|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
68% of doctors think GMO's should be labeled
#21920927 - 07/09/15 05:16 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
The media and govt keep giving us propaganda that gmo's are good for us and nothing to be concerned about. Most people want to know what is in their food but Monsanto and other huge companies are determined that we will not. Their lobbying (bribery) has gotten them a bill in congress to block states from requiring labels. What are they so afraid of?
http://naturalsociety.com/survey-68-of-doctors-think-gmos-should-be-labeled/
Most Americans aren’t waiting for doctors to support GMO labeling. We have been very clear; we want GMO labeling now, and we are even willing to go to court for it. Now, mirroring what millions of Americans have voiced over the past years, a leading network of doctor’s has voted on GMO labeling, and they overwhelmingly support it.
SERMO currently consists of 358,000 members – all verified and credentialed physicians. For the moment, they represent doctors primarily in the United States and Canada, but the network is expanding to include a global community.
Of all the doctors asked if GM foods should be labeled, a whopping 68 percent thought people should be given the right to know what is in their food – for obvious health concerns associated with genetically modified food. And of course the basic right to know what we’re really consuming.
SERMO is essentially like Facebook for doctors, where they can, according to the SERMO website, ‘talk openly and anonymously.’
That means no biotech industry infiltration, except for the likely-visiting shills and trolls which infiltrate most social media. Reportedly, an honest discussion among medical professionals can be had at this network. If that’s truly the case, the 68 percent who agree with labeling GMOs is even more significant, because it is a number which is likely more accurate than even the polls which found that 66+ percent of Americans wanted GM labeling, as reported by mainstream media.
Surveys repeatedly show that 80 percent to 95 percent of people want foods that contain genetically modified organisms to be labeled, in the least. Here is a simple breakdown of some reported polls on consumer demand for GMO labeling:
The New York Times: 93% found to be in support of labeling GMOs MSNBC: 96% in support Reuters/NPR: 93% in support of full labeling Washington Post: 95% in support of full labeling Consumer Reports: 95% agree GM animals should be labeled ABC News: 93% want federal GM labeling mandate What’s more, in a recently published Nielsen study of 30,000 consumers, 80 percent of respondents said they would pay more for foods that indicate a degree of healthfulness, such as those labeled ‘Non-GMO.’ Do we really need more proof that people are turning their backs on biotech-altered poison crops?
Even doctors desire GMO labeling – but you can bet the biotech industry will have a way to skew those facts as well.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
Edited by Stonehenge (07/09/15 05:51 PM)
|
Mr.GuessWork
Stranger

Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 4,563
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21920938 - 07/09/15 05:20 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
68% is surprisingly low. You'd think more doctors would be in favor of informative food labeling.
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Mr.GuessWork]
#21920952 - 07/09/15 05:22 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.GuessWork said: 68% is surprisingly low. You'd think more doctors would be in favor of informative food labeling.
They get propagandized too and they are only human. However, that story will never make it into the major media. Just a hunch I have. Monsatan would not like it.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
DieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Mr.GuessWork]
#21920963 - 07/09/15 05:25 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.GuessWork said: You'd think more doctors would be in favor of informative food labeling.
Its not informative food labeling, its baseless fear mongering. Producers are free to label their food how they like. If you don't want GMO then buy good labeled non-GMO.
|
Mr.GuessWork
Stranger

Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 4,563
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21920975 - 07/09/15 05:29 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
There's nothing to loose by putting that labeling in place but profits for those assholes. It's getting harder to post about this kind of shit without frothing at the mouth. I doubt there are even any serious risks to most people from GMO foods, but refusing to label them just makes it impossible to do large scale research like metadata studies on the matter. Fucking assholes. It'd be nice if we had a government to protect us from this kind of stuff.
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: DieCommie]
#21920981 - 07/09/15 05:30 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
You forgot the bill in congress forbidding states from labeling produce. We can't even label the country of origin anymore because we ceded sovereignty to Europe on those things.
mgw >It'd be nice if we had a government to protect us from this kind of stuff
Our govt is bought and paid for.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Patlal
You ask too many questions



Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 9 hours, 33 minutes
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21920993 - 07/09/15 05:32 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I love GMOs. More vitamins per square inch. More square inches per veggie.
Best invention ever
--------------------
|
Mr.GuessWork
Stranger

Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 4,563
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: DieCommie]
#21920999 - 07/09/15 05:33 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Displaying factual information on a food label is not fear mongering. Nobody knows what people are eating. This is not an unreasonable thing to demand of food labeling. People are afraid because they're being deliberately denied information that they're concerned about. That's how you create fear.
Edited by Mr.GuessWork (07/09/15 05:37 PM)
|
badchad
Mad Scientist

Registered: 03/02/05
Posts: 13,372
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21921036 - 07/09/15 05:41 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I bet very few physicians have any training whatsoever about GMOs.
-------------------- ...the whole experience is (and is as) a profound piece of knowledge. It is an indellible experience; it is forever known. I have known myself in a way I doubt I would have ever occurred except as it did. Smith, P. Bull. Menninger Clinic (1959) 23:20-27; p. 27. ...most subjects find the experience valuable, some find it frightening, and many say that is it uniquely lovely. Osmond, H. Annals, NY Acad Science (1957) 66:418-434; p.436
|
Mr.GuessWork
Stranger

Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 4,563
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: badchad]
#21921070 - 07/09/15 05:46 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
^ Ya. But they ought to know more than your-average-joe about the benefits and history of food labeling for public heath and medical research. Maybe those other stats are inflated somehow. Maybe not though .
|
Capers
Man About Town


Registered: 08/15/10
Posts: 16,199
Loc: United States
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Mr.GuessWork]
#21921178 - 07/09/15 06:14 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
GMOs are good for humanity. People who proselytize against them are akin to news pundits who deny climate change or evangelists who deny evolution.
|
r00tuuu123
Now I'm just really piseed



Registered: 04/20/12
Posts: 8,507
Loc: I'll be there in a minute
Last seen: 7 years, 10 months
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: badchad]
#21921384 - 07/09/15 07:05 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
badchad said: I bet very few physicians have any training whatsoever about GMOs.
Most Physicians don't even have training about vitamins.
--------------------
Please report me to a Mod for hurting your punk ass hippie feelings And all time Champion thread killer.
|
badchad
Mad Scientist

Registered: 03/02/05
Posts: 13,372
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: r00tuuu123]
#21921528 - 07/09/15 07:38 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
r00tuuu123 said:
Most Physicians don't even have training about vitamins. 
And their all but guaranteed to lack training in label-comprehension studies that would examine population health effects as a result of label changes. Really, I think the survey demonstrates physicians are just as alamarist about GMOs as the public is.
-------------------- ...the whole experience is (and is as) a profound piece of knowledge. It is an indellible experience; it is forever known. I have known myself in a way I doubt I would have ever occurred except as it did. Smith, P. Bull. Menninger Clinic (1959) 23:20-27; p. 27. ...most subjects find the experience valuable, some find it frightening, and many say that is it uniquely lovely. Osmond, H. Annals, NY Acad Science (1957) 66:418-434; p.436
|
DiscoBiscuitsTrip


Registered: 06/05/10
Posts: 1,422
Loc: FL
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: badchad]
#21921606 - 07/09/15 07:55 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I think GMOs are mainly bad because of the way they are grown, they go against the cycle of nature and its harming our environment.
--------------------
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,510
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Mr.GuessWork] 2
#21921968 - 07/09/15 09:07 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.GuessWork said: There's nothing to loose by putting that labeling in place but profits for those assholes.
There's nothing to gain from forcing companies to label GMOs, so why infringe on the First Amendment when there's no compelling reason to do so?
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Enlil]
#21923505 - 07/10/15 08:00 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Companies are forced now to put nutrition labels on food. I don't see you whining about that. There are loads of regulations over what can be put on a label, never have you thrown a fit over first amendment rights for that. But, when it comes to frankenfood, all of a sudden its a terrible thing. You pick and choose what the public should be allowed to know and what you object to. Many people want to know these things and its the dirtbag companies and their lackeys who try to stop us.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
DieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21923517 - 07/10/15 08:05 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Companies are forced now to put nutrition labels on food. I don't see you whining about that.
That's because nutrition content has been shown to have positive and negative health consequences. GMO food in general has not been shown to have negative health consequences. Its just fear mongering. If a particular kind of GMO food has different nutrition content then it will need to have accurate labels. If a person of faith fears GMO in lieu of evidence they are free to patronize the products that cater to their faith, just like people with kosher and halal foods.
What we, or I, don't want is people's faith and knee-jerk fears getting legislated without evidence. That is a terrible road to go down.
|
badchad
Mad Scientist

Registered: 03/02/05
Posts: 13,372
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21923540 - 07/10/15 08:12 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
For things like drugs, the labels contain a description of data and clinical studies. There is no mention of the chemistry and/or route of synthesis.
In the case of food, whether or not its GMO is irrelevant to the data and actual safety profile. Consider the two statements:
"In 30 day toxicology studies in rodents, an incidence of .001% stomach cancer was observed"
"In 30 day toxicology studies in rodents with, THIS GMO FOOD an incidence of .001% stomach cancer was observed".
In this case, the objective data are identical, but the inclusion of the GMO tag would needlessly alarm ill-informed consumers.
-------------------- ...the whole experience is (and is as) a profound piece of knowledge. It is an indellible experience; it is forever known. I have known myself in a way I doubt I would have ever occurred except as it did. Smith, P. Bull. Menninger Clinic (1959) 23:20-27; p. 27. ...most subjects find the experience valuable, some find it frightening, and many say that is it uniquely lovely. Osmond, H. Annals, NY Acad Science (1957) 66:418-434; p.436
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: DieCommie]
#21923548 - 07/10/15 08:15 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
DC, you have not said a word justifying why people should be kept in the dark about gmo's. If they were proven to be harmful they would be banned, not just labeled. No one yet has come up with a coherent or logical reason why food should not be labeled. All I hear is the poor biotech companies might not make as much money if people had a choice so they must be forced to choose blindly.
Maybe we should extend that perhaps to all areas. Forbid candidates from declaring which party they are with since it has not been proven to be harmful to be one or the other or independent. Lets make food labels just say "100% legal content as decided by the fda" and leave it at that. No point in giving people too much info, they might make informed decisions and then monsatan would lose market share.
Badchad, perhaps 30 day studies might not be long enough? Ya think? How long did it take before we found the dangers of asbestos? Years and years.
>the inclusion of the GMO tag would needlessly alarm ill-informed consumers.
Many other ingredients are listed, why are you so protective toward gmo's? Why do you want to take away people's right to choose?
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Adolin




Registered: 06/28/11
Posts: 8,292
Loc: USA
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge] 1
#21923565 - 07/10/15 08:18 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
i think it should be left to companies to put "non-GMO" on the label if they want to.
if it doesnt say non-gmo, assume it has GMO's. or look it up yourself 
needless fear mongering.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,510
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21923572 - 07/10/15 08:20 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said: Companies are forced now to put nutrition labels on food. I don't see you whining about that. There are loads of regulations over what can be put on a label, never have you thrown a fit over first amendment rights for that. But, when it comes to frankenfood, all of a sudden its a terrible thing. You pick and choose what the public should be allowed to know and what you object to. Many people want to know these things and its the dirtbag companies and their lackeys who try to stop us.
Companies are forced to label nutrition information because there is a compelling government interest in keeping the public healthy and the regulation is narrowly tailored to that interest.
What is the compelling government interest in satisfying the curiosity of the public? If GMOs are harmful, prove it with peer-reviewed studies. I'll be the first to rally for forced labeling in that case. At this point, however, forcing labels serves no compelling interest and only infringes on First Amendment rights.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
badchad
Mad Scientist

Registered: 03/02/05
Posts: 13,372
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21923580 - 07/10/15 08:22 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said: Badchad, perhaps 30 day studies might not be long enough? Ya think? How long did it take before we found the dangers of asbestos? Years and years.
>the inclusion of the GMO tag would needlessly alarm ill-informed consumers.
Many other ingredients are listed, why are you so protective toward gmo's? Why do you want to take away people's right to choose?
I'm not familiar with the requirements of food products testing, but they are the SAME for both GMO and non-GMO. Thats the point.
I have no problem with listing ingredients. Again, the requirements are the SAME for GMO and non-GMO. The point is that whether or not something is GMO is irrelevant, given that the safety requirements are identical.
-------------------- ...the whole experience is (and is as) a profound piece of knowledge. It is an indellible experience; it is forever known. I have known myself in a way I doubt I would have ever occurred except as it did. Smith, P. Bull. Menninger Clinic (1959) 23:20-27; p. 27. ...most subjects find the experience valuable, some find it frightening, and many say that is it uniquely lovely. Osmond, H. Annals, NY Acad Science (1957) 66:418-434; p.436
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: badchad]
#21923608 - 07/10/15 08:34 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
We don't know the safety profile of most gmo's because they have not been tested long enough. And some tests have shown problems hence the controversy.
Ingredients have to be listed, no need for a compelling govt interest in telling us about aspartame but its listed, guar gum, modified food starch, etc etc. Its all listed and none of it was proven to be harmful. But when it comes to the main ingredient, gmo, all of a sudden the usual suspects scream that their first amendment rights are taken away.
Explain to me why aspartame should be listed and gmo should not?
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
DieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21923616 - 07/10/15 08:38 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Explain to me why aspartame should be listed and gmo should not?
Because the safety of aspartame is documented and debated. The safety issue of GMO is only claimed and nebulous. Also, aspartame is a specific ingredient. GMO is not. Maybe aspartame isn't that bad and is should not be listed?
My banannas don't have radiation stickers on them. Why are you not advocating for that? Don't you want consumers to be informed of this possibly dangerous ingredient in banannas?
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: DieCommie]
#21923631 - 07/10/15 08:42 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
>Because the safety of aspartame is documented and debated. The safety issue of GMO is only claimed and nebulous.
By your own words, aspartame is safer than gmo.
>aspartame is a specific ingredient. GMO is not.
Its the main ingredient. Should we not say whats in food at all then? Is that the logical conclusion you deniers are working toward? Avocados should not be labeled avocado since that is not an ingredient. Soy should not be labeled because people might get unduly alarmed. Lets treat the consumer like a mushroom.
BTW, aspartame is a toxic chemical, I'm glad as hell there are warning labels because I have a bad reaction to that compound as do many many people.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
badchad
Mad Scientist

Registered: 03/02/05
Posts: 13,372
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21923632 - 07/10/15 08:43 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said: We don't know the safety profile of most gmo's because they have not been tested long enough. And some tests have shown problems hence the controversy.
The same argument could be made for any new food product, because the testing requirements are identical.
Quote:
Stonehenge said: Ingredients have to be listed, no need for a compelling govt interest in telling us about aspartame but its listed, guar gum, modified food starch, etc etc. Its all listed and none of it was proven to be harmful. But when it comes to the main ingredient, gmo, all of a sudden the usual suspects scream that their first amendment rights are taken away.
Explain to me why aspartame should be listed and gmo should not?
Aspartame is listed as an ingredient regardless of GMO status.
Would you propose that the genetic lineage of "regular" products and history of hybridization be listed on every food product? Should a "tangelo" be required to have a label that its "a citrus fruit hybrid of tangerine and pomelo or grapefruit."?
-------------------- ...the whole experience is (and is as) a profound piece of knowledge. It is an indellible experience; it is forever known. I have known myself in a way I doubt I would have ever occurred except as it did. Smith, P. Bull. Menninger Clinic (1959) 23:20-27; p. 27. ...most subjects find the experience valuable, some find it frightening, and many say that is it uniquely lovely. Osmond, H. Annals, NY Acad Science (1957) 66:418-434; p.436
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,510
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21923634 - 07/10/15 08:43 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said:
Explain to me why aspartame should be listed and gmo should not?
Aspartame is an ingredient. Corn is an ingredient.
The genetic makeup of the corn isn't, and it isn't relevant because it hasn't been shown to make a difference in the safety of the product.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Asante
Mage


Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 86,797
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Patlal]
#21923640 - 07/10/15 08:46 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Patlal said: I love GMOs. More vitamins per square inch. More square inches per veggie.
Best invention ever
More square inches per square foot too right?
-------------------- Omnicyclion.org higher knowledge starts here
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: 68% of doctors think GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21923642 - 07/10/15 08:47 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said: The media and govt keep giving us propaganda that gmo's are good for us and nothing to be concerned about. Most people want to know what is in their food but Monsanto and other huge companies are determined that we will not. Their lobbying (bribery) has gotten them a bill in congress to block states from requiring labels. What are they so afraid of?
http://naturalsociety.com/survey-68-of-doctors-think-gmos-should-be-labeled/
natural society is hardly a reputable news source and a survey is far from a adequate means of data collection
Quote:
Most Americans aren’t waiting for doctors to support GMO labeling. We have been very clear; we want GMO labeling now, and we are even willing to go to court for it.
some americans, certainly not most and courts dont determine the safety of a product
|
Mr.GuessWork
Stranger

Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 4,563
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Enlil]
#21923652 - 07/10/15 08:52 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
Mr.GuessWork said: There's nothing to loose by putting that labeling in place but profits for those assholes.
There's nothing to gain from forcing companies to label GMOs, so why infringe on the First Amendment when there's no compelling reason to do so?
There is something to gain. Better labels would provide better data for those large scale metadata analysis, which tend to rely on people's self-reporting. As it stands now, large scale studies are harder to do, and the researchers can't pay the costs to get that information. Labeling the food is the best way to get better information about what it does. That reason is probably a minor concern for most people though.
The best immediate reason to put the labels on the food is to address public concern. Public concern doesn't have to be based on evidence in any reasonable way. Think about tamper-proof seals on Tylenol bottles. It's not like there's a bunch of people who are trying to poison Tylenol that need to be stopped. That was done to make consumers feel more comfortable with their product. People also don't want to blindly trust big business to give them good food, and that is a real public concern. A law mandating labeling would start to address that concern, and would be better for big business and consumers in the end. There's a balance that needs to be maintained between the first amendment rights of pathological entities and the need for people to feel secure and informed about their basic resources. Since the big business guys have more legal power and more effective first-amendment style sway in politics, I'd say their first amendment rights can handle the extra demand of stating a simple fact about the source of their products to consumers. Their first amendment rights are almost exclusively dedicated to the procurement of money, after all, and their are other concerns that need to be addressed for the public's benefit (even if the current research doesn't suggest that the public's concerns are well founded.).
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21923653 - 07/10/15 08:52 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said: BTW, aspartame is a toxic chemical, I'm glad as hell there are warning labels because I have a bad reaction to that compound as do many many people.
aspartame is the single most thoroughly tested food product on the planet
http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/othercarcinogens/athome/aspartame
Quote:
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates the use of aspartame and other artificial sweeteners in the United States. In 2007, the FDA stated:
Considering results from the large number of studies on aspartame's safety, including five previously conducted negative chronic carcinogenicity studies, a recently reported large epidemiology study with negative associations between the use of aspartame and the occurrence of tumors, and negative findings from a series of three transgenic mouse assays, FDA finds no reason to alter its previous conclusion that aspartame is safe as a general purpose sweetener in food.
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) assesses the safety of sweeteners such as aspartame in the European Union. According to a 2009 report from its Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources Added to Food:
Overall, the Panel concluded, on the basis of all the evidence currently available… that there is no indication of any genotoxic or carcinogenic potential of aspartame and that there is no reason to revise the previously established ADI for aspartame of 40 mg/kg [body weight].
Does aspartame cause any other health problems?
Complaints of various health issues have circulated since aspartame first appeared on the market in the 1980s. But for most people, no health problems have clearly been linked to aspartame use
|
Sun King



Registered: 02/15/14
Posts: 4,069
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: badchad]
#21923661 - 07/10/15 08:55 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
badchad said: I bet very few physicians have any training whatsoever about GMOs.
--------------------
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,510
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Mr.GuessWork]
#21923665 - 07/10/15 08:55 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.GuessWork said:
The best immediate reason to put the labels on the food is to address public concern. Public concern doesn't have to be based on evidence in any reasonable way.
We have a Constitutional right to freedom of speech, though. We can't infringe that right just to serve "public concern". If we could, unpopular speech could be banned simply because the public doesn't like it.
Tamper-proofing is completely different because there is no constitutional right to choose how one's product is bottled.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Enlil]
#21923680 - 07/10/15 09:01 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: At this point, however, forcing labels serves no compelling interest and only infringes on First Amendment rights.
it serves the interests of the big organic lobbyists while preying upon the ignorance of the population, we all know that organic products fetch a higher market price and are surrounded by lies such as the claims of no herbicides and no pesticides being used... now here's a little something, the vast majority of people have no clue what produce is or isnt genetically modified and there are labeling systems in place for the items that arent GMO including the certified organic labeling and the non GMO project labeling. why arent people simply buying those products instead... are they afraid that the labeling structure would eliminate their poptarts?
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Mr.GuessWork] 1
#21923685 - 07/10/15 09:04 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.GuessWork said: The best immediate reason to put the labels on the food is to address public concern. Public concern doesn't have to be based on evidence in any reasonable way. Think about tamper-proof seals on Tylenol bottles.
public concern has been addressed, just look for this label
|
Mr.GuessWork
Stranger

Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 4,563
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Prisoner#1]
#21923708 - 07/10/15 09:10 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
Mr.GuessWork said: The best immediate reason to put the labels on the food is to address public concern. Public concern doesn't have to be based on evidence in any reasonable way. Think about tamper-proof seals on Tylenol bottles.
public concern has been addressed, just look for this label

You'd think the success of that attempt would show up in the polls (I'm still not convinced they aren't inflated, but ). Honestly, that's probably as good as it's going to get. It's a messy problem anyway, and I'm not sure that better labeling will be a significant help at alleviating public concern. People are just emotional because they feel powerless. And there are clear public health problems that still need to be dealt with, like most people still eating at McDonald's multiple times a week.
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Prisoner#1]
#21923712 - 07/10/15 09:11 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
>natural society is hardly a reputable news source
The old liberal sneer again. Its not just liberals who do it. If you can't dispute the facts, sneer at the source. They are tying to pass a law stopping any such labels.
Here is info from a doctor. Get your sneer out
http://aspartame.mercola.com/
"Aspartame is, by Far, the Most Dangerous Substance on the Market that is Added To Foods"
enlil >We have a Constitutional right to freedom of speech, though. We can't infringe that right just to serve "public concern".
We do it all the time. What is the compelling reason to list modified food starch or many other ingredients?
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Le_Canard
The Duk Abides


Registered: 05/16/03
Posts: 94,392
Loc: Earthfarm 1
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: DieCommie]
#21923740 - 07/10/15 09:18 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DieCommie said:
Quote:
Companies are forced now to put nutrition labels on food. I don't see you whining about that.
That's because nutrition content has been shown to have positive and negative health consequences. GMO food in general has not been shown to have negative health consequences. Its just fear mongering. If a particular kind of GMO food has different nutrition content then it will need to have accurate labels. If a person of faith fears GMO in lieu of evidence they are free to patronize the products that cater to their faith, just like people with kosher and halal foods.
What we, or I, don't want is people's faith and knee-jerk fears getting legislated without evidence. That is a terrible road to go down.
I concur. There's no evidence that GMO foods are harmful. I do think GM should be used for such things as higer crop harvest, drought resistance or improved nutrition content. I do think it's reprehensible that Monsanto is modifying cereal crops so they can use more Round-Up to control weeds.
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21923744 - 07/10/15 09:19 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said: Here is info from a doctor. Get your sneer out
http://aspartame.mercola.com/
"Aspartame is, by Far, the Most Dangerous Substance on the Market that is Added To Foods"
hahahaha... no, Joseph Mercola is an Osteopath... oh, and he sells snake oil that makes false and illegal claims. you may want to reconsider what you think a liberal is because it's liberals that buy into this bullshit
http://www.quackwatch.com/11Ind/mercola.html https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/9-reasons-to-completely-ignore-joseph-mercola-and-natural-news/
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Le_Canard]
#21923757 - 07/10/15 09:23 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Le_Canard said:
Quote:
DieCommie said:
Quote:
Companies are forced now to put nutrition labels on food. I don't see you whining about that.
That's because nutrition content has been shown to have positive and negative health consequences. GMO food in general has not been shown to have negative health consequences. Its just fear mongering. If a particular kind of GMO food has different nutrition content then it will need to have accurate labels. If a person of faith fears GMO in lieu of evidence they are free to patronize the products that cater to their faith, just like people with kosher and halal foods.
What we, or I, don't want is people's faith and knee-jerk fears getting legislated without evidence. That is a terrible road to go down.
I concur. There's no evidence that GMO foods are harmful. I do think GM should be used for such things as higer crop harvest, drought resistance or improved nutrition content. I do think it's reprehensible that Monsanto is modifying cereal crops so they can use more Round-Up to control weeds.
what do you think the use of roundup is for? it's for killing off the weeds to increase crop yields, it's not a means of selling a product.
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Le_Canard]
#21923760 - 07/10/15 09:23 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
So, lc, you are against labeling too? Keep the public in the dark to prop up monsatan's profits?
Regardless of how people believe gmo's are perfectly safe, no one has advanced a rational argument against labeling or preventing labeling.
Pris, why am I not surprised at your response? Many people get sick if they eat aspartame, I am one of them. Many people have a bad reaction to msg, it even has a name, Chinese restaurant syndrome.
Crank up your sneer, here is more evidence to ignore
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00244-006-0149-5#page-1
New analysis of a rat feeding study with a genetically modified maize reveals signs of hepatorenal toxicity
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21923788 - 07/10/15 09:34 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said: So, lc, you are against labeling too? Keep the public in the dark to prop up monsatan's profits?
in the dark about what?
Quote:
Regardless of how people believe gmo's are perfectly safe, no one has advanced a rational argument against labeling or preventing labeling.
non-gmo products are already labeled, right?
Quote:
Pris, why am I not surprised at your response? Many people get sick if they eat aspartame, I am one of them. Many people have a bad reaction to msg, it even has a name, Chinese restaurant syndrome.
ok, so dont eat aspartame or MSG http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/001126.htm
Quote:
food additive called monosodium glutamate (MSG) is often blamed for Chinese restaurant syndrome, but scientific evidence has not proven MSG to be the cause of the symptoms
Quote:
Crank up your sneer, here is more evidence to ignore
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00244-006-0149-5#page-1
New analysis of a rat feeding study with a genetically modified maize reveals signs of hepatorenal toxicity
really? seralini again and on a pay to publish site no less... seralini is an activist being funded to find at what ever means some link even when one isnt there. saralini is a shill of ever there was one... maybe you forgot the dozens of links I provided last time to show you he's a fraud
http://www.science20.com/genetic_literacy_project/the_industry_funding_behind_antigmo_activist_gilleseric_seralini-156197
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Prisoner#1]
#21923815 - 07/10/15 09:44 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
In a surprise move, pris sneered at all the evidence. Here is something by a doctor to sneer at. Is he a quack too like everyone who disagrees with you?
http://www.webmd.com/food-recipes/20000619/does-chinese-food-give-you-headache Many people, however, pay more than just the restaurant check for their MSG-enhanced gastronomic pleasure. For some, the price includes a headache and numbness in the back of the neck, which can radiate down the arms and back. Other people report symptoms of mild to severe headaches, tightness in the chest, pressure around the cheeks or jaw, mild mood changes, weakness, tingling, burning sensations, heart palpitations, or vivid and bizarre dreams. A few people report asthma-like symptoms after consuming even small amounts of the food additive
Here is some more info on toxicity of aspartame.
http://www.sweetpoison.com/aspartame-side-effects.html http://www.livestrong.com/article/29349-symptoms-aspartame-poisoning/
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Mr.GuessWork
Stranger

Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 4,563
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Enlil]
#21923838 - 07/10/15 09:52 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
Mr.GuessWork said:
The best immediate reason to put the labels on the food is to address public concern. Public concern doesn't have to be based on evidence in any reasonable way.
We have a Constitutional right to freedom of speech, though. We can't infringe that right just to serve "public concern". If we could, unpopular speech could be banned simply because the public doesn't like it.
Tamper-proofing is completely different because there is no constitutional right to choose how one's product is bottled.
I agree that that these kinds of subjects need to be handled carefully, and with due consideration for people's freedoms and safeties (dictionary act definition of people). The tricky part here is that necessitating the label doesn't really stop anybody from doing anything except hiding the source material of a widely distributed product. Granted, there's not a lot of strong evidence to suggest that that's causing any danger, but it's certainly not helping anybody but the corporations who are making the sales. From a non-profiteering standpoint, what's the real danger that these labels cause?
I understand the laws mandating most of what's on the current labels were based on pre-exisiting medical evidence that the information could prevent harm, but stonehenge's point stands too. What about the specific ingredients list? Those things a legally required to be listed on the label and many of them are completely harmless. There's more than constitutional law at play here, and part of that is about addressing public concern. That's one of the functions of law and government, and it's important.
PS Quit calling pris's sneer liberal, stonehenge. It's hurting your credibility.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,510
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Mr.GuessWork]
#21923855 - 07/10/15 09:59 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.GuessWork said: The tricky part here is that necessitating the label doesn't really stop anybody from doing anything except hiding the source material of a widely distributed product.
It forces speech. That's a serious infringement on the right of free speech.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21923859 - 07/10/15 10:01 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said: In a surprise move, pris sneered at all the evidence. Here is something by a doctor to sneer at. Is he a quack too like everyone who disagrees with you?
http://www.webmd.com/food-recipes/20000619/does-chinese-food-give-you-headache Many people, however, pay more than just the restaurant check for their MSG-enhanced gastronomic pleasure.
MSG is used in far more than chinese food, it's used to retain color and flavor in a large variety of foods and as a meat tenderizer but for some crazy reason it only happens when some people eat chinese food... you like spaghetti? maybe a little parmasian cheese on it... how about doritos or pringles, maybe campbells soup, KFC or Chick Fil A, ranch dressing... yeah, fuckloads of foods with MSG and this only happens with chinese foods... makes me suspicious, just like all those hipsters with their gluten allergies sucking down beers and other gluten containing foods unaware that they're supposed to get sick so they dont have a reaction at all
Quote:
Here is some more info on toxicity of aspartame.
http://www.sweetpoison.com/aspartame-side-effects.html http://www.livestrong.com/article/29349-symptoms-aspartame-poisoning/
maybe you should go with actual scientific studies, not retard blogs
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Prisoner#1]
#21923894 - 07/10/15 10:12 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I avoid processed food as much as possible. Eat all of it you like, put some extra roundup on everything if you like. The govt says its safe.
mgw >stonehenge's point stands too. What about the specific ingredients list? Those things a legally required to be listed on the label and many of them are completely harmless. There's more than constitutional law at play here, and part of that is about addressing public concern. That's one of the functions of law and government, and it's important.
Well said
>Quit calling pris's sneer liberal, stonehenge.
The left patented it, I give credit where it came from. Not saying pris is liberal overall, just his use of the sneer tactic rather than facts.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Mr.GuessWork
Stranger

Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 4,563
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Enlil]
#21923901 - 07/10/15 10:14 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
Mr.GuessWork said: The tricky part here is that necessitating the label doesn't really stop anybody from doing anything except hiding the source material of a widely distributed product.
It forces speech. That's a serious infringement on the right of free speech.
I entirely agree that it's a restriction on the right. I was just pointing out that forcing speech in this particular case doesn't seem to do much, if any, harm. I'm open to arguments on that front though.
The reasoning behind requiring labeling is more like the reasoning behind the freedom of information act. It's put in place to increase public awareness so we can better recognize problems when they occur. I'm not sure what the legal arguments behind the freedom of information act were, and I'll bet they had some evidence of wrong doing in them that could have been prevented by the act, but I think it's a decent analogy even though it's a bit weak.
Edited by Mr.GuessWork (07/10/15 10:16 AM)
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,510
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Mr.GuessWork]
#21923913 - 07/10/15 10:18 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Forcing people to reveal their breast/penis size on a public database doesn't do much, if any, harm either.
The right is a right for a reason, and we have clear guidelines for when we can and can't infringe on the right. If we make exceptions to those guidelines to quell public concern, it won't be long before the exceptions swallow the rule.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21923919 - 07/10/15 10:21 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said:
>Quit calling pris's sneer liberal, stonehenge.
The left patented it, I give credit where it came from. Not saying pris is liberal overall, just his use of the sneer tactic rather than facts.
you do realize it's the lefty douchebag hippies that push for the GMO labeling dont you, groups such as green peace. you cite the dangers from sites such as mercola, some detox blog and studies by people like seralini who it's been shown is paid off by the big organic lobbyists and has been discredited completely by his peers
and it would be a smear tactic if the crap you post were in fact true
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smear_campaign
Quote:
mgw >stonehenge's point stands too. What about the specific ingredients list? Those things a legally required to be listed on the label and many of them are completely harmless. There's more than constitutional law at play here, and part of that is about addressing public concern. That's one of the functions of law and government, and it's important.
"contains spices and natural flavors"
horse shit is a natural flavor, I'm sure we'd find that on the ingredients list of a garden burger
|
Asante
Mage


Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 86,797
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21923921 - 07/10/15 10:22 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said:
The old liberal sneer again.
I'm pretty sure its lesbian aloofness
-------------------- Omnicyclion.org higher knowledge starts here
|
Mr.GuessWork
Stranger

Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 4,563
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Enlil]
#21923932 - 07/10/15 10:25 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Forcing people to reveal their breast/penis size on a public database doesn't do much, if any, harm either.
The right is a right for a reason, and we have clear guidelines for when we can and can't infringe on the right. If we make exceptions to those guidelines to quell public concern, it won't be long before the exceptions swallow the rule.
The difference is that people's penises and breasts aren't being eaten by a large portion of the population and there's no public concern about that stuff, and there's also very little that could possibly be gained from such a database. We already do make exceptions to guidelines to quell public concerns (again, look at the freedom of information act as an example). We just do it carefully (I assume), and that helps to stop the exception from becoming the rule. You can't just dismiss every concern because it might start a slippery slope. That sets a bad precedent for other bad precedents.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,510
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Mr.GuessWork]
#21924251 - 07/10/15 12:17 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
The freedom of information act is about disclosure of publically owned information, dude. Completely different situation.
You're talking about forcing private citizens to reveal the genetic makeup of their products just because people are curious. It serves zero utilitarian purpose to do so since these products are safe.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Enlil]
#21924286 - 07/10/15 12:33 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
>since these products are safe.
Not proven, or you might understand better if I say fact not in evidence.
Selling products on the market place is not a right, its a privilege and the public has a right to know what they are getting.
You made sense for one day but now are back to your usual drivel.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Prisoner#1]
#21924300 - 07/10/15 12:39 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Here ya go pris, another study to sneer at. Were the doctors all quacks? Is the website untrustworthy according to you? I know you can't deal with facts so it will be something like that.
HTTP://WWW.TRUEACTIVIST.COM/END-OF-ASPARTAME-STUDY-LINKS-DIET-SODA-TO-MAJOR-PROBLEMS/
It’s nothing new to report that aspartame is an artificial sweetener everyone should aim to avoid. In the past, it has been proven to contribute to a list of ailments, including Diabetes, neurological concerns, weight gain, brain fog, and more.
But in a study (published in 2014) which took place over 10 years and involved 60,000 women, it was determined that women who drink two or more diet drinks a day have much higher cardiovascular disease rates and are more likely to die from the disease.
In the largest study of its kind, The University of Iowa concluded the following:
[C]ompared to women who never or only rarely consume diet drinks, those who consume two or more a day are 30 percent more likely to have a cardiovascular event [heart attack or stroke] and 50 percent more likely to die from related disease.
This is one of the largest studies on this topic, and our findings are consistent with some previous data, especially those linking diet drinks to the metabolic syndrome, says Dr. Ankur Vyas the lead investigator of the study.
The association persisted even after researchers adjusted the data to account for demographic characteristics and other cardiovascular risk factors, including body mass index, smoking, hormone therapy use, physical activity, energy intake, salt intake, diabetes, hypertension, high cholesterol, and sugar-sweetened beverage intake.
On average, women who consumed two or more diet drinks a day were younger, more likely to be smokers, and had a higher prevalence of diabetes, high blood pressure, and higher body mass index.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Mr.GuessWork
Stranger

Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 4,563
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Enlil]
#21924314 - 07/10/15 12:44 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: The freedom of information act is about disclosure of publically owned information, dude. Completely different situation.
You're talking about forcing private citizens to reveal the genetic makeup of their products just because people are curious. It serves zero utilitarian purpose to do so since these products are safe.
The free disclosure of public information is what makes it public information in a practical sense. legal Gobbledygook won't change that. Effectively, that law turned certain restricted information into public information. This argument about labels is not a cut and dry legal argument with clear classifications. It's a power struggle between opposing interests, and it requires a cost benefit analysis that's fair to both parties.
It's not clear that labels would serve zero utilitarian purposes. People should have a right to make informed choices. I don't see a need for any extra buyer-beware shit with our already fucked up food industry. Generally, most information is useful to somebody, and consumers seem to have some use in mind for this information, otherwise they wouldn't want the labels. It's not clear that the labels would provide any public benefit or what those benefits might be, but calling them useless is premature. Maybe people are unconvinced by the limited amount of research that has been done over the past few decades, and they want to be able to reliably make informed choices about what they're eating. The corporations who produce these foods get special privileges so they can more effectively deliver services (ideally), so why should they be free from special demands?
|
Hippocampus



Registered: 04/01/15
Posts: 753
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21924318 - 07/10/15 12:45 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
r00tuuu123 said: Most Physicians don't even have training about vitamins. 
Physicians are trained about vitamins starting in undergraduate with basic chemistry knowledge. They then use that knowledge to learn biochem in 1st year med school. During which they learn about exactly what each vitamin does in the body on a molecular level. Then they learn about various pathology that is caused from different vitamin deficiencies and their respective treatments. Then they practice in the clinical setting actually seeing patients that have these various vitamin issues. After about 6 months of clerkships where they might see vitamin related cases they choose a residency which may or may not have anything to do with vitamins ever again. GP or IM will treat lots of vitamin things. Surgical specialties not so much.
But if you mean that doctors aren't trained in bullshit unproven vitamin fads, or that they don't work in research on the cutting edge of vitamin related clinical study, then yes, that's true.
|
badchad
Mad Scientist

Registered: 03/02/05
Posts: 13,372
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Hippocampus]
#21924373 - 07/10/15 01:06 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
GMO labeling is likely to be expensive, and there is no consensus on how to do it.
GMO corn makes up 88% of all US corn and over 90% of all soybeans. How would this be labeled, are you suggesting ANY food item with any amount of corn or soybean be labeled "GMO"?
To clear themselves of GMO labeling, it would be expensive for a manufacturer to track EVERY single food ingredient in the process.
And what about pesticides? Labeling pesticide use is likely to be FAR more important, no? This is why our food regulations are based on the end product, and rightfully so.
-------------------- ...the whole experience is (and is as) a profound piece of knowledge. It is an indellible experience; it is forever known. I have known myself in a way I doubt I would have ever occurred except as it did. Smith, P. Bull. Menninger Clinic (1959) 23:20-27; p. 27. ...most subjects find the experience valuable, some find it frightening, and many say that is it uniquely lovely. Osmond, H. Annals, NY Acad Science (1957) 66:418-434; p.436
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: badchad]
#21924380 - 07/10/15 01:10 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
>GMO labeling is likely to be expensive, and there is no consensus on how to do it.
Nonsense, how about "gmo inside"
>GMO corn makes up 88% of all US corn and over 90% of all soybeans. How would this be labeled, are you suggesting ANY food item with any amount of corn or soybean be labeled "GMO"?
If it is gmo, label it as such.
>To clear themselves of GMO labeling, it would be expensive for a manufacturer to track EVERY single food ingredient in the process.
Why? A reputable manufacturer will know where his ingredients come from. Those selling the ingredients will have to label them too.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Mr.GuessWork
Stranger

Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 4,563
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: badchad]
#21924425 - 07/10/15 01:19 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
badchad said: GMO labeling is likely to be expensive, and there is no consensus on how to do it.
GMO corn makes up 88% of all US corn and over 90% of all soybeans. How would this be labeled, are you suggesting ANY food item with any amount of corn or soybean be labeled "GMO"?
To clear themselves of GMO labeling, it would be expensive for a manufacturer to track EVERY single food ingredient in the process.
And what about pesticides? Labeling pesticide use is likely to be FAR more important, no? This is why our food regulations are based on the end product, and rightfully so.
Granted the whole discussion about how to do it is a clusterfuck, but the costs of keeping track of labels should be easy to manage since they have to keep track of a bunch of similar stuff. They're supposed to do a lot of monitoring on the products they use anyway, and you'd better believe they have to know where all their ingredients came from. That's how they can track infected food back to it's source when there's an outbreak.
If you look at a food label, it lists ingredients. The food labels say what was put into the food, and what the food's nutritional values are. The label is not entirely focused on end product. All you'd have to do for the GMO stuff is put a little GMO symbol by stuff that was produced with the help of millions of dollar genetic engineering, and when Corps buy that stuff it would come with the label already on it. All they would have to do is pass that information on in the label, which could be done very cheaply.
The thing about costs is a scapegoat argument to distract people from the real reasons that corporations don't want the labels in place. Basically labeling allows products that are more expensive to produce to have a competitive edge against GMOs.
|
badchad
Mad Scientist

Registered: 03/02/05
Posts: 13,372
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21924434 - 07/10/15 01:22 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
So what percentage of food products do you think contain American corn? (not a rhetorical question, I don't readily know). I'm guessing, but what? probably 80-90%? including restaurant foods.
Your proposal would literally, label just about everything as GMO...and we're just talking about corn.
-------------------- ...the whole experience is (and is as) a profound piece of knowledge. It is an indellible experience; it is forever known. I have known myself in a way I doubt I would have ever occurred except as it did. Smith, P. Bull. Menninger Clinic (1959) 23:20-27; p. 27. ...most subjects find the experience valuable, some find it frightening, and many say that is it uniquely lovely. Osmond, H. Annals, NY Acad Science (1957) 66:418-434; p.436
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Mr.GuessWork]
#21924443 - 07/10/15 01:22 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
>The thing about costs is a scapegoat argument to distract people from the real reasons that corporations don't want the labels in place. Basically labeling allows products that are more expensive to produce to have a competitive edge against GMOs.
Exactly right! The poor sheep who believe whatever is in the media have been trained to think gmo should be sneaked into our food to protect corporate profits. They don't think it through.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: badchad]
#21924473 - 07/10/15 01:24 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
badchad said: So what percentage of food products do you think contain American corn? (not a rhetorical question, I don't readily know). I'm guessing, but what? probably 80-90%? including restaurant foods.
Your proposal would literally, label just about everything as GMO...and we're just talking about corn.
Oh, the sky is falling if we have labels. People will get confused and stop eating.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
badchad
Mad Scientist

Registered: 03/02/05
Posts: 13,372
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21924500 - 07/10/15 01:27 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said:
Oh, the sky is falling if we have labels. People will get confused and stop eating.
Says chicken little that started the "scary GMO" thread.
How about you answer the question: Given the widspread use of American corn, and that the majority of American corn is GMO, is your proposal to label almost EVERY product as GMO?
Also, GMO corn is primarily used as corn feed. Would you also label beef as "Fed GMO corn"?
-------------------- ...the whole experience is (and is as) a profound piece of knowledge. It is an indellible experience; it is forever known. I have known myself in a way I doubt I would have ever occurred except as it did. Smith, P. Bull. Menninger Clinic (1959) 23:20-27; p. 27. ...most subjects find the experience valuable, some find it frightening, and many say that is it uniquely lovely. Osmond, H. Annals, NY Acad Science (1957) 66:418-434; p.436
|
Mr.GuessWork
Stranger

Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 4,563
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: badchad]
#21924509 - 07/10/15 01:29 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
badchad said:
Quote:
Stonehenge said:
Oh, the sky is falling if we have labels. People will get confused and stop eating.
Says chicken little that started the "scary GMO" thread.
How about you answer the question: Given the widspread use of American corn, and that the majority of American corn is GMO, is your proposal to label almost EVERY product as GMO?
That sounds consistent with his statements. What's wrong with it?
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: badchad]
#21924544 - 07/10/15 01:35 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
>How about you answer the question: Given the widspread use of American corn, and that the majority of American corn is GMO, is your proposal to label almost EVERY product as GMO?
Its far from almost every product. And so what? The cost is miniscule and they do it with dozens of other ingredients too.
>Also, GMO corn is primarily used as corn feed. Would you also label beef as "Fed GMO corn"?
Yes
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Asante
Mage


Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 86,797
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Mr.GuessWork]
#21924547 - 07/10/15 01:36 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
-------------------- Omnicyclion.org higher knowledge starts here
|
badchad
Mad Scientist

Registered: 03/02/05
Posts: 13,372
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Mr.GuessWork]
#21924564 - 07/10/15 01:38 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Nothing particularly. One would question the utility of having over 90% of products labeled as "GMO" (I guess they'll put a disclaimer on restaurant items). More importantly, of what utility is it to have a product labeled as "GMO" when it contains 0.001% corn?
All of this notwithstanding that GMO products undergo the same safety evaluations as non-GMO.
On second thought, totally well-thought out idea.
-------------------- ...the whole experience is (and is as) a profound piece of knowledge. It is an indellible experience; it is forever known. I have known myself in a way I doubt I would have ever occurred except as it did. Smith, P. Bull. Menninger Clinic (1959) 23:20-27; p. 27. ...most subjects find the experience valuable, some find it frightening, and many say that is it uniquely lovely. Osmond, H. Annals, NY Acad Science (1957) 66:418-434; p.436
|
Mr.GuessWork
Stranger

Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 4,563
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: badchad]
#21924782 - 07/10/15 02:01 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
badchad said: Nothing particularly. One would question the utility of having over 90% of products labeled as "GMO" (I guess they'll put a disclaimer on restaurant items). More importantly, of what utility is it to have a product labeled as "GMO" when it contains 0.001% corn?
All of this notwithstanding that GMO products undergo the same safety evaluations as non-GMO.
On second thought, totally well-thought out idea.
Any source to back the claim up that stat BTW? I'm not really doubting it, I'm just curious. The specifications for labeling would have to be better thought out. The idea certainly isn't ready to be put into place. I would argue for something like a little symbol by the GMO ingredients on the already existing ingredients list, not a bulk GMO label, which would be stupid to put on a label without knowing the specifics anyway.
"All of this notwithstanding that GMO products undergo the same safety evaluations as non-GMO."
True, and that's a good thing. I just think it would be nice to know that a new organism is being used in the food I'm eating. It would be nice to be able to identify that organism, so I could learn more about how it was modified. The whole idea does have practical problems, I admit. And they are significant.
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Mr.GuessWork] 1
#21924812 - 07/10/15 02:10 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
If you don't want to eat GMO, then onlt buy food which os voluntarily labled jnon-gmo. Its simple, quit being a petty tyrant trying to get everyone to cater to your irrational fears. If there is not enough of a non GMO labled food selection for you, maybe you shouldn't blindly believe in vapid hype and fear mongering which lacks evidence.
|
Mr.GuessWork
Stranger

Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 4,563
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Shins]
#21924832 - 07/10/15 02:16 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Again, nobody is fear mongering as far as I can tell. The polls suggest that people want to know when they're eating GMO stuff, and many of them are probably afraid at some level. The best way to deal with that fear is to tell them what they want to know. Withholding information makes people scared.
|
Asante
Mage


Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 86,797
|
Re: 102.5% of doctors think GMO's should be labeled [Re: Mr.GuessWork]
#21924839 - 07/10/15 02:20 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Food labels should be far better than they are now so sure, mention it.
-------------------- Omnicyclion.org higher knowledge starts here
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,510
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21924873 - 07/10/15 02:30 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said:
Selling products on the market place is not a right, its a privilege and the public has a right to know what they are getting.
Uh...yeah...selling products is a right, protected by the Constitution. There is, however, no right to know the genetic makeup of a product.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
badchad
Mad Scientist

Registered: 03/02/05
Posts: 13,372
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Mr.GuessWork]
#21924879 - 07/10/15 02:31 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.GuessWork said:
Any source to back the claim up that stat BTW?.
Not very good ones. There are local media articles describing the amount of corn in our products and some anecdotal news storiesabout it. We could probably also take into account high fructose corn syrup and amount in grain used for livestock, and I speculate the number is huge.
And that's JUST CORN.
Taking into account other GMOs, I'd guess the vast amount of food products have some trace of GMO . In terms of feasability, it's easier to label the non-GMO items. In addition, if you check that agricultureal reference above, there are thousands of GMO varieties. I dare say there are lots of differences.
-------------------- ...the whole experience is (and is as) a profound piece of knowledge. It is an indellible experience; it is forever known. I have known myself in a way I doubt I would have ever occurred except as it did. Smith, P. Bull. Menninger Clinic (1959) 23:20-27; p. 27. ...most subjects find the experience valuable, some find it frightening, and many say that is it uniquely lovely. Osmond, H. Annals, NY Acad Science (1957) 66:418-434; p.436
|
Mr.GuessWork
Stranger

Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 4,563
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: badchad]
#21924887 - 07/10/15 02:34 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
badchad said:
Quote:
Mr.GuessWork said:
Any source to back the claim up that stat BTW?.
Not very good ones. There are local media articles describing the amount of corn in our products and some anecdotal news storiesabout it. We could probably also take into account high fructose corn syrup and amount in grain used for livestock, and I speculate the number is huge.
And that's JUST CORN.
Taking into account other GMOs, I'd guess the vast amount of food products have some trace of GMO . In terms of feasability, it's easier to label the non-GMO items. In addition, if you check that agricultureal reference above, there are thousands of GMO varieties. I dare say there are lots of differences.
Potatoes, various other kinds of produce, and meats are also genetically engineered. The figure of 90% is probably pretty reasonable. It might even be higher.
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Enlil]
#21924890 - 07/10/15 02:34 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
>selling products is a right, protected by the Constitution.
I await your quote from the constitution. Something tortured no doubt away from its original meaning. The feds regulate interstate commerce, that would include banning sellers who don't follow the rules.
.001% corn in a product? Why on earth would it be there then?
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Asante
Mage


Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 86,797
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21924896 - 07/10/15 02:37 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Allergy Information: These potato chips were produced in a factory that also processes corn, may contain traces of corn.
-------------------- Omnicyclion.org higher knowledge starts here
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,510
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21924948 - 07/10/15 02:55 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Enlil]
#21924955 - 07/10/15 02:58 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I don't see your quote. You have dodged again. Where in the constitution, not in Wikipedia, does it give a right to sell?
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,510
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21925049 - 07/10/15 03:31 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
"No State shall . . . pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts"
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
D.M.T
Shroomery Contaminant


Registered: 10/31/09
Posts: 10,991
Loc: In your brain
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21925072 - 07/10/15 03:39 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said: Explain to me why aspartame should be listed and gmo should not?
Aspartame has been linked to seizures among other problems, although the evidence presented has all been questionable.
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: D.M.T]
#21925134 - 07/10/15 03:57 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Nice try but you fell short once again. Nothing about selling being a right. Its still regulated which means they can ban it if the seller does not follow regs.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,510
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21925163 - 07/10/15 04:04 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
A sale is a contract, little buddy. You learn something new every day.
The right to freedom of speech is a fundamental right, and the government cannot infringe upon that right without a compelling government interest. I ask again...what is the compelling government interest being served in requiring GMOs to be labeled?
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Mr.GuessWork
Stranger

Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 4,563
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Enlil]
#21925192 - 07/10/15 04:10 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
The trouble with the argument for labels is that it's hard to come up with a justification that's clearly and strongly compelling. Other countries have the labels, which gives their researchers an advantage, and if they find any evidence to strongly support the idea that GMOs can cause serious health risks, the situation will change.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,510
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Mr.GuessWork]
#21925221 - 07/10/15 04:17 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.GuessWork said: if they find any evidence to strongly support the idea that GMOs can cause serious health risks, the situation will change.
Absolutely. GMOs have been used for quite awhile now without any indication that they've caused health problems. If, however, scientists find that GMOS do cause problems, that would certainly be a compelling government interest to force labeling and perhaps even ban them from food.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Patlal
You ask too many questions



Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 9 hours, 33 minutes
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Enlil]
#21925256 - 07/10/15 04:23 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: A sale is a contract, little buddy. You learn something new every day.
The right to freedom of speech is a fundamental right, and the government cannot infringe upon that right without a compelling government interest. I ask again...what is the compelling government interest being served in requiring GMOs to be labeled?
The government is the people, the people have the right to know exactly what they buy. Just like a contract, you have the right to know the terms of your purchase. Should an ingredient be against what you believe, you can decide not to buy. Without said information, you might purchase something with ingredients you don't agree with or ingredients that underwent a industrial process you don't agree with.
I dn't understand people who refuse to be more informed. If it was just for me, any consumer product would come with the information possible.
--------------------
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Enlil]
#21925325 - 07/10/15 04:41 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: A sale is a contract, little buddy. You learn something new every day.
The right to freedom of speech is a fundamental right, and the government cannot infringe upon that right without a compelling government interest. I ask again...what is the compelling government interest being served in requiring GMOs to be labeled?
Again you struggle probably realizing you are wrong but never willing to admit it. Govt can regulate interstate commerce and that includes regulating what sales contracts can be made and on what terms. Selling is no more a right than driving is. If it was a right, then no one could be stopped from selling any more than they can be stopped from breathing. Yet as you know very well, there are many restrictions on selling.
Its time to cut your losses and admit it, or as is your usual way, just go silent on that point.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,510
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Patlal]
#21925327 - 07/10/15 04:42 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Patlal said:
The government is the people, the people have the right to know exactly what they buy. Just like a contract, you have the right to know the terms of your purchase. Should an ingredient be against what you believe, you can decide not to buy. Without said information, you might purchase something with ingredients you don't agree with or ingredients that underwent a industrial process you don't agree with.
That's a pretty wild theory. Do you have a source for this alleged right to know "exactly what [one buys]"? If that right exists, where is the 1000 page manual that should come with a car, stating the atomic breakdown of every part on the vehicle?
We're not talking about ingredients....We're talking about the genetic makeup of them. If you think the purchaser has the right to know that, then you need to back that up with a source, because caveat emptor has been the general law for centuries.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,510
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21925331 - 07/10/15 04:43 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
No one can be stopped from selling, dude, unless the government has an important interest and the regulation is rationally related to that interest.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Enlil]
#21925351 - 07/10/15 04:46 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Caveat emptor has been replaced by numerous regulations as you know.
>No one can be stopped from selling, dude, unless the government has an important interest and the regulation is rationally related to that interest.
So they do not have a right to sell same as they have a right to life and liberty? That's as close as you have ever come to admitting anything. And its ludicrous to say that all govt regulations are "rational". Anything they come up with could fit under your loose wordage. Ho hum, fail.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Adolin




Registered: 06/28/11
Posts: 8,292
Loc: USA
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21925356 - 07/10/15 04:48 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
you know what's ludicrous?
trying to argue with a lawyer on an online forum.
arguing with enlil is like shouting at the wall.
|
Mr.GuessWork
Stranger

Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 4,563
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Adolin]
#21925363 - 07/10/15 04:49 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Gresh said: arguing with enlil is like shouting at the wall.
Only if you expect him to shout back.
|
Adolin




Registered: 06/28/11
Posts: 8,292
Loc: USA
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Mr.GuessWork]
#21925368 - 07/10/15 04:51 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
good point. still.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,510
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21925388 - 07/10/15 04:59 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said: So they do not have a right to sell same as they have a right to life and liberty? That's as close as you have ever come to admitting anything. And its ludicrous to say that all govt regulations are "rational". Anything they come up with could fit under your loose wordage. Ho hum, fail.
Maybe I need to explain further:
There are Constitutional rights. Not all of these rights are protected the same, however. There are two basic types: Fundamental rights, and other rights.
For fundamental rights, like the right to free speech, the government needs a compelling interest to regulate, and that regulation must be narrowly tailored to that interest. For labeling, which is a speech issue, the government would have to have a compelling interest to force it.
For other rights, like the right to contract, the government needs an important interest, and the law has to be rationally related to that interest. This is a lower standard.
What you fail to understand is that the government can't circumvent the compelling interest test by pretending to regulate something else. They can't say, "We're not regulating speech, but if you don't speak, you can't sell." That is a regulation of speech, pure and simple. Any other analysis would pretty much be the end of all fundamental rights. I can explain this in further detail if you need it, but this thread isn't really the place.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Enlil]
#21925413 - 07/10/15 05:08 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Gresh, you are right. You might get more logic from the wall.
Enlil, you are trying to shift the question back to labels I see. Fine. However, selling is not speech and can be regulated. What the feds are doing or trying to do is stop states from requiring labels or to prevent voluntary labeling. I haven't read the bill so its unclear at this point.
Anything really dirty and bad they make secret like the tpp, aca, ttip, and other alphabet garbage. Now they want to keep gmo's secret. I wonder why?
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,510
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21925421 - 07/10/15 05:10 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
There is no bill to prohibit voluntary labeling, and such a law would be unconstitutional as an infringement on the right to freedom of speech.
Selling can be regulated. Speech can be regulated. In order to do the latter, however, the government needs a compelling interest. I ask yet again, what is the compelling government interest in requiring GMOs to be labeled?
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Patlal
You ask too many questions



Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 9 hours, 33 minutes
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Enlil]
#21925439 - 07/10/15 05:16 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
Patlal said:
The government is the people, the people have the right to know exactly what they buy. Just like a contract, you have the right to know the terms of your purchase. Should an ingredient be against what you believe, you can decide not to buy. Without said information, you might purchase something with ingredients you don't agree with or ingredients that underwent a industrial process you don't agree with.
That's a pretty wild theory. Do you have a source for this alleged right to know "exactly what [one buys]"? If that right exists, where is the 1000 page manual that should come with a car, stating the atomic breakdown of every part on the vehicle?
We're not talking about ingredients....We're talking about the genetic makeup of them. If you think the purchaser has the right to know that, then you need to back that up with a source, because caveat emptor has been the general law for centuries.
We don't need 1000 page documents anymore. We have the internet. All info should be on the company's website. That way the customer will be able exactly what he buys. Of course most people won't give a shit, but some people will be able to study before they purchase.
And no I can't back that with a source because it doesn't exist, It's what I think should be done in the future. Therefore there is no source. It has to be written from scratch and made into law. IMO of course. I know it won't happen because people already don't inform themselves even though lots of information is already available to them, but you know, I can dream that one day people will start caring.
--------------------
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,510
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Patlal]
#21925461 - 07/10/15 05:23 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Considering that we already have the Chinese reverse engineering everything we make so that they can do it cheaper, I think requiring the disclosures you suggest would be highly imprudent.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Patlal
You ask too many questions



Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 9 hours, 33 minutes
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Enlil]
#21925477 - 07/10/15 05:26 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Considering that we already have the Chinese reverse engineering everything we make so that they can do it cheaper, I think requiring the disclosures you suggest would be highly imprudent.
Trump will take care of that, don't worry
--------------------
|
Atreyu
Never Ending


Registered: 03/18/14
Posts: 4,083
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Enlil]
#21925491 - 07/10/15 05:30 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Is it not enough that the general public wants them labeled?
--------------------
つ ◕_◕ ༽つ N = R* • fp • ne • fl • fi • fc • L
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Atreyu]
#21925513 - 07/10/15 05:38 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Atreyu said: Is it not enough that the general public wants them labeled?
It used to be enough but now big money is the boss. Big money can find a thousand lackeys to do its bidding. They buy however many politicians they need.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,510
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Atreyu]
#21925634 - 07/10/15 06:22 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Atreyu said: Is it not enough that the general public wants them labeled?
Not when we're talking about a fundamental right, it isn't.
Think about it this way, if the general public wanted slavery back, would that be enough to override the Constitution? Same principle here. The whole purpose of a Constitution is to reduce tyranny of the majority by having a supreme body of law that is not subject to the whims of public opinion.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Shroomism
Space Travellin



Registered: 02/13/00
Posts: 66,015
Loc: 9th Dimension
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Atreyu]
#21925644 - 07/10/15 06:26 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Well Monsanto has spent millions fighting against it.. so no.. it's not enough.
--------------------
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Enlil]
#21925675 - 07/10/15 06:38 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
What horseshit comparing modifying a label with bringing back slavery.
shr >Well Monsanto has spent millions fighting against it.. so no.. it's not enough.
You said the magic words. Spend enough money in the right places and laws get made or changed, the media says what you want to hear and you get your way. And the sheep believe the lies you told, that's the icing on the cake. They will even stand up and defend Monsanto while they are poisoning them with roundup etc.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
r00tuuu123
Now I'm just really piseed



Registered: 04/20/12
Posts: 8,507
Loc: I'll be there in a minute
Last seen: 7 years, 10 months
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21925870 - 07/10/15 07:46 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I don't under stand the problem GMO has been going on since the days of Gregor Mendel just on a macro level rather than a micro level. It's not like every sheep is dolly the sheep and their mot cloning animals with plants WTF GMO is pretty much the same as selective breeding just more on a precise level. it 's not like it is a new thing.
--------------------
Please report me to a Mod for hurting your punk ass hippie feelings And all time Champion thread killer.
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: r00tuuu123]
#21925899 - 07/10/15 07:55 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
What is new is that they can move genes from bacteria, animals or even jellyfish into other species. They put a gene in to give resistence to roundup, a toxic herbicide and now all those crops are loaded with the crap plus the new gene.
We simply don't know the long term effects of these frankenstein experiments. We are not asking them to be all banned, simply to be informed when they are present. But noooooooo
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
r00tuuu123
Now I'm just really piseed



Registered: 04/20/12
Posts: 8,507
Loc: I'll be there in a minute
Last seen: 7 years, 10 months
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21925964 - 07/10/15 08:12 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
You think you don't eat enough herbicides and insecticides in a year? Plus jellyfish is a delicacy in Japan so you're getting a bargain. Let me know when they start cloning Fugu into tomatos. Soylent Green is made of people !
--------------------
Please report me to a Mod for hurting your punk ass hippie feelings And all time Champion thread killer.
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21926048 - 07/10/15 08:37 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said: Here ya go pris, another study to sneer at. Were the doctors all quacks? Is the website untrustworthy according to you? I know you can't deal with facts so it will be something like that.
HTTP://WWW.TRUEACTIVIST.COM/END-OF-ASPARTAME-STUDY-LINKS-DIET-SODA-TO-MAJOR-PROBLEMS/
ok,let me explain this is simple, easy to follow terms... this is an article, it's not a study, this article cites sources such as mercola, a well known fraudster and crackpot who got his doctorate in a field of quackery. that's an article with an agenda, not a scientific study
Quote:
But in a study (published in 2014) which took place over 10 years and involved 60,000 women, it was determined that women who drink two or more diet drinks a day have much higher cardiovascular disease rates and are more likely to die from the disease.
In the largest study of its kind, The University of Iowa concluded the following:
[C]ompared to women who never or only rarely consume diet drinks, those who consume two or more a day are 30 percent more likely to have a cardiovascular event [heart attack or stroke] and 50 percent more likely to die from related disease.
On average, women who consumed two or more diet drinks a day were younger, more likely to be smokers, and had a higher prevalence of diabetes, high blood pressure, and higher body mass index.
that last part you seem to kinda overlook but it's clear you didnt click the link to the study the article is misrepresenting because it was a study of older women but wait... the study it links to isnt a study, it's an article as well
now in that article it says:
http://now.uiowa.edu/2014/03/ui-study-finds-diet-drinks-associated-heart-trouble-older-women
Quote:
UI study finds diet drinks associated with heart trouble for older women One of the largest study of its kind looks at diet drinks and cardiovascular outcomes
“We only found an association, so we can’t say that diet drinks cause these problems,” Vyas says, adding that there may be other factors about people who drink more diet drinks that could explain the connection.
“It’s too soon to tell people to change their behavior based on this study; however, based on these and other findings we have a responsibility to do more research to see what is going on and further define the relationship, if one truly exists,” he adds. “This could have major public health implications.”
Future research could include clinical studies, animal models, and even molecular and pharmacologic analyses to begin to explain what, if any, direct role diet drinks play in heart health.
so wait a second, the researcher that conducted this study didnt conduct a clinical study, it kinda sounds like it was merely a survey by the text of the original article and in all this they found that the majority that drank 2+ drinks a day also lead unhealthy lifestyles such as smoking
wait a second... that wasnt even the original article
Quote:
Note to Editors: This release is adapted from a news release prepared by the American College of Cardiology.
so wait, it's an article based on an article based on an article and you're trying to pass this shit off as a study... are you really this dumb?
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21926074 - 07/10/15 08:44 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said: We simply don't know the long term effects of these frankenstein experiments. We are not asking them to be all banned, simply to be informed when they are present. But noooooooo
what do you consider to be long term?
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Shroomism]
#21926126 - 07/10/15 08:53 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Shroomism said: Well Monsanto has spent millions fighting against it.. so no.. it's not enough.
so it's about the money? how much has monsanto actually spent in it's lobbying efforts?
the anti-GMO lobby spent $9.3 million in 2013 to get products labeled while the total for biotech and agribusiness in 2014 was only $9 million. surely it wasnt all monsanto especially since ConAgra and Sygenta are also large contributors
how about giving us the exact amount that monsanto spent in either 2013 or 2014 on their lobbying efforts since it's clear that big organic and big anti-GMO have spent more than all of them combined
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Prisoner#1] 1
#21926154 - 07/10/15 08:59 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
don't be shy, pris, tell us if you liked the link or not?
Lol @ the cherry picking for any perceived flaw or possible flaw or imaginary flaw. Oh golly, was it on older women? Then lets disregard. They mentioned your favorite doctor? Maybe he is not such a quack after all? Might even be a better doctor than you?
Lets not fight, we agree you disagree.
Long term? how long did it take for asbestos problems to show up? How long before it was proven?
You think monsatan and the other creeps are going to tell the truth on what they spent or just what can be proven? They spend much more on sneaky stuff, sponsoring studies that just by coincidence always say what the sponsors want. Or the researchers get no more work and their conclusions are buried. Payoffs to politicians, think they put that in the 9 mill? There are many ways to skin a cat.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Atreyu
Never Ending


Registered: 03/18/14
Posts: 4,083
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21926350 - 07/10/15 09:51 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
--------------------
つ ◕_◕ ༽つ N = R* • fp • ne • fl • fi • fc • L
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21927002 - 07/11/15 01:54 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said: don't be shy, pris, tell us if you liked the link or not?
Lol @ the cherry picking for any perceived flaw or possible flaw or imaginary flaw. Oh golly, was it on older women? Then lets disregard. They mentioned your favorite doctor? Maybe he is not such a quack after all? Might even be a better doctor than you?
Lets not fight, we agree you disagree.
so you're saying I just blew your whole argument out of the water again
you want non-GMO foods, grow it yourself, dont eat the GMO shit, it's not rocket surgery, the companies that use it are well known, you know what to avoid so avoid it and quit hounding the world with your scare tactics and conspiracy theories because the sane and rational world knows that there's no dangers from this shit
Quote:
You think monsatan and the other creeps are going to tell the truth on what they spent or just what can be proven? They spend much more on sneaky stuff, sponsoring studies that just by coincidence always say what the sponsors want. Or the researchers get no more work and their conclusions are buried. Payoffs to politicians, think they put that in the 9 mill? There are many ways to skin a cat.
see, to you it's a big conspiracy
seralini's link to the anti-GMO crowd is well know, his funding is directly from their coffers, why not show us something of substance since you claim all these researchers and politicians are being paid off. that's the thing about money, it leaves a trail and when it's more than 1000 differnt researchers with more than 3000 studies and billions of meals served using GMOs, wouldnt you think that some of this shit would have shown up and actually been linked to the GMOs by someone that wasnt so easy to discredit because his research didnt fucking match his conclusions... apparently he's like you, he didnt believe anyone would read the shit he published
|
Hippocampus



Registered: 04/01/15
Posts: 753
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Prisoner#1]
#21927191 - 07/11/15 02:43 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Better not tell them about how bacteria integrates into human DNA. They'll make us all wear GMO labels.
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Prisoner#1]
#21928048 - 07/11/15 09:18 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
>so you're saying I just blew your whole argument out of the water again
No, your feeble argument based on guilt by association, weak points and slander has failed once again. Some 166,000 cases are not an anomaly, we now know its crap. But eat up a big bowl of gm corn with a splash of roundup. No one will stop you but they might want to watch.
The "lets keep it secret" crowd is going down in flames.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21929287 - 07/11/15 03:23 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said: >so you're saying I just blew your whole argument out of the water again
No, your feeble argument based on guilt by association, weak points and slander has failed once again.
so pointing out the flaws in those stupid articles is guilt by association?
the one so called study even stated they cant attribute the health problems to diet drinks
Quote:
Some 166,000 cases are not an anomaly , we now know its crap
what 166,000 cases of what?
Quote:
. But eat up a big bowl of gm corn with a splash of roundup. No one will stop you but they might want to watch.
manure is safe so why dont you eat it? organic pesticides are safe so why dont you eat that?
everyone sees what your argument breaks down to when your 'evidence' is picked apart, it's sad and your unconvincing and certainly dont appear to know what you're talking about, you just link to shit and get enraged when it's torn down for being fraudulent and you still keep believing this shit you spread
Quote:
The "lets keep it secret" crowd is going down in flames.
so you kick the pieces off the board, throw a fit and scream that you're the winner when you havent come close to making an opening move, 
http://www.iflscience.com/environment/no-st-study-scientists-find-conspiracy-theorists-will-anything-other-conspiracy
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Prisoner#1] 1
#21929456 - 07/11/15 04:00 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Your so called 'picking apart' is the usual "I don't like that doctor, I don't like that study, quit convincing me against my will. Waahh!"
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Atreyu]
#21929667 - 07/11/15 04:42 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Atreyu said: Is it not enough that the general public wants them labeled?
. 1. No it is not enough. The constitution was written to protect rights like free speech from the tyranny of a majority. . 2. You have no hard proof that that is actually what the general public wants.
|
s240779

Registered: 12/07/10
Posts: 12,880
Last seen: 2 months, 10 days
|
Re: 68% of doctors think GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21936015 - 07/13/15 03:46 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
However, when an international group of scientists did gather to discuss the matter, they concluded that mutant crops aren’t needed to feed the world.
http://www.alternet.org/food/pope-francis-roll-brings-sanity-gmo-debate
|
|