MonroeTalks.com > Categories > Health > GMO's... Good or bad?


Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 16   Go Down

Author Topic: GMO's... Good or bad?  (Read 15393 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Frenchfry

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 39903
Re: GMO's... Good or bad?
« Reply #30 on: August 17, 2013, 08:39:22 PM »

I am hearing a lot of things from uninformed people regarding the pros and cons of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO's), but even more specifically, GM corn.  Monsanto is evil, and wants to kill everyone, etc.

What are your thoughts?
Not sure why you're so obnoxious...sure hope it's not common amongst gun owners much like false bravado, and poor judgment.

Anyway it seems the right eschews science...and yet here you are...advocating science.

Guess it's like anything else...pick and choose.

I recall reading about farmers that tried to get away from using GM seed...but got sued.

I found a few things about the subject...but of course for anyone on the right, validity is suspect unless it comes from Fox News.

On Monday, a federal appeals court dismissed organic farmers’ lawsuit against the biotech firm Monsanto Company — but extracted a binding promise from Monsanto that they would not sue farmers whose crops were inadvertently contaminated with their product. Monsanto, which owns the patents to the vast majority of genetically modified staple crops in the U.S., devotes $10 million a year and a staff of 75 specifically to investigate and sue farmers who use their GM technology without paying royalties. To date, they have pursued more than 800 patent infringement cases.

Organic farmers sued Monsanto in 2011, fearing the company could unleash their enormous legal power on farmers whose crops were accidentally contaminated with their patent-protected technology. Given that seeds are scattered easily by wind, animals, and birds, traces of genetically modified DNA often intermingles with non-GM crops. A study of non-GM crops in the U.S. found that 50 percent of traditional corn seed, 50 percent of soy, and 83 percent of canola was contaminated with GM material.
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/06/11/2133121/appeals-court-monsanto-not-sue-farmers/

============

LOL... okay here's one from INFOWARS....but they're morons:

GMO feed turns pig stomachs to mush! Shocking photos reveal severe damage
http://www.infowars.com/gmo-feed-turns-pig-stomachs-to-mush-shocking-photos-reveal-severe-damage-caused-by-gm-soy-and-corn/

============

GMO Myths and Truths

An evidence-based examination of the claims made for the safety and efficacy of genetically modified crops
http://earthopensource.org/files/pdfs/GMO_Myths_and_Truths/GMO_Myths_and_Truths_1.3b.pdf

===========

10 Reasons to Avoid GMOs

http://www.responsibletechnology.org/10-Reasons-to-Avoid-GMOs

==========

http://www.seattleorganicrestaurants.com/vegan-whole-foods/gmo-harms-dangers/

==========

Frankenseeds
http://sierrapermaculture.com/?p=129
Logged
This is what I see when I visit:

"Sorry Frenchfry, you are banned from posting and sending personal messages on this forum.
This ban is not set to expire."

No emails, no warnings, no communication whatsoever...just that ban

May be what happened to the other libs as well.

I guess disabling the report to admin link only on the lib side was indicative of the slanted games they play.

Enjoy your spoon-fed Faux News type right-wing echo-chamber.

Edited to add:

This is the only way to answer some of the questions posed:

1) I did nothing to warrant the banishment, it's political.

2) It's the router that's blocked but considering all the nonsense right-wing games being played by those running the site...it's just not worth it to bypass the banishment block.

3) The moron stalkers from MT contemplating a visit will be considered a threat and can expect to have a bad day if they act upon those idiotic thoughts.

bumfunkegypt@live.com

old salt

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2310
Re: GMO's... Good or bad?
« Reply #31 on: August 20, 2013, 10:42:43 AM »

Not sure if this discovery will be disease resistant, but it sure could be helpful in reducing fertilizers.

http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2013/08/18/scientists-unlock-self-fertilizing-crops/

http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/news/pressreleases/2013/july/world-changing-technology-enables-crops-to-take-nitrogen-from-the-air-.aspx

Of course, my favorite quote:

"This is yet another reminder of the folly of predicting future trends based on current technology. The pace of technological innovation is growing, and that acceleration isn’t just affecting consumer technology like smartphones or laptops, it’s producing potential solutions like this one to some of the world’s more pressing future problems."
Logged
Voting Democrat Will Destroy Your Family, Grow Government, Raise Your Taxes, Increase Crime, Reduce Individual Rights, And Diminish Western Civilization.

Dan Hamilton

  • Super Talker
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 249
Re: GMO's... Good or bad?
« Reply #32 on: August 25, 2013, 01:52:27 PM »

There is still the problem of genetically modified seed pollinating non genetically modified seed causing the non modified seed to become sterile. GMO crops are designed not to be able to reproduce so that farmers have to buy their seed year after year, and can pass this modifications to Non GMO fields.

Many countries will not allow GMO's to be imported because of this and other reasons.
Logged

Monroe Native

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20428
Re: GMO's... Good or bad?
« Reply #33 on: August 25, 2013, 02:39:31 PM »

Many countries will not allow GMO's to be imported because of this and other reasons.

Many countries also have a large portion of their populace that is starving.
Logged
I have learned that only two things are necessary to keep one's wife happy. First, let her think she's having her own way. And second, let her have it.
Lyndon B. Johnson

You do not examine legislation in the light of the benefits it will convey if properly administered, but in the light of the wrongs it would do and the harms it would cause if improperly administered.
Lyndon B. Johnson

Dan Hamilton

  • Super Talker
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 249
Re: GMO's... Good or bad?
« Reply #34 on: August 25, 2013, 02:45:24 PM »

Many countries also have a large portion of their populace that is starving.
I think the EU is doing pretty good. But here is a listing of some countries that have banned them.
Quote
In Australia: Several Australian states had bans on GM crops but most of them have since lifted them. Only South Australia still has a ban on GM crops, though Tasmania has a moratorium on them until November of 2014.

In Japan: The Japanese people are staunchly opposed to genetically modified crops and no GM seeds are planted in the country. However, large quantities of canola are imported from Canada (which is one of the world’s largest producers of GM canola) and there is now GM canola growing wild around Japanese ports and roads to major food oil companies. Genetically modified canola such as Monsanto’s Roundup Ready canola have been found growing around 5 of the 6 ports that were tested for GM contamination.

In New Zealand: No GM foods are grown in the country.

In Germany: There is a ban on the cultivation or sale of GMO maize.

In Ireland: All GM crops were banned for cultivation in 2009, and there is a voluntary labeling system for foods containing GM foods to be identified as such.

In Austria, Hungary, Greece, Bulgaria and Luxembourg: There are bans on the cultivation and sale of GMOs.

In France: Monsanto’s MON810 GM corn had been approved but its cultivation was forbidden in 2008. There is widespread public mistrust of GMOsthat has been successful in keeping GM crops out of the country.

In Madeira: This small autonomous Portugese island requested a country-wide ban on genetically modified crops last year and was permitted to do so by the EU.

In Switzerland: The country banned all GM crops, animals, and plants on its fields and farms in a public referendum in 2005, but the initial ban was for only five years. The ban has since been extended through 2013.

In India: The government placed a last-minute ban on GM eggplant just before it was scheduled to begin being planted in 2010. However, farmers were widely encouraged to plant Monsanto’s GM cotton and it has led to devastating results. The UK’s Daily Mail reports that an estimated 125,000 farmers have committed suicide because of crop failure and massive debt since planting GM seeds.


http://naturalrevolution.org/list-of-countries-that-ban-gmo-crops-and-require-ge-food-labels/
Logged

livewire

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13929
  • "SHALL NOT be infringed". Got it?
Re: GMO's... Good or bad?
« Reply #35 on: August 25, 2013, 06:00:28 PM »

Most of the countries listed in your link, Dan, have limited ag resources to begin with, because of their geography or size (India and Australia being a couple exceptions).  But most buy GM products from the U.S., as well as other countries.  In my mind, that's kind of hypocritical of them to ban GMO cultivation, but freely buy GM products for consumption.  GM products are here to stay, whether we like them or not.

The US exports about 25% of our entire pork production, with most of it going to Japan.  Pigs eat soy meal, practically all of it GM, grown here in the states.

Japan is looking for non-GM soybeans, but the market is small, and shrinking. Japan buys thousands of metric tons of American corn and soybeans - 
Each and every WEEK. 
All genetically modified.

http://www.agweb.com/usda_weekly_exports_corn_sales_dip_below_the_10_week_average/
Logged
The Spirit of the Woods is like an old good friend.
Makes me feel warm and good inside.

livewire

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13929
  • "SHALL NOT be infringed". Got it?
Re: GMO's... Good or bad?
« Reply #36 on: August 25, 2013, 06:11:59 PM »

Well, so much for the EU banning GM corn.




Monsanto’s SmartStax maize ‘to be approved for growth in October’ in EU

http://rt.com/news/smartstax-maize-germany-approval-428/
Logged
The Spirit of the Woods is like an old good friend.
Makes me feel warm and good inside.

Dan Hamilton

  • Super Talker
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 249
Re: GMO's... Good or bad?
« Reply #37 on: August 25, 2013, 06:28:24 PM »

Well, so much for the EU banning GM corn.




Monsanto’s SmartStax maize ‘to be approved for growth in October’ in EU

http://rt.com/news/smartstax-maize-germany-approval-428/


Yeah I think I saw that in one of my searches too. But my main question is still regarding this.

There is still the problem of genetically modified seed pollinating non genetically modified seed causing the non modified seed to become sterile. GMO crops are designed not to be able to reproduce so that farmers have to buy their seed year after year, and can pass this modifications to Non GMO fields.

Many countries will not allow GMO's to be imported because of this and other reasons.

Don 't you see any problem with this?
Logged

sammy

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4431
Re: GMO's... Good or bad?
« Reply #38 on: August 25, 2013, 06:49:44 PM »

Yeah I think I saw that in one of my searches too. But my main question is still regarding this.
Don 't you see any problem with this?
If GMO seeds are made not to reproduce, why did Monsanto just win a judgement against a farmer who planted seeds from his previous years crop? would he have planted seed which would not reproduce? If he did , he would have no crop, and Monsanto would have no case.
Logged

livewire

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13929
  • "SHALL NOT be infringed". Got it?
Re: GMO's... Good or bad?
« Reply #39 on: August 25, 2013, 09:00:07 PM »

Yeah I think I saw that in one of my searches too. But my main question is still regarding this.
Don 't you see any problem with this?

First of all, if GM corn was designed to be sterile, why do farmers still have a problem with volunteer corn in beans, the year after RR corn was grown there?  Can't be that sterile, if it germinates and produces an ear. There are examples of this all over Monroe county. Yes, the second generation from any hybrid will be less productive, but that has nothing to do with genetic modifications, such as being Roundup Ready. That's the nature of hybrids. It has been that way for decades prior to GM.

Also, what Sammy said is a very valid point.

IF cross pollination from one variety (GM) to another (non-GM) DOES OCCUR, then it's also likely that the opposite has occurred. The non-GM variety has also cross pollinated with the GM variety. This means that those certain traits were passed to the planted crop. I see no reason to worry about this. In many cases, the seed companies are deliberately putting refuge (non-GM) seed in the bag.

I honestly don't see a problem with cross pollination. Someone please tell me why it is bad, or how does it harm anyone.

What am I missing?

Logged
The Spirit of the Woods is like an old good friend.
Makes me feel warm and good inside.

sammy

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4431
Re: GMO's... Good or bad?
« Reply #40 on: August 25, 2013, 09:15:47 PM »

What you're missing is the message from the antis;Organic good, GMOs/bad. They have no evidence, only that progress, especially if it may benefit millions of starving people, has to be bad. Buy local, buy organic, buy grass-fed, eat grass. You know the arguments.
Logged

Dan Hamilton

  • Super Talker
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 249
Re: GMO's... Good or bad?
« Reply #41 on: August 26, 2013, 12:07:42 AM »

By Erin Hayes
ABCNEWS.com


R E E D,   Ky.,   Aug. 2 — This is how it has worked for centuries: farmers harvest a crop and hold back some of the seeds to plant next year’s crop.
     In nature’s cycle, one harvest creates the next. But science has come up with a method to stop that cycle and to make crops sterile. It is the result of genetic engineering. Researchers have found a way to implant a kind of genetic switch in crops that can terminate their ability to reproduce. Its critics have dubbed it “terminator technology” and they are appalled by it. Margaret Mellon of the Union of Concerned Scientists calls it, “a technology that doesn’t improve yields, doesn’t increase the nutritional value of food, but does only one thing. And that is it sterilizes the plants. It produces dead seed.”
     But big agribusiness companies are very interested in it. “We believe this technology has the potential for agricultural biotechnology in terms of gene control devices in plants,” says Jack Watson of Monsanto.
     Companies such as Monsanto want that control. They argue they spend millions on research, creating genetically altered crops and that their profits come from selling farmers the seed. To protect those profits, Monsanto now patents much of that seed, actually making it illegal for farmers to save and reuse it. When farmer David Chaney did just that, Monsanto sent a private detective to his farm. Monsanto sued him and dozens of other farmers. They also bought radio time to warn others that offenders stand to lose hundreds of dollars per acre.

Banned by World Bank
But if the seed-sterilizing technology gets approved, Monsanto would not need to investigate or sue. It would have a genetic lock, guaranteeing farmers would have to buy its seed every season. That has many alarmed. The World Bank’s agricultural network has banned the technology fearing that sterile seeds could spell disaster for millions of farmers and creating the possibility of a localized famine.
     “The small farmers in the developing world who still rely extensively on their ability to hold back their seeds … who can get wiped out by one bad season, would suddenly find themselves with no seeds for the next year and no money to buy new seeds,” says Ismael Serageldin of World Bank.
     Another concern: the potential for the sterilized crops to sterilize normal crops. “If cross-pollination occurred and my neighbor was to go using genetically engineered crops with the Terminator genes, they could destroy my crops,” says one farmer. Another says, “I don’t think it’s in the best interests of mankind.”
     But what has farmers really upset is that the United States Department of Agriculture actually helped invent the genetically altered seed.



 Government Gets Cut of Royalties
It’s not a subject they like to discuss, but when pressed, Eileen Kennedy of the USDA admitted “We were part of the research group developing that. Absolutely.”
     The primary reason: to help companies protect their bottom line. “Recoup a part of their investment that private sector R&D [research and development] money is going into the development of that seed,” says Kennedy.
     Monsanto has promised to call for public debate on the merits of the technology. “And until that takes place in the public realm and until we have an opportunity to analyze those impacts, we will not commercialize the technology,” says Watson.
     What will the federal government stand to gain? Well, consider: By contract, if the genetically altered seed goes commercial, agriculture officials could make a lot of money. “Twenty-five percent of those royalties would go to the individual investigators,” says Kennedy. “To USDA scientists.”
     To some, the promise of opportunity. To others, a threat that could, at the very least, irrevocably alter life on the farm.

Logged

livewire

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13929
  • "SHALL NOT be infringed". Got it?
Re: GMO's... Good or bad?
« Reply #42 on: August 27, 2013, 07:56:06 PM »

And my question goes unanswered.

Logged
The Spirit of the Woods is like an old good friend.
Makes me feel warm and good inside.

Dan Hamilton

  • Super Talker
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 249
Re: GMO's... Good or bad?
« Reply #43 on: August 27, 2013, 09:02:53 PM »

First of all, if GM corn was designed to be sterile, why do farmers still have a problem with volunteer corn in beans, the year after RR corn was grown there?  Can't be that sterile, if it germinates and produces an ear. There are examples of this all over Monroe county. Yes, the second generation from any hybrid will be less productive, but that has nothing to do with genetic modifications, such as being Roundup Ready. That's the nature of hybrids. It has been that way for decades prior to GM.

Also, what Sammy said is a very valid point.

IF cross pollination from one variety (GM) to another (non-GM) DOES OCCUR, then it's also likely that the opposite has occurred. The non-GM variety has also cross pollinated with the GM variety. This means that those certain traits were passed to the planted crop. I see no reason to worry about this. In many cases, the seed companies are deliberately putting refuge (non-GM) seed in the bag.

I honestly don't see a problem with cross pollination. Someone please tell me why it is bad, or how does it harm anyone.

What am I missing?
How about those organic farmers who are trying to sell their product as "organic" and "GMO" free and are having their fields contaminated? It harms them wouldn't you say?


And you don't see a problem with seed companies deliberately putting in "refuge" seed in your product? I would consider that fraud.

Monsanto has created the "terminator" seed, and says that they won't introduce it into the field, but why would they create it in the first place? What happens if it accidentally gets out?

Here is another article describing how GMO technologies have devastated Indian farmers.

Quote
The entry of Monsanto in the Indian seed sector was made possible with a 1988 Seed Policy imposed by the World Bank, requiring the Government of India to deregulate the seed sector. Five things changed with Monsanto’s entry: First, Indian companies were locked into joint-ventures and licensing arrangements, and concentration over the seed sector increased. Second, seed which had been the farmers’ common resource became the “intellectual property” of Monsanto, for which it started collecting royalties, thus raising the costs of seed. Third, open pollinated cotton seeds were displaced by hybrids, including GMO hybrids. A renewable resource became a non-renewable, patented commodity. Fourth, cotton which had earlier been grown as a mixture with food crops now had to be grown as a monoculture, with higher vulnerability to pests, disease, drought and crop failure. Fifth, Monsanto started to subvert India’s regulatory processes and, in fact, started to use public resources to push its non-renewable hybrids and GMOs through so-called public-private partnerships (PPP).

In 1995, Monsanto introduced its Bt technology in India through a joint-venture with the Indian company Mahyco. In 1997-98, Monsanto started open field trials of its GMO Bt cotton illegally and announced that it would be selling the seeds commercially the following year. India has rules for regulating GMOs since 1989, under the Environment Protection Act. It is mandatory to get approval from the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee under the ministry of environment for GMO trials. The Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology sued Monsanto in the Supreme Court of India and Monsanto could not start the commercial sales of its Bt cotton seeds until 2002.
And, after the damning report of India’s parliamentary committee on Bt crops in August 2012, the panel of technical experts appointed by the Supreme Court recommended a 10-year moratorium on field trials of all GM food and termination of all ongoing trials of transgenic crops.

But it had changed Indian agriculture already.

Monsanto’s seed monopolies, the destruction of alternatives, the collection of superprofits in the form of royalties, and the increasing vulnerability of monocultures has created a context for debt, suicides and agrarian distress which is driving the farmers’ suicide epidemic in India. This systemic control has been intensified with Bt cotton. That is why most suicides are in the cotton belt.

An internal advisory by the agricultural ministry of India in January 2012 had this to say to the cotton-growing states in India — “Cotton farmers are in a deep crisis since shifting to Bt cotton. The spate of farmer suicides in 2011-12 has been particularly severe among Bt cotton farmers.”

The highest acreage of Bt cotton is in Maharashtra and this is also where the highest farmer suicides are. Suicides increased after Bt cotton was introduced — Monsanto’s royalty extraction, and the high costs of seed and chemicals have created a debt trap. According to Government of India data, nearly 75 per cent rural debt is due to purchase inputs. As Monsanto’s profits grow, farmers’ debt grows. It is in this systemic sense that Monsanto’s seeds are seeds of suicide.


http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-seeds-of-suicide-how-monsanto-destroys-farming/5329947

Logged

livewire

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13929
  • "SHALL NOT be infringed". Got it?
Re: GMO's... Good or bad?
« Reply #44 on: August 28, 2013, 03:43:50 PM »


How about those organic farmers who are trying to sell their product as "organic" and "GMO" free and are having their fields contaminated? It harms them wouldn't you say?


I am having difficulty debating the issue with you, because you aren't answering my questions... except with more questions directed at me.  I have made an attempt to answer every one of your questions, and will do so once again.

No, I would not say that the existence of GMO's would harm organic farmers.  The "organic" market is very small, and is mostly comprised of fresh vegetables.  Almost no one grows "organic" field corn, or soybeans for feed.  So cross pollination doesn't occur much, if at all.  How could it?  The only exception I could envision would be organic sweet corn cross pollinating with field corn.  GMO or not, that would be a bad thing for the sweet corn, and would even if the field corn was non-GMO, it would ruin the sweet corn.  Any farmer knows this, and would take steps to prevent cross pollination.



And you don't see a problem with seed companies deliberately putting in "refuge" seed in your product? I would consider that fraud.


No, I don't see a problem with refuge seed.  It has many benefits.

Why do you consider it fraud?  The seed companies aren't keeping it a secret - they readily describe their product that contains refuge seed.



Monsanto has created the "terminator" seed, and says that they won't introduce it into the field, but why would they create it in the first place? What happens if it accidentally gets out?


I guess I won't have to spray for volunteer corn, because it won't exist.  Win!


Now PLEASE give me direct answers to my questions, to support your position.

Again, why do you consider refuge seed fraud?

How does GMO corn and soybeans harm you, or anyone else?  Please be specific.
Logged
The Spirit of the Woods is like an old good friend.
Makes me feel warm and good inside.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 16   Go Up