What do we know about GMOs?

[Turtle]

Everything I'm saying you all contradict and refuse to accept a pov other than you as much as I am

Like I said, find me a credible source that says genetic modification of gene splicing is the same as selective breeding. That's your point of view, and it's incorrect. Selective breeding in favor of desired traits is simply not the same thing as engineering those traits using the genes of another species. Therefor, you're right, I refuse to accept your point of view.

 

[cheri1122]

Everything I'm saying you all contradict and refuse to accept a pov other than you as much as I am

That's because cross breeding is NOT the same thing as genetic modifications. Crossbreeding can only produce the qualities that already exist in one parent or the other [barring mutations, which are unpredictable]. Genetic mods can introduce something that wasn't there before [ie: resistance to disease], but it can also result in unforeseen consequences, which is what people are concerned about.
People seem to distrust what they don't understand, and that may be the only reason Monsanto is fighting so hard against labeling GMOs - but I don't trust giant chemical companies, either.
I'm old enough to remember when the tobacco companies swore their products were safe, too, and they knew they were lying.

 

[cheri1122]

BULL HOCKEY! Every bit of grain, every bit of domesticated animal protiain we eat today, is a "GMO". Nothing in modern agriculture is as nature provided. Unless you hunt, fish or forage for your food, you are ingesting "GMO" products, get over it.

My only comment was to applaud the legislator who seriously put some effort into learning about a subject, so I think the "BULL HOCKEY!" reply was unwarranted. And what, exactly, am I supposed to "get over"?

 

[davekc]

Everything I'm saying you all contradict and refuse to accept a pov other than you as much as I am

I just read through all this and OMG. Listen, I think you are trying to promote a opinion without any facts. And there in lies your problem. I think most here would give your opinion a second look if you had those.
No need to complicate the simple.

 

[KickStarter6]

My credible piece of evidence is corn. I don't need tests I don't need some person that doesn't trust this or that I only need corn. Modern corn that's been genetically modified to resist pests and diseases. It was first crossed by farmer and once they made the best corn they could scientist took over when specialized equipment was needed to continue to improve the yield, it's sturdiness, speed of growth and have better flavor for the consumers. How exactly is that a stretch? All I honestly hear is small minds refusing to accept that their old strong beliefs of the old farmer have now turned into a educated man in a lab coat.

 

[davekc]

You are having the same problem. Your example has nothing to do with selective breeding.

 

[layoutshooter]

My only comment was to applaud the legislator who seriously put some effort into learning about a subject, so I think the "BULL HOCKEY!" reply was unwarranted. And what, exactly, am I supposed to "get over"?

You don't trust the "big chemical" companies, but you do trust someone from the government? Without modern chemicals we would be paying WAY more for our food than we are now. If you want what we have now, you have to accept most of what is going on.

Are "GMO" foods safe? I don't know. The LAST bunch I want investigating them is the government. They have their own agenda to push.

You can avoid "GMO" foods if you wish. There are plenty of farmers who grow "natural" foods and their numbers are growing. Just seek them out, pay their price, and you will have what you want.

 

[KickStarter6]

You are having the same problem. Your example has nothing to do with selective breeding.

Excuse me cross pollinating

 

[cheri1122]

You don't trust the "big chemical" companies, but you do trust someone from the government? Without modern chemicals we would be paying WAY more for our food than we are now. If you want what we have now, you have to accept most of what is going on.

Are "GMO" foods safe? I don't know. The LAST bunch I want investigating them is the government. They have their own agenda to push.

You can avoid "GMO" foods if you wish. There are plenty of farmers who grow "natural" foods and their numbers are growing. Just seek them out, pay their price, and you will have what you want.

That I don't trust big chemical companies does not mean I do trust the government, nor did I say I want to avoid GMOs - you're making assumptions that aren't warranted.
Like the legislator in the link, the fact is that I don't know much about GMOs - but that doesn't mean I reject them without finding out more. Chemistry has done a lot that's beneficial for mankind, and I sure wouldn't want to insist that 'natural' is always better - the plague virus is natural, right?

 

[cheri1122]

My credible piece of evidence is corn. I don't need tests I don't need some person that doesn't trust this or that I only need corn. Modern corn that's been genetically modified to resist pests and diseases. It was first crossed by farmer and once they made the best corn they could scientist took over when specialized equipment was needed to continue to improve the yield, it's sturdiness, speed of growth and have better flavor for the consumers. How exactly is that a stretch? All I honestly hear is small minds refusing to accept that their old strong beliefs of the old farmer have now turned into a educated man in a lab coat.

Did you ever watch the movie 'Fantasia'? There's a cool part where Mickey Mouse is the Sorcerer's Apprentice, and he learns a little bit of magic, so he casts a spell, and then, he can't control it. Because sometimes, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. That's what people worry about: what genetic modifications might produce - and what if it can't be controlled?

 

[layoutshooter]

That I don't trust big chemical companies does not mean I do trust the government, nor did I say I want to avoid GMOs - you're making assumptions that aren't warranted.
Like the legislator in the link, the fact is that I don't know much about GMOs - but that doesn't mean I reject them without finding out more. Chemistry has done a lot that's beneficial for mankind, and I sure wouldn't want to insist that 'natural' is always better - the plague virus is natural, right?

I said you could avoid them if you wish too. If you want non-gmo foods, it is easy to do. If you don't, go to Kroger.

I prefer more "natural" foods. I find they have more flavor than the swill they sell at Kroger. (or any other chain)

I am not bothered by the gmo foods. There are far more things out there that I consider a far greater danger.

 

[Turtle]

Excuse me cross pollinating

Which has nothing to do with GMO.

 

[KickStarter6]

See my next post

 

[KickStarter6]

What I'm saying and this is the last time I say so listen up lol.

An ancient farmer selecting certain plants and animals to breed for their specific traits is the same PRINCIPAL as a scientist purposely splicing genes to make plants and animals in THEIR OPINION better for the consumer. No it's not an apples to apples comparison but you have proven that anything other than is impossible for your brains to comprehend. If you can't see the correlation your blind and refuse truth that on front of your eyes.

 

[KickStarter6]

Also keep in mind I have never once SAID that I am for or against GMO's. I only tried to expand what I view as a narrow view point. You say natural when farmers purposefully raise the orange carrot instead of the true purple one. I call it business and science. You say it's nature. I say that in principal is what scientist to an extent are doing now, just way more advanced than a ancient farmer. Still IMO man made product only to carrying degrees.

 

[Turtle]

What I'm saying and this is the last time I say so listen up lol.

An ancient farmer selecting certain plants and animals to breed for their specific traits is the same PRINCIPAL as a scientist purposely splicing genes to make plants and animals in THEIR OPINION better for the consumer. No it's not an apples to apples comparison but you have proven that anything other than is impossible for your brains to comprehend. If you can't see the correlation your blind and refuse truth that on front of your eyes.

Nobody said they couldn't see a correlation between GMOs and selective breeding. Nobody disagrees with there being a correlation. Our brains can comprehend just fine. What we disagree with are the ridiculous statements like "Selective breeding is genetically modifying, it's the exact same thing farmers and breeders have done for centuries," because selective breeding selects current traits for preferential breeding while genetic modification is creating a brand new genome that never existed before. Both methods similarly result in a preferred organism, but they are not even remotely close to being "the exact same thing." What your brain can't comprehend is that selective breeding and genetic modification are not the same thing.

 

[Turtle]

Also keep in mind I have never once SAID that I am for or against GMO's. I only tried to expand what I view as a narrow view point.

Well, while I'm keeping that in mind, you should keep in mind that you said, "In my opinions GMO's are a good thing that help plant life by lowering chances of bad crops, makes natural pesticides, and eventually be less expensive to the consumer."

 

[KickStarter6]

Well, while I'm keeping that in mind, you should keep in mind that you said, "In my opinions GMO's are a good thing that help plant life by lowering chances of bad crops, makes natural pesticides, and eventually be less expensive to the consumer."

Saying something is good is not saying I am for it. Free health care is a good thing IMO but I'm not for it. But that is splitting hairs. So I'll concede that my words their were misleading

 

[layoutshooter]

Saying something is good is not saying I am for it. Free health care is a good thing IMO but I'm not for it. But that is splitting hairs. So I'll concede that my words their were misleading

When you get something for free you get what you paid for. Nothing.

 

[xiggi]

Saying something is good is not saying I am for it. Free health care is a good thing IMO but I'm not for it. But that is splitting hairs. So I'll concede that my words their were misleading

Health care is never free someone has to pay for it.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using EO Forums mobile app