GMO food
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-11-2012, 04:04 AM
GMO food
In light of Prop 37 hype on Google+, I was wondering what do you guys think of GMO? And by 'what do you think' I mean what is the objective, scientific, assessment of GMO? I don't know much about it myself, so I would like those of you who know something more to share links, facts, studies, etc. and after that (and only after that) your personal opinions on GMO. Smile

*popcorn*

[Image: s1hlsk.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2012, 12:55 PM
RE: GMO food
So, what are GMOs?
GMOs are organisms whose genetic material has been altered via genetic engineering. Such a technique grants the organism various properties, most of them which are beneficial.

Pros of GMOs:
Increased quality of crops, increased quantity of crops, potential new method of delivering vaccines, generally make food crops easily accessible to everyone.

Cons of GMOs:
Alteration of biodiversity (pest-resistant crops either lead to decrease in numbers of a particular insect, or natural selection might lead to a population of pests immune to the effects of the crop) (Pest-resistant crops may transfer pest-resistant genes to nearly related weeds, creating pest-resistant weeds), possible side effects from various foreign proteins in crops (allergic reactions and such).

Personal opinions on GMO?
It's a double-edged sword, but pros outweigh the cons in my opinion. Only problem I have is companies who try to exploit such technology for their own gains.

Welcome to science. You're gonna like it here - Phil Plait

Have you ever tried taking a comfort blanket away from a small child? - DLJ
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like robotworld's post
08-11-2012, 01:05 PM
RE: GMO food
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/a...umans.html


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-19654825


There are some things we shouldnt fuck with.

You have consciously forgotten you're breathing until you just read this. Why not take a few nice... slow.... and long deep breathes now you're aware.

Chill

Cool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2012, 01:10 PM
RE: GMO food
Dailymail is not a reliable news source; they have in fact been caught altering facts to make stories and headlines more shocking. They're worse than Fox News.


Second article, the study had methodological issues and the product was one fed to cows, not to humans.

E 2 = (mc 2)2 + (pc )2
614C → 714N + e + ̅νe
2 K(s) + 2 H2O(l) → 2 KOH(aq) + H2 (g) + 196 kJ/mol
It works, bitches.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2012, 01:39 PM
RE: GMO food
(08-11-2012 01:10 PM)Phaedrus Wrote:  Dailymail is not a reliable news source; they have in fact been caught altering facts to make stories and headlines more shocking. They're worse than Fox News.


Second article, the study had methodological issues and the product was one fed to cows, not to humans.
Im aware what the articles say bro.

I think they should test it more, preferably over generations.

You have consciously forgotten you're breathing until you just read this. Why not take a few nice... slow.... and long deep breathes now you're aware.

Chill

Cool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2012, 01:47 PM
RE: GMO food
(08-11-2012 01:39 PM)bemore Wrote:  
(08-11-2012 01:10 PM)Phaedrus Wrote:  Dailymail is not a reliable news source; they have in fact been caught altering facts to make stories and headlines more shocking. They're worse than Fox News.


Second article, the study had methodological issues and the product was one fed to cows, not to humans.
Im aware what the articles say bro.

I think they should test it more, preferably over generations.
This process has been in use for several decades now, bemore.

[Image: 4833fa13.jpg]
Poonjab
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2012, 02:10 PM
RE: GMO food
GMOs suck in a diverse planting situation. They tend to be really shitty at being a part of a balanced system. For mono cropping they are much better.

My biggest problem with GMOs is when companies patent the plant. When the seeds naturally spread, these big companies sue farmers who have their patented plant interbreeding with a similar, non GMO crop. Example: farmer joe grows soybeans. Farmer frank grows GMO soybeans. Franks beans pollinate joes beans, so when joe harvests and save his seed, it is now a hybrid with the GMO from franks crop. Joe can't stop this from happening, and the company with the patent swoops in and forces joe to buy their GMO beans or get sued for stealing their patent.

Science is awesome, and GMO can definitely help the world, but the abuse of science makes me ill.

[Image: StarkLord01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Stark Raving's post
08-11-2012, 02:18 PM
RE: GMO food
(08-11-2012 02:10 PM)Stark Raving Wrote:  My biggest problem with GMOs is when companies patent the plant. When the seeds naturally spread, these big companies sue farmers who have their patented plant interbreeding with a similar, non GMO crop. Example: farmer joe grows soybeans. Farmer frank grows GMO soybeans. Franks beans pollinate joes beans, so when joe harvests and save his seed, it is now a hybrid with the GMO from franks crop. Joe can't stop this from happening, and the company with the patent swoops in and forces joe to buy their GMO beans or get sued for stealing their patent.
This isn't an issue with GMOs. This is an issue with the patenting office and copyright laws. If a pharmacy patented the cure for cancer, would your gripe be with the cure or the patenting methods?

[Image: 4833fa13.jpg]
Poonjab
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2012, 03:37 PM
RE: GMO food
(08-11-2012 02:18 PM)Logica Humano Wrote:  
(08-11-2012 02:10 PM)Stark Raving Wrote:  My biggest problem with GMOs is when companies patent the plant. When the seeds naturally spread, these big companies sue farmers who have their patented plant interbreeding with a similar, non GMO crop. Example: farmer joe grows soybeans. Farmer frank grows GMO soybeans. Franks beans pollinate joes beans, so when joe harvests and save his seed, it is now a hybrid with the GMO from franks crop. Joe can't stop this from happening, and the company with the patent swoops in and forces joe to buy their GMO beans or get sued for stealing their patent.
This isn't an issue with GMOs. This is an issue with the patenting office and copyright laws. If a pharmacy patented the cure for cancer, would your gripe be with the cure or the patenting methods?
Cool your jets there turbo. I think I was pretty clear that I had a problem with what companies do with GMOs. Just because it's not an issue with the actual science doesn't make it irrelevant.

[Image: StarkLord01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-11-2012, 05:47 PM
RE: GMO food
(08-11-2012 03:37 PM)Stark Raving Wrote:  
(08-11-2012 02:18 PM)Logica Humano Wrote:  This isn't an issue with GMOs. This is an issue with the patenting office and copyright laws. If a pharmacy patented the cure for cancer, would your gripe be with the cure or the patenting methods?
Cool your jets there turbo. I think I was pretty clear that I had a problem with what companies do with GMOs. Just because it's not an issue with the actual science doesn't make it irrelevant.
Where did I say your points were irrelevant? I said your gripes are not with GMOs, they are with patenting protocols.

[Image: 4833fa13.jpg]
Poonjab
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: