If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(AlterNet)   Want to know why two million people worldwide protested Monsanto yesterday? Here are five reasons. "Froot Loops is 100-percent genetically engineered, and that's a children's cereal. That's irresponsible and unacceptable on so many levels"   (alternet.org) divider line 183
    More: Scary, Froot Loops, Monsanto, heavy industrial, moral responsibility, Agent Orange  
•       •       •

4668 clicks; posted to Business » on 26 May 2013 at 3:19 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



183 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-05-26 12:01:56 PM  
I don't dislike them so much for "ZOMG GENETIC ENGINEERING" reasons (although I admit, I don't actually trust Monsanto themselves to, uh, do the dillgent research to prevent an ecological catastrophe).

I dislike them for A) Monopolistic reasons
B) Their policies.
 
2013-05-26 12:05:22 PM  
You didn't think those things grew naturally, did you?
 
2013-05-26 12:29:36 PM  
AlterNet.  Right.  Okay, let me go touch my clear quartz crystal and work with my chalice well water a bit first.  I wouldn't want to alter the energy of their site by clicking in before I cleansed my aura.
 
2013-05-26 12:43:01 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: AlterNet.  Right.  Okay, let me go touch my clear quartz crystal and work with my chalice well water a bit first.  I wouldn't want to alter the energy of their site by clicking in before I cleansed my aura.


Dislike the messenger, therefore the message is invalid. Makes sense.
 
2013-05-26 12:45:42 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: You didn't think those things grew naturally, did you?


You can't fool me.  I know that somewhere, there are vast orchards of Froot trees.

i105.photobucket.com
 
2013-05-26 01:00:30 PM  

FloydA: MaudlinMutantMollusk: You didn't think those things grew naturally, did you?

You can't fool me.  I know that somewhere, there are vast orchards of Froot trees.

[i105.photobucket.com image 271x360]


Well, of course there are

/but they had to be genetically modified to produce the blue ones
//those just aren't natural
 
2013-05-26 01:01:06 PM  
i.imgur.com

YOU'VE GONE TOO FAR, MONSANTO!
 
2013-05-26 01:01:58 PM  

FloydA: MaudlinMutantMollusk: You didn't think those things grew naturally, did you?

You can't fool me.  I know that somewhere, there are vast orchards of Froot trees.

[i105.photobucket.com image 271x360]


You sure?  The root system on that tree looks flimsy.  I mean, a single choco-wave or rainbow wind would take that thing right out.  No wonder they're endangered and we have to grow them in test tubes.
 
2013-05-26 01:09:14 PM  
Ever had a seedless grape? A banana? A tomato from a grocery store? Any beef from a grocery store? All of that is GMO.
 
2013-05-26 01:10:17 PM  

vudutek: Benevolent Misanthrope: AlterNet.  Right.  Okay, let me go touch my clear quartz crystal and work with my chalice well water a bit first.  I wouldn't want to alter the energy of their site by clicking in before I cleansed my aura.

Dislike the messenger, therefore the message is invalid. Makes sense.


Please point out in my post above where I said their message was invalid.

Go ahead.  I'll wait.
 
2013-05-26 01:11:36 PM  
So, where does selective breeding for desirable characteristics fall on the Scale of Evil?  Just wondering.
 
2013-05-26 01:17:45 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: FloydA: MaudlinMutantMollusk: You didn't think those things grew naturally, did you?

You can't fool me.  I know that somewhere, there are vast orchards of Froot trees.

[i105.photobucket.com image 271x360]

Well, of course there are

/but they had to be genetically modified to produce the blue ones
//those just aren't natural


i105.photobucket.com
Approves.
 
2013-05-26 01:22:07 PM  

PainInTheASP: FloydA: MaudlinMutantMollusk: You didn't think those things grew naturally, did you?

You can't fool me.  I know that somewhere, there are vast orchards of Froot trees.

[i105.photobucket.com image 271x360]

You sure?  The root system on that tree looks flimsy.  I mean, a single choco-wave or rainbow wind would take that thing right out.  No wonder they're endangered and we have to grow them in test tubes.



True, but as long as they're not planted in the Dead Forest, I don't think we have to worry about  Zemzelett.
 
2013-05-26 01:40:44 PM  
People are just afraid of genetically modified food because they don't understand it.  The leaders of this movement, however, have a far darker purpose.  To deny you and us SUPER POWERS.  Because they know eventually we'll be able to eat a power-bar and wake up the next morning with heat-vision or invisibility or the ability to stop time or whatever.  And then--how will they be able to control us?

Wake up MAN!
 
2013-05-26 01:44:53 PM  

FloydA: PainInTheASP: FloydA: MaudlinMutantMollusk: You didn't think those things grew naturally, did you?

You can't fool me.  I know that somewhere, there are vast orchards of Froot trees.

[i105.photobucket.com image 271x360]

You sure?  The root system on that tree looks flimsy.  I mean, a single choco-wave or rainbow wind would take that thing right out.  No wonder they're endangered and we have to grow them in test tubes.


True, but as long as they're not planted in the Dead Forest, I don't think we have to worry about  Zemzelett.


HAH!  Holy shiat, I had no idea.  I had to Google Zemzelett to have any clue WTF was going on.  But I guess it works, which makes this so much weirder.
 
2013-05-26 01:46:24 PM  
I just finished eating the final serving in my box of froot loops. I generally eat organic, locally grown, free-range stuff but I love me some froot loops.
 
2013-05-26 01:48:55 PM  
Also, who knew that white-listing fark with ad block would be so gosh-darned entertaining. An ad for chocolate frosted flakes in espanol, and then an ad for a fitbit flex. Hilarious.
 
2013-05-26 01:51:13 PM  
Any parent who would feed their kids garbage like Froot Loops needs to have their head examined.
 
2013-05-26 02:02:57 PM  
There was this gay kid, well he claimed to be gay, that lived down the street from me growing up. We called him Fruit Loops. Then there was the guy that lived around the corner who we called Cookies and Cream.
 
2013-05-26 02:13:54 PM  
GMOs are healthy. People are basing science off of their political views. Many of you are no better than the Republicans and their anti science stances.
 
2013-05-26 02:15:15 PM  
I'm a little more concerned about the long-term ingestion of Round-Up by the entire population of the US.
 
2013-05-26 02:17:15 PM  

The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: I'm a little more concerned about the long-term ingestion of Round-Up by the entire population of the US.


Well... we could always hope that it leads to a reduction in the number of dickweeds

/probably just wishful thinking, though
 
2013-05-26 02:22:16 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: I'm a little more concerned about the long-term ingestion of Round-Up by the entire population of the US.

Well... we could always hope that it leads to a reduction in the number of dickweeds


i105.photobucket.com
 
2013-05-26 02:23:02 PM  
Their genetic monopoly enables disgusting and immoral business practices, the GMO food itself is not at all the reason why their execs and lawyers should be rounded up and ground into fertilizer. But they are round up resistant.
 
2013-05-26 02:47:51 PM  
yawn
another GMO article?
when do we get our next global warming, obamagate, cheney is evil, oh nevermind

monsanto is insane, but the government and courts LETTING them is even more dangerous
 
2013-05-26 03:07:17 PM  

Felgraf: I don't dislike them so much for "ZOMG GENETIC ENGINEERING" reasons (although I admit, I don't actually trust Monsanto themselves to, uh, do the dillgent research to prevent an ecological catastrophe).

I dislike them for A) Monopolistic reasons
B) Their policies.


Pretty much this.  I totally see a disaster being a greater problem than some medical issues.

Also, there are several types of GMOs aren't all the same.
 
2013-05-26 03:26:50 PM  
I don't worry about the GMO or herbicide/pesticide stuff, I trust the FDA and USDA not to approve anything that will kill us, but I do take exception with the way Monsanto does business, and how they have bullied the courts into copyrighting the seeds of their plants.

That farmer that was sued for buying and planting bulk soybeans was bullshiat.
 
2013-05-26 03:29:57 PM  
They marched right past my apartment yesterday.  All I can say is that its nice that these hipsters who have never spent a single day on a farm can get some exercise.  They looked damned unhealthy.  Perhaps if they ate more GMO food - they wouldn't look as bad.

/they also marched right up to the farmers market yelling at everyone to join the protest because "they already agree with us because they were at a farmers market"
//just ended up pissing off everyone there
 
2013-05-26 03:31:08 PM  

make me some tea: Any parent who would feed their kids garbage like Froot Loops needs to have their head examined.


What worries me is the sugar (or high-fructose corn syrup) not the fact that it is made out of GMOs.
 
2013-05-26 03:34:10 PM  

vudutek: Benevolent Misanthrope: AlterNet.  Right.  Okay, let me go touch my clear quartz crystal and work with my chalice well water a bit first.  I wouldn't want to alter the energy of their site by clicking in before I cleansed my aura.

Dislike the messenger, therefore the message is invalid. Makes sense.


The messenger and the message are horseshiat here. GMO feeds billions. Luddite morons who have never taken a science class above middle school protest GMO and pesticides without stopping to think of the famine and pestilence that would literally kill a billion people if not for companies like Monsanto. You can't imagine what a billion corpses looks like. It would fill Manhattan six feet high.

There is no such thing as a toxin. Everything is toxic or healthful, depending on the dose.
 
2013-05-26 03:35:52 PM  
Cuz people who feed their kids Froot Loops know a lot about nutrition.
 
2013-05-26 03:36:34 PM  

Felgraf: I don't dislike them so much for "ZOMG GENETIC ENGINEERING" reasons (although I admit, I don't actually trust Monsanto themselves to, uh, do the dillgent research to prevent an ecological catastrophe).

I dislike them for A) Monopolistic reasons
B) Their policies.


Same. They own Obama, Congress and the Supreme Court.
 
2013-05-26 03:39:57 PM  
Fruit Loops is crap that I won't feed to my kids whether it has GMOs in it or not.
 
2013-05-26 03:41:48 PM  
So what do the anti-GMO protesters recommend as an alternative course of action? We need GMO foods since "natural" variations of plants won't provide sufficient yields to feed the entire populace. More people would starve, the price of food would jump up causing even more people to starve. Unless they want us to slash more forests to farmland.
 
2013-05-26 03:42:55 PM  
Is it possible to hate on Monsanto for being an evil, bullying, monopolistic competition, but also believe that a lot of the fears about GMOs are hysterical?

I'd like to sign up for that camp... I just in a conversation in a party
"GMOs killed 4 people at Taco bell!"
"Huh?, where'd you hear that"
"It's all over the web?
"Like where?"
"Just check out youtube..."
 
2013-05-26 03:43:45 PM  
Genetic engineerings!  Teh CHILDRENS!!!!! OMG!!!
 
2013-05-26 03:46:49 PM  
Someone needs to learn the defintion of 100%

Fruit Loops Ingredients:
Sugar, corn flour blend (whole grain yellow corn flour, degerminated yellow corn flour), wheat flour, whole grain oat flour, oat fiber, soluble corn fiber, contains 2% or less of partially hydrogenated vegetable oil (coconut, soybean and/or cottonseed), salt, red 40, natural flavor, blue 2, turmeric color, yellow 6, annatto color, blue 1, BHT for freshness.

Sugar -  possibly non-GMO
Wheat flour - non-GMO
Oat flour - non-GMO
Oat fiber - non-GMO
Coconut Oil - non-GMO
Salt - non-GMO
Red 40 - non-GMO
Natural Flavor - non_GMO
Blue 2 - non-GMO
Tumeric - non-GMO
Yellow 6 - non-GMO
Annatto - non-GMO
Blue 1 - non-GMO
BHT - non-GMO
 
2013-05-26 03:48:20 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: So, where does selective breeding for desirable characteristics fall on the Scale of Evil?  Just wondering.


When my wife sleeps around?
 
2013-05-26 03:56:13 PM  

dforkus: Is it possible to hate on Monsanto for being an evil, bullying, monopolistic competition, but also believe that a lot of the fears about GMOs are hysterical?


Yes.
 
2013-05-26 04:10:50 PM  

Felgraf: I don't dislike them so much for "ZOMG GENETIC ENGINEERING" reasons (although I admit, I don't actually trust Monsanto themselves to, uh, do the dillgent research to prevent an ecological catastrophe).

I dislike them for A) Monopolistic reasons
B) Their policies.


This this this. Monsanto is evil for many reasons, but GMOs are not one of them. GMOs will single-handedly stave off world-wide famine for at least the next 100 years, and solve the pesky problem of phosphates depleting.
 
2013-05-26 04:11:31 PM  

sweet-daddy-2: Benevolent Misanthrope: So, where does selective breeding for desirable characteristics fall on the Scale of Evil?  Just wondering.

When my wife sleeps around?


Nah. It's all good till one of the females gets feels and gives her Duke a son.

Then it goes down hill fast.
 
2013-05-26 04:19:28 PM  

RogermcAllen: Someone needs to learn the defintion of 100%
Blue 1 - non-GMO


Well, just picking one at random, let's go with Blue 1.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brilliant_Blue_FCF

C37H34N2Na2O9S3

Sure.  Sounds delicious.  Of course it isn't "GMO" since there are no genes to modify in a chemical.  But it isn't exactly extracted from flowers, is it.
 
2013-05-26 04:22:30 PM  
I like my mutant sweet potato baked with butter, brown sugar, pecans, and plutonium-239. Yummm.

images.agoramedia.com
 
2013-05-26 04:24:06 PM  

cman: GMOs are healthy. People are basing science off of their political views. Many of you are no better than the Republicans and their anti science stances.


I'll just leave this here.

www.motherearthnews.com
 
2013-05-26 04:26:19 PM  
What these folks are really pissed about (as am I) is not just the fact that these foods are genetically engineered. What the issue is happens to be twofold:
1. Monsanto and other agricorps own too much of everything. When there are two few players controlling too much of the world's food supply, this can only be a bad thing.
2. Here in the united states, these agricorps have lobbied to keep "genetically modified" labeling off food packaging, with Monsanto spending $6 million in 2012 (down from $8.8 million in 2008 - another election year) to make sure it stays that way.

I don't mind the "genetically modified" food, as long as it's labeled as such. Let me decide if I want to eat it. If it's fast food, I know it's GM, and can simply decide to go somewhere else... but at the grocery store that labeling should be mandatory. Of course the agricorps don't want this, as they are afraid the idiot american public will not buy their sh*t anymore... it's all about profit you know.

List what's in the food, let me decide. You can put ground up rat sh*t in it, I don't care... as long as the phrase "ground up rat sh*t" is on the package.
 
2013-05-26 04:26:38 PM  
So 2 million people protesting a reduction in worldwide hunger?
 
2013-05-26 04:27:18 PM  

traxan: cman: GMOs are healthy. People are basing science off of their political views. Many of you are no better than the Republicans and their anti science stances.

I'll just leave this here.

[www.motherearthnews.com image 600x993]


And I'll just leave this here as it has as much context as your image:

encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com
 
2013-05-26 04:37:19 PM  

cman: GMOs are healthy. People are basing science off of their political views. Many of you are no better than the Republicans and their anti science stances.


What nobody will ever acknowledge is that they buy off both parties equally or close enough to barely be a noticeable difference in the two parties. But those on the left never want to admit their politicians are just as dirty as those they hate.
 
2013-05-26 04:43:03 PM  

Felgraf: I don't dislike them so much for "ZOMG GENETIC ENGINEERING" reasons (although I admit, I don't actually trust Monsanto themselves to, uh, do the dillgent research to prevent an ecological catastrophe).

I dislike them for A) Monopolistic reasons
B) Their policies.


This.

I have relatively low fear of GMOs, but that does not mean I feel that Monsanto's business practices are anything short of repugnant.

Almost all of the food we eat is genetically modified in some way.  This hysteria about GMOs is late to the party by a few thousand years.  On one hand, I feel that corporations should be compensated for their research and development, but I do not feel that this gives them the right to attempt a food supply monopoly.
 
2013-05-26 04:46:35 PM  

dj_bigbird: Ever had a seedless grape? A banana? A tomato from a grocery store? Any beef from a grocery store? All of that is GMO.


Now, is that selective breeding? Or tinkering in the lab on the cellular level. As was mentioned earlier, indicate which tomatoes are GM, and which are not, and let the market speak.
 
2013-05-26 04:55:13 PM  

traxan: cman: GMOs are healthy. People are basing science off of their political views. Many of you are no better than the Republicans and their anti science stances.

I'll just leave this here.

[www.motherearthnews.com image 600x993]


Benign mammary tumor is a common ailment in rats. I had a pet rat with an even bigger one than that. The photo is meaningless without the research indicating a statistically significant increase in occurrence in the test population over the control.
 
2013-05-26 04:56:21 PM  

dj_bigbird: Ever had a seedless grape? A banana? A tomato from a grocery store? Any beef from a grocery store? All of that is GMO.


piece of crap.  None of those are GMOs
 
2013-05-26 05:00:07 PM  

rewind2846: When there are too few players controlling too much of the world's food supply, this can only be a bad thing.


/FTFM
//gramma nazi
 
2013-05-26 05:01:43 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: So, where does selective breeding for desirable characteristics fall on the Scale of Evil?  Just wondering.


When you use it take over the seed supply, it's pretty evil. And scary.
 
2013-05-26 05:27:08 PM  

traxan: cman: GMOs are healthy. People are basing science off of their political views. Many of you are no better than the Republicans and their anti science stances.

I'll just leave this here.

[www.motherearthnews.com image 600x993]


See, the thing with rats and mice is, them getting horrific tumors isn't something that people should base decisions on. I've had many pet rats and pet mice and with few exceptions, they *all* died of tumors of one kind or another. I had a mother mouse and she had nine daughters and within the space of a month or so, all ten mice had tumors and had to be put down.

They simply lived a petted and loved life in a smoke-free home, clean cages all the time, fresh fluffy, non-cedar litter, proper nutrition and vet visits - and they still all got cancer and had to be put down. The girl's father also died of a tumor a month or so after that, and his brother, bucking the odds, died of some kind of respiratory infection before he could get cancer, too.

What was interesting, to me anyway, with this particular family of mice, was that the girl's mother, Twinkletoes*, a pure black mouse, mated with an albino father (we were told he was a girl and so he was Princess Snowflake until we discovered he was a prince by the fact that he got Twinkletoes pregnant), and produced 12 natural brown mouse-colored babies, 9 girls and 3 boys (I sold the boys to the pet shop). Their father was overweight but their mother was a skinny thing, svelte and active. All the girls were overweight like their dad. It took Twinkletoes longer to get her cancer, since she developed her tumor around the same time as her daughters, but was obviously older than them.

All the rats I've had, especially the females, with two exceptions (one a tooth abcess and one an aneurysm) had to be put down because of tumors. So it's apparent to us that rats and mice if they are coddled and fed well and live long enough .... get cancer! It's like there's a switch that is flipped in them and at a certain age, bang, tumor.

*our little girl named all the mice, that was her contribution, so, yeah, odd names
 
2013-05-26 05:30:14 PM  

mr intrepid: dj_bigbird: Ever had a seedless grape? A banana? A tomato from a grocery store? Any beef from a grocery store? All of that is GMO.

Now, is that selective breeding? Or tinkering in the lab on the cellular level. As was mentioned earlier, indicate which tomatoes are GM, and which are not, and let the market speak.


The only difference between the two are the number of failures before you achieve your desired goal.  Virtually all the food you eat has been genetically modified.  Brussel sprouts, broccoli, kale, cauliflower, and collard greens are all mutated cabbage, they were all created in the last 500 years.  The original "corn" grew a foot tall and had ears less than 2 inches long.  Potatoes were once the size of grapes.  The changes in other food plants are all similarly extreme.  Every cross breeding failure on the way to the desired mutations of these plants had a chance of disaster.  They could have created invasive species, or plants that were toxic.
 
2013-05-26 05:31:39 PM  

TuteTibiImperes: I don't worry about the GMO or herbicide/pesticide stuff, I trust the FDA and USDA not to approve anything that will kill us, but I do take exception with the way Monsanto does business, and how they have bullied the courts into copyrighting the seeds of their plants.


But what about bees? It's not the pesticides alone that are killing them, but clearly they aren't helping the bees.

And yes, all you have to do is look at the many court cases against them, and country-wide bans of the company elsewhere to see that their business practices are pure evil. The real shame is that they essentially run the FDA and the State Department does some of their work for them abroad.
 
2013-05-26 05:40:59 PM  

traxan: cman: GMOs are healthy. People are basing science off of their political views. Many of you are no better than the Republicans and their anti science stances.

I'll just leave this here.

[www.motherearthnews.com image 600x993]




Yes, yes. A rat with a tumor.
In September, researchers led by Gilles-Eric Seralini at the University of Caen in Normandy said rats fed with the genetically-modified corn and/or doses of Roundup developed cancer. The paper unleashed a storm in environmentally-sensitive Europe, where GM crops face many restrictions. NK603 has been engineered to make it resistant to agricultural biotechnology company Monsanto's herbicide Roundup. This way, farmers can douse fields with the weedkiller in a single go, offering savings. Seralini said his experiment was the first to test GM corn on rodents' normal lifespan of two years, as opposed to the standard 90 days. He said NK603 and Roundup both caused tumours, whether they were consumed together or on their own. But critics faulted the experimental methods and data and accused him of manipulating the media to gain scary headlines. On Friday, six French science academies joined the accusers, saying that the work "does not enable any reliable conclusion to be drawn" and had "spread fear among the public"...
...The European Food Safety Agency (EFSA), which reviews use and authorisation of GM organisms, had already rejected the Seralini report as "inadequate," and watchdogs in Germany and Australia and New Zealand have said it offered no firm evidence of risk.

Expert panel rejects French study linking GM corn to cancer
 
2013-05-26 05:45:04 PM  

cchris_39: Benevolent Misanthrope: So, where does selective breeding for desirable characteristics fall on the Scale of Evil?  Just wondering.

When you use it take over the seed supply, it's pretty evil. And scary.


Speaking of which - I've been thinking to start a Seed Library in my library.  Get an old card catalog, but instead of catalog cards, have seed packets.  Not just specializing in h
"heirloom" varieties, but clearly labelled as to the original seed it was grown from and whether that seed was GM, hybrid, etc.

Anyone involved with one?  How do we get one started?
 
2013-05-26 05:51:26 PM  

Felgraf: I dislike them for A) Monopolistic reasons
B) Their policies.


Same here.  I was really upset after hearing the verdict of the Monsanto v. Schmeiser case.  It essentially means that organic farmers in Canada will have to pay a licensing fee to Monsanto for what the farmers essentially see as nuisance plants.

I'm waiting for laws or lawsuits by non-GMO farmers against their neighbors who plant GMO crops and fail to include buffer zones on their property.  Right now, the non-GMO farmers are the ones who must utilize buffer zones or delayed plantings to avoid cross-contamination.  The burden really should be the other way around.

Ultimately, I think that GMO plants in the field should be sterile.


/is not really worried about the health effects of frankenfood, though
//natural is not always better
 
2013-05-26 05:56:40 PM  

dforkus: Is it possible to hate on Monsanto for being an evil, bullying, monopolistic competition, but also believe that a lot of the fears about GMOs are hysterical?


This is the internet.  Nuanced views aren't allowed.
 
2013-05-26 06:01:38 PM  
Where's all the outrage over ruby-red grapefruit and golden barley?

Or are they cool because they were made through x-ray and neutron mutations?

I just want to know where the border between good and evil is, where knowing what was done at the DNA level is worse than not knowing.
 
2013-05-26 06:03:17 PM  
can we all agree to abolish the word "healthful" as it's an affront to the English language
 
2013-05-26 06:18:44 PM  

Dinjiin: Same here.  I was really upset after hearing the verdict of the Monsanto v. Schmeiser case.  It essentially means that organic farmers in Canada will have to pay a licensing fee to Monsanto for what the farmers essentially see as nuisance plants.


You were upset that the court did not believe Schmeiser's argument that 95% of his crops were accidentally contaminated?
 
2013-05-26 06:20:34 PM  
I don't have a problem with GM food but don't see why they don't label it. Science says it is perfectly safe so let consumers decide. If enough want to pay more money for non-GM foods great.
 
2013-05-26 06:24:55 PM  

Tommy Moo: vudutek: Benevolent Misanthrope: AlterNet.  Right.  Okay, let me go touch my clear quartz crystal and work with my chalice well water a bit first.  I wouldn't want to alter the energy of their site by clicking in before I cleansed my aura.

Dislike the messenger, therefore the message is invalid. Makes sense.

The messenger and the message are horseshiat here. GMO feeds billions. Luddite morons who have never taken a science class above middle school protest GMO and pesticides without stopping to think of the famine and pestilence that would literally kill a billion people if not for companies like Monsanto. You can't imagine what a billion corpses looks like. It would fill Manhattan six feet high.

There is no such thing as a toxin. Everything is toxic or healthful, depending on the dose.




There are so toxins! Fortunately, Kinoki Foot Pads can suck them right out of you through the bottom of your feet!

Formulated in Japan using all-natural tree extracts and powerful negative ions to rid the body of harmful toxins, this foot pad works on the principle of foot reflexology. Simply place the pads on the soles of your feet (or a targeted body part such as the shoulder or knee) before going to bed. Use a fresh pad each night until the color on the pad becomes lighter and lighter when removed in the morning. Ancient Chinese medicine holds that the sole of the foot is the focal point for circulation and that's why it's believed that these harmful wastes gather in the feet. What's more, the principle of reflexology focuses on relieving tension, improving circulation and strengthening the immune system. The foot pads also contain negative ions to refresh the body and enhance your overall well-being.

Note that they had to include "all natural". Because natural is good, and unnatural is bad.
 
2013-05-26 06:25:05 PM  

Carth: I don't have a problem with GM food but don't see why they don't label it. Science says it is perfectly safe so let consumers decide. If enough want to pay more money for non-GM foods great.


This.
 
2013-05-26 06:27:43 PM  

You're the jerk... jerk: You were upset that the court did not believe Schmeiser's argument that 95% of his crops were accidentally contaminated?


No, I was upset that generic seed sold on the open market was subject to the Monsanto tax.  The burden should be on GMO farmers in keeping their seed out of generic channels.  A farmer should not be forced to pay a premium for testing or for pre-certified GMO-free seed.

I have limited sympathy for Schmeiser.  He decided to play with fire and got burnt.  But the fire shouldn't have been there in the first place.
 
2013-05-26 06:29:36 PM  

Dinjiin: Ultimately, I think that GMO plants in the field should be sterile.


I thought they were SUPPOSED to be? Isn't that the entire point of the terminator gene/I-can't-remember-the-farking-word but they're not supposed to produce seeds, so you have to buy your seeds again from Monsanto next year?
 
2013-05-26 06:29:46 PM  
d.gr-assets.com
 
2013-05-26 06:31:09 PM  

ongbok: There was this gay kid, well he claimed to be gay, that lived down the street from me growing up. We called him Fruit Loops. Then there was the guy that lived around the corner who we called Cookies and Cream.


Did one of them have a retarded brother you called Special K?

/Eddie Murphy FTW
 
2013-05-26 06:32:27 PM  

BigJake: can we all agree to abolish the word "healthful" as it's an affront to the English language


We should do the needful
 
2013-05-26 06:34:03 PM  
i.chzbgr.com

He seems happy.
 
2013-05-26 06:44:20 PM  

Nonrepeating Rotating Binary: RogermcAllen: Someone needs to learn the defintion of 100%
Blue 1 - non-GMO

Well, just picking one at random, let's go with Blue 1.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brilliant_Blue_FCF

C37H34N2Na2O9S3

Sure.  Sounds delicious.  Of course it isn't "GMO" since there are no genes to modify in a chemical.  But it isn't exactly extracted from flowers, is it.


Lets break it down by the elements:

C: Carbon, needed for humans to live.
H: Hydrogen, needed for humans to live
N: Nitrogen, needed for humans to live
Na: Sodium, needed for humans to live
O: Oxygen, needed for humans to live
S: Sulfur, needed for humans to live

Or lets go the chemical formulas are scary:

C12H17ClN4OS: Thiamine, needed for humans to live
C19H19N7O6: Folic Acid, needed for humans to live
C63H88CoN14O14P: Cyanocobalamin, needed for humans to live

Everything you eat is "scary chemicals that have a chemical formula".

Moron.
 
2013-05-26 06:53:08 PM  
GMOs turned me into a newt!
 
2013-05-26 06:54:55 PM  

HK-MP5-SD: Every cross breeding failure on the way to the desired mutations of these plants had a chance of disaster.  They could have created invasive species, or plants that were toxic.


There's a difference between cross breeding plants or animals, where the non-viable ones die or are sterile) and shoehorning foreign genetic material into organisms that would never normally combine, like the glowing cells from shellfish implanted in mice.

The other issue is that simply cross-breeding organisms more often than not breeds useful and benign results, while manipulation on a purely genetic chemical level is still just an educated guess. We don't have thousands of years worth of experimentation and data for proof like we do with corn, potatoes, horses, dogs, and cows.

The first one still produces near-natural organisms, as natural selection still controls the outcome. The second does not. The second is also patentable, which is why Monsanto and other agricorps decided that the other way was not good for their business model.

Not the same thing.
 
2013-05-26 07:00:42 PM  

rewind2846: HK-MP5-SD: Every cross breeding failure on the way to the desired mutations of these plants had a chance of disaster.  They could have created invasive species, or plants that were toxic.

There's a difference between cross breeding plants or animals, where the non-viable ones die or are sterile) and shoehorning foreign genetic material into organisms that would never normally combine, like the glowing cells from shellfish implanted in mice.

The other issue is that simply cross-breeding organisms more often than not breeds useful and benign results, while manipulation on a purely genetic chemical level is still just an educated guess. We don't have thousands of years worth of experimentation and data for proof like we do with corn, potatoes, horses, dogs, and cows.

The first one still produces near-natural organisms, as natural selection still controls the outcome. The second does not. The second is also patentable, which is why Monsanto and other agricorps decided that the other way was not good for their business model.

Not the same thing.


Add to this that you're now eating the equivalent of the glowing mouse.  There's no legal requirement for food companies to inform you if food contains glowing mouse bits.  Or in this case, corn that's genetically resistant to pesticides, has been exposed to those pesticides, and has a fraction of the nutritional value of real corn.
 
2013-05-26 07:01:12 PM  

Repo Man: GMOs turned me into a newt!



<looks at Repo Man>
 
2013-05-26 07:04:10 PM  
The cake is a lie.
 
2013-05-26 07:06:21 PM  

BravadoGT: People are just afraid of genetically modified food because they don't understand it.  The leaders of this movement, however, have a far darker purpose.  To deny you and us SUPER POWERS.  Because they know eventually we'll be able to eat a power-bar and wake up the next morning with heat-vision or invisibility or the ability to stop time or whatever.  And then--how will they be able to control us?

Wake up MAN!


GM food could inadvertently give a sociopath atomic breath or something.

While awesome, that would be totally irresponsible.
 
2013-05-26 07:06:58 PM  

phaseolus: Repo Man: GMOs turned me into a newt!


<looks at Repo Man>




I got better.
 
2013-05-26 07:08:26 PM  

xria: Lets break it down by the elements:

C: Carbon, needed for humans to live.
H: Hydrogen, needed for humans to live
N: Nitrogen, needed for humans to live
Na: Sodium, needed for humans to live
O: Oxygen, needed for humans to live
S: Sulfur, needed for humans to live

Or lets go the chemical formulas are scary:

C12H17ClN4OS: Thiamine, needed for humans to live
C19H19N7O6: Folic Acid, needed for humans to live
C63H88CoN14O14P: Cyanocobalamin, needed for humans to live

Everything you eat is "scary chemicals that have a chemical formula".

Moron.


Cool!  Let's play that game!

H: Hydrogen, needed for humans to live 
O: Oxygen, needed for humans to live
S: Sulfur, needed for humans to live
 

So we're totally safe spraying a little H2SO4 on our breakfast cereal or even having a glass of it, right?
Oh wait, no.  That's Sulfuric Acid.

Well then maybe...

C: Carbon, needed for humans to live.
O: Oxygen, needed for humans to live

Cl:  Hey, it's in ordinary table salt, right?

So we're safe with a little COCl2?

Oh wait, no.  That's Phosgene.

Just because something is made of common chemical elements doesn't mean it's harmless.

Retard.
 
2013-05-26 07:09:59 PM  

foo monkey: rewind2846: HK-MP5-SD: Every cross breeding failure on the way to the desired mutations of these plants had a chance of disaster.  They could have created invasive species, or plants that were toxic.

There's a difference between cross breeding plants or animals, where the non-viable ones die or are sterile) and shoehorning foreign genetic material into organisms that would never normally combine, like the glowing cells from shellfish implanted in mice.

The other issue is that simply cross-breeding organisms more often than not breeds useful and benign results, while manipulation on a purely genetic chemical level is still just an educated guess. We don't have thousands of years worth of experimentation and data for proof like we do with corn, potatoes, horses, dogs, and cows.

The first one still produces near-natural organisms, as natural selection still controls the outcome. The second does not. The second is also patentable, which is why Monsanto and other agricorps decided that the other way was not good for their business model.

Not the same thing.

Add to this that you're now eating the equivalent of the glowing mouse.  There's no legal requirement for food companies to inform you if food contains glowing mouse bits.  Or in this case, corn that's genetically resistant to pesticides, has been exposed to those pesticides, and has a fraction of the nutritional value of real corn.


Jesus Christ, did you just post a link to Infowars non ironically?
 
2013-05-26 07:28:53 PM  

Repo Man: foo monkey: rewind2846: HK-MP5-SD: Every cross breeding failure on the way to the desired mutations of these plants had a chance of disaster.  They could have created invasive species, or plants that were toxic.

There's a difference between cross breeding plants or animals, where the non-viable ones die or are sterile) and shoehorning foreign genetic material into organisms that would never normally combine, like the glowing cells from shellfish implanted in mice.

The other issue is that simply cross-breeding organisms more often than not breeds useful and benign results, while manipulation on a purely genetic chemical level is still just an educated guess. We don't have thousands of years worth of experimentation and data for proof like we do with corn, potatoes, horses, dogs, and cows.

The first one still produces near-natural organisms, as natural selection still controls the outcome. The second does not. The second is also patentable, which is why Monsanto and other agricorps decided that the other way was not good for their business model.

Not the same thing.

Add to this that you're now eating the equivalent of the glowing mouse.  There's no legal requirement for food companies to inform you if food contains glowing mouse bits.  Or in this case, corn that's genetically resistant to pesticides, has been exposed to those pesticides, and has a fraction of the nutritional value of real corn.

Jesus Christ, did you just post a link to Infowars non ironically?


He totally just did.

I bet he also believes that the government is using HAARP to control weather patterns so only Monsanto-approved Round Up Ready crops grow.
 
2013-05-26 07:50:19 PM  

Mantour: He seems happy.


He seems a little nuts to me.
 
2013-05-26 07:56:06 PM  

traxan: cman: GMOs are healthy. People are basing science off of their political views. Many of you are no better than the Republicans and their anti science stances.

I'll just leave this here.

[www.motherearthnews.com image 600x993]


Yes, you will, completely devoid of context.
 
2013-05-26 08:00:40 PM  
Regardless of what the Fruit Loops may think about Froot Loops, Monsanto is still bad for humanity for a bunch of very valid reasons.
 
2013-05-26 08:04:17 PM  

Nonrepeating Rotating Binary: Just because something is made of common chemical elements doesn't mean it's harmless.

Retard.


Knocking down a ridiculous straw man is just digging your hole deeper.
 
2013-05-26 08:11:43 PM  

Tommy Moo: traxan: cman: GMOs are healthy. People are basing science off of their political views. Many of you are no better than the Republicans and their anti science stances.

I'll just leave this here.

[www.motherearthnews.com image 600x993]

Yes, you will, completely devoid of context.




Well, if you Google that image, you will find site after site breathlessly exclaiming that the rat in that photo was part of a study that "proves" what they have been saying all along (frankenfoods are going to kill you OMG!!!). What you won't find are any of those sites publishing a retraction now that the study in question has been found to be flawed.
 
2013-05-26 08:16:27 PM  
Ex-Monsanto executives run the United States Food and Drug Administration, the agency tasked with ensuring food safety for the American public.

screenagekicks.files.wordpress.com
/Yep...
 
2013-05-26 08:17:57 PM  
Saw them yesterday in Nashville as I sat on my barstool drinking my genetically modified Corona. I was like WTF? Is there a Monsanto plant around here? And why are these people taking up an already crowded sidewalk.
Oddly enough as this was going on...an underground transformer caught fire across the street. As about ohhh 3 bachelorette parties walked by with their penis straws etc.
God bless Nashville.
 
2013-05-26 08:38:31 PM  

RogermcAllen: Someone needs to learn the defintion of 100%

Fruit Loops Ingredients:
Sugar, corn flour blend (whole grain yellow corn flour, degerminated yellow corn flour), wheat flour, whole grain oat flour, oat fiber, soluble corn fiber, contains 2% or less of partially hydrogenated vegetable oil (coconut, soybean and/or cottonseed), salt, red 40, natural flavor, blue 2, turmeric color, yellow 6, annatto color, blue 1, BHT for freshness.

Sugar -  possibly non-GMO
Wheat flour - non-GMO
Oat flour - non-GMO
Oat fiber - non-GMO
Coconut Oil - non-GMO
Salt - non-GMO
Red 40 - non-GMO
Natural Flavor - non_GMO
Blue 2 - non-GMO
Tumeric - non-GMO
Yellow 6 - non-GMO
Annatto - non-GMO
Blue 1 - non-GMO
BHT - non-GMO


Unless you have the non-GMO certificates of each ingredient from each ingredient supplier, you can't assume that a product is non-GMO.

Yes, salt and BHT are most likely non-GMO (therefore making the 100% GMO claim bogus), but you'd be surprised...
 
2013-05-26 08:41:22 PM  
this biatch, Tami Canal, DID NOT HAVE TESTICULAR CANCER.
 
2013-05-26 08:51:09 PM  
ascorbic acid, citric acid, maltodextrin, and fructose all have GMO roots at this point.

can someone with f.b. please look up Tami Monroe Canal and tell me if she's a Mormon?, it'll say something like 'Latter Day Saints' or 'Christian - LDS' under the 'religion' line.
 
2013-05-26 08:55:08 PM  
The sad thing is that, with guys like Dees against you, you can tar all of your opponents as nut jobs (as others have mentioned, there are legitimate complaints against Monsanto's business practices). I know I stop listening to anything anyone has to say once I hear or read the word "frankenfood".

i44.tinypic.com

i43.tinypic.com
i42.tinypic.com
And yes, this guy is completely on the level. These are things that he really believes. To David Dees, all of the conspiracies are true.
 
2013-05-26 09:02:36 PM  

zimbach: Benign mammary tumor is a common ailment in rats. I had a pet rat with an even bigger one than that. The photo is meaningless without the research indicating a statistically significant increase in occurrence in the test population over the control.


Huh... I assumed the rat was growing a human ear for transplant purposes.
 
2013-05-26 09:03:38 PM  
Just one more.

i39.tinypic.com
 
2013-05-26 09:07:10 PM  

zimbach: Benign mammary tumor is a common ailment in rats. I had a pet rat with an even bigger one than that. The photo is meaningless without the research indicating a statistically significant increase in occurrence in the test population over the control.


imageshack.us

pseudoscience, coming to a red-state near you!
 
2013-05-26 09:07:16 PM  

1. Put snakes on plane: Knocking down a ridiculous straw man is just digging your hole deeper.


Ah, Fark.  Where half the people troll and the other half take themselves far too seriously to be taken seriously.
 
2013-05-26 09:18:53 PM  

rewind2846: What these folks are really pissed about (as am I) is not just the fact that these foods are genetically engineered. What the issue is happens to be twofold:
1. Monsanto and other agricorps own too much of everything. When there are two few players controlling too much of the world's food supply, this can only be a bad thing.
2. Here in the united states, these agricorps have lobbied to keep "genetically modified" labeling off food packaging, with Monsanto spending $6 million in 2012 (down from $8.8 million in 2008 - another election year) to make sure it stays that way.

I don't mind the "genetically modified" food, as long as it's labeled as such. Let me decide if I want to eat it. If it's fast food, I know it's GM, and can simply decide to go somewhere else... but at the grocery store that labeling should be mandatory. Of course the agricorps don't want this, as they are afraid the idiot american public will not buy their sh*t anymore... it's all about profit you know.

List what's in the food, let me decide. You can put ground up rat sh*t in it, I don't care... as long as the phrase "ground up rat sh*t" is on the package.


I suspect they're fighting the labeling regulation to protect a year-or-so's worth of stock reports. slap the GMO label on there, people freak out for a while and GMO items drop in sales, until joe six pack goes back to buying the cheapest things at the supermarket again, and sales will stabilize back to pre-labeling hysteria.

$ wins on Main Street too, not just Wall Street.
 
2013-05-26 09:26:26 PM  

Repo Man: Just one more.

[i39.tinypic.com image 600x480]


You gotta admit that this picture is kind of awesome.
 
2013-05-26 09:27:24 PM  
Albino lab rats grew tumors?

Must have been the GMO-ness of their feed, and not the fact that albinism is often a marker for all kinds of recessive genetic farked-up-edness that the rats already suffered from.
 
2013-05-26 09:33:56 PM  
I'd rather we went back to the days when over a billion people were starving to death. If you can't grow the wheat God gave us then you deserve to starve!

Jjaro: So 2 million people protesting a reduction in worldwide hunger?


Essentially. But they're morons so that makes their advocacy misguided and not sinister.

zimbach: Benign mammary tumor is a common ailment in rats. I had a pet rat with an even bigger one than that. The photo is meaningless without the research indicating a statistically significant increase in occurrence in the test population over the control.


IIRC, he's referring to a report where GMO food caused tumors in rats. Since then the science has been picked apart.
 
2013-05-26 09:48:51 PM  

Mrbogey: I'd rather we went back to the days when over a billion people were starving to death. If you can't grow the wheat God gave us then you deserve to starve!

Jjaro: So 2 million people protesting a reduction in worldwide hunger?

Essentially. But they're morons so that makes their advocacy misguided and not sinister.

zimbach: Benign mammary tumor is a common ailment in rats. I had a pet rat with an even bigger one than that. The photo is meaningless without the research indicating a statistically significant increase in occurrence in the test population over the control.

IIRC, he's referring to a report where GMO food caused tumors in rats. Since then the science has been picked apart.


I resemble that remark!

/left handed
 
2013-05-26 09:53:26 PM  

The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: I'm a little more concerned about the long-term ingestion of Round-Up by the entire population of the US.


No worries. They'll add some Vitamin C and have it reclassified as a food additive. Problem solved!
 
2013-05-26 09:57:02 PM  

dj_bigbird: Ever had a seedless grape? A banana? A tomato from a grocery store? Any beef from a grocery store? All of that is GMO.


NONE of those are GMO (some tomatoes, maybe).

Selective breeding is NOT GMO.

GMO is getting non-grape DNA into a grape reproductive cell, or non-nanner DNA into nanners, or whatever.  It may produce the desired effect on the crop, but the effect on the crop AS FOOD, and the effect of that food on humans, is neither well known nor well controlled.  Neither is that DNA drifting non-GMO versions of that crop.
 
2013-05-26 10:02:56 PM  

mod3072: The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: I'm a little more concerned about the long-term ingestion of Round-Up by the entire population of the US.

No worries. They'll add some Vitamin C and have it reclassified as a food additive. Problem solved!


Oh come on!  Round-up is only  C3H8NO5P.

According to xria, all of those chemicals are necessary to sustain Human Life.
 
2013-05-26 10:04:24 PM  

Felgraf: I dislike them for A) Monopolistic reasons
B) Their policies.


That is BY FAR  a fair enough reason to protest them.

I didn't go to the protest, though.  Too goddamn tired.

Round-Up Resistant weeds are, and will continue to, f--k us over.  Of course, Monsanto has a solution to that.

And in the winter, the gorillas simply freeze to death.
 
2013-05-26 10:08:24 PM  

Carth: I don't have a problem with GM food but don't see why they don't label it. Science says it is perfectly safe so let consumers decide. If enough want to pay more money for non-GM foods great.


Ultimately it won't help.  There will be a board deciding what gets labelled as GM, and that board will be populated by folks like Monsanto and the larger producers.

Just like "organic"

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/08/business/organic-food-purists-worr y- about-big-companies-influence.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Buy local when you can.  Although I know how many local folks use Monsanto products so even then it's tricky.  You do what you can.
 
2013-05-26 10:12:03 PM  

dionysusaur: GMO is getting non-grape DNA into a grape reproductive cell, or non-nanner DNA into nanners, or whatever.


DNA is DNA.  Nature doesn't have any concept of "grape DNA" or "nanner DNA" or whatever; genomes are by definition only documents what has existed before, not what can naturally exist.
 
2013-05-26 10:19:01 PM  

Nonrepeating Rotating Binary: mod3072: The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: I'm a little more concerned about the long-term ingestion of Round-Up by the entire population of the US.

No worries. They'll add some Vitamin C and have it reclassified as a food additive. Problem solved!

Oh come on!  Round-up is only  C3H8NO5P.

According to xria, all of those chemicals are necessary to sustain Human Life.


You're not being very scientific there. That wasn't his argument about chemicals.

poot_rootbeer: dionysusaur: GMO is getting non-grape DNA into a grape reproductive cell, or non-nanner DNA into nanners, or whatever.

DNA is DNA.  Nature doesn't have any concept of "grape DNA" or "nanner DNA" or whatever; genomes are by definition only documents what has existed before, not what can naturally exist.


Don't forget, horizontal gene transfer. Lots of genes end up in strange places.
 
2013-05-26 10:29:41 PM  

Skyday: The cake is a lie.


No. The flower for it was, and that chicken who laid the egg was on roids. I think the cake still counts.
 
2013-05-26 10:34:38 PM  

utah dude: this biatch, Tami Canal, DID NOT HAVE TESTICULAR CANCER.


Perhaps your anger is because her lie is reflecting your lie.
 
2013-05-26 10:35:18 PM  
Are we protesting that farker Mendel and his pea plants on Monday?  He got all this GMO shiat started.

/pretty much what everyone else says, Mosanto sucks in terms of business practices, but GMO is key to crop yield
 
2013-05-26 10:36:59 PM  

Mrbogey: According to xria, all of those chemicals are necessary to sustain Human Life.

You're not being very scientific there. That wasn't his argument about chemicals.


s'fine.  He completely missed the point of my argument too.
 
2013-05-26 10:50:57 PM  
mainstreet62:
Unless you have the non-GMO certificates of each ingredient from each ingredient supplier, you can't assume that a product is non-GMO.

You pretty much can when it's oats or wheat. There's only been one GMO oats trial, and that was 15 years ago, and never made it to market. There aren't any GMO wheat strains in use, either.

For that matter, the only ingredient in Froot Loops that can reasonably be called GMO is the corn - and bT (with a bacterial gene that kills pests) and HT (herbicide-tolerant) corn have both been studied incessantly for years, with no notable side effects.

All of the "studies" that showed GMO corn to be toxic have been revealed as fraudulent or deeply flawed so far.
 
2013-05-26 10:56:58 PM  
GMO, vaccine and flouride paranoia tend  the left side of the political spectrum for a reason.  The narrative is that big corporations are conspiring against the public.  Global warming and evolution are on the right because the narrative is intellectuals and government are conspiring against businesses and the religious.

In all cases, the science is overwhelming but the "concerns" fit a political belief.  One you realize that, it becomes easier to examine your own motives and avoid non-scientific belief.
 
2013-05-26 10:58:48 PM  

ArgusRun: GMO, vaccine and flouride paranoia tend  the left side of the political spectrum for a reason.  The narrative is that big corporations are conspiring against the public.  Global warming and evolution are on the right because the narrative is intellectuals and government are conspiring against businesses and the religious.

In all cases, the science is overwhelming but the "concerns" fit a political belief.  One you realize that, it becomes easier to examine your own motives and avoid non-scientific belief.


Thank you.
 
2013-05-26 11:15:56 PM  

utah dude: zimbach: Benign mammary tumor is a common ailment in rats. I had a pet rat with an even bigger one than that. The photo is meaningless without the research indicating a statistically significant increase in occurrence in the test population over the control.

[imageshack.us image 600x453]

pseudoscience, coming to a red-state global warming believers near you!


FTFY.
 
2013-05-26 11:22:14 PM  

06Wahoo: utah dude: zimbach: Benign mammary tumor is a common ailment in rats. I had a pet rat with an even bigger one than that. The photo is meaningless without the research indicating a statistically significant increase in occurrence in the test population over the control.

[imageshack.us image 600x453]

pseudoscience, coming to a red-state global warming believers near you!

FTFY.




See ArgusRun's post above.
 
2013-05-26 11:22:54 PM  

Repo Man: foo monkey: rewind2846: HK-MP5-SD: Every cross breeding failure on the way to the desired mutations of these plants had a chance of disaster.  They could have created invasive species, or plants that were toxic.

There's a difference between cross breeding plants or animals, where the non-viable ones die or are sterile) and shoehorning foreign genetic material into organisms that would never normally combine, like the glowing cells from shellfish implanted in mice.

The other issue is that simply cross-breeding organisms more often than not breeds useful and benign results, while manipulation on a purely genetic chemical level is still just an educated guess. We don't have thousands of years worth of experimentation and data for proof like we do with corn, potatoes, horses, dogs, and cows.

The first one still produces near-natural organisms, as natural selection still controls the outcome. The second does not. The second is also patentable, which is why Monsanto and other agricorps decided that the other way was not good for their business model.

Not the same thing.

Add to this that you're now eating the equivalent of the glowing mouse.  There's no legal requirement for food companies to inform you if food contains glowing mouse bits.  Or in this case, corn that's genetically resistant to pesticides, has been exposed to those pesticides, and has a fraction of the nutritional value of real corn.

Jesus Christ, did you just post a link to Infowars non ironically?


lulz.  I didn't notice.  I'm running a fever.  I get a pass.
 
2013-05-26 11:36:53 PM  

SN1987a goes boom: traxan: cman: GMOs are healthy. People are basing science off of their political views. Many of you are no better than the Republicans and their anti science stances.

I'll just leave this here.

[www.motherearthnews.com image 600x993]

And I'll just leave this here as it has as much context as your image:

[encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com image 257x196]


Ok here is the context.

http://www.motherearthnews.com/natural-health/gmo-safety-zmgz13amzst o. aspx#axzz2UQrYZUzj
 
2013-05-26 11:45:53 PM  

TuteTibiImperes: I don't worry about the GMO or herbicide/pesticide stuff, I trust the FDA and USDA not to approve anything that will kill us, but I do take exception with the way Monsanto does business, and how they have bullied the courts into copyrighting the seeds of their plants.

That farmer that was sued for buying and planting bulk soybeans was bullshiat.


Plant patents have been around since the 1930s. Monsanto just is a little too vigorous in defending them. As to Bowman, he tried to do an end run around the patent protection and admitted it. SCOTUS voted 9-0 in Monsanto's favor.

Apparently, there is a brisk business in black market seeds. It's called brown bagging.
 
2013-05-27 12:01:59 AM  

traxan: Ok here is the context.

http://www.motherearthnews.com/natural-health/gmo-safety-zmgz13amzst o. aspx#axzz2UQrYZUzj


The article leaves a bit to be desired. The article provides no link to the original study, doesn't name the authors only sáy they are "French", and leaves the details of the results extremely vague. Going further the article itself says the sample size is inadequate for drawing conclusions.

Beyond that, here is an article about the response from the French science academies (assuming this is the same French study- it sounds like it but the Motherearth article is rather vague):

http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/19/six-french-science-acad em ies-dismiss-study-finding-gm-corn-harmed-rats/
 
2013-05-27 12:11:23 AM  
GMO is fine with me...the Frankenfood stuff is largely scare tactics for the uneducated.

My problems with Monsanto lie in their monopolistic practices, their subsidies, their tax evasion, and their general usurpation of legal protections for normal human beings.
 
2013-05-27 12:19:06 AM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: You didn't think those things grew naturally, did you?


I thought they were minted. Isn't that why he and his three (nephews?) search for them in the commercials?
 
2013-05-27 12:53:34 AM  
Wonder how many people would starve to death if the world was forced to go organic.
 
2013-05-27 12:56:07 AM  

Tommy Moo: vudutek: Benevolent Misanthrope: AlterNet.  Right.  Okay, let me go touch my clear quartz crystal and work with my chalice well water a bit first.  I wouldn't want to alter the energy of their site by clicking in before I cleansed my aura.

Dislike the messenger, therefore the message is invalid. Makes sense.

The messenger and the message are horseshiat here. GMO feeds billions. Luddite morons who have never taken a science class above middle school protest GMO and pesticides without stopping to think of the famine and pestilence that would literally kill a billion people if not for companies like Monsanto. You can't imagine what a billion corpses looks like. It would fill Manhattan six feet high.

There is no such thing as a toxin. Everything is toxic or healthful, depending on the dose.


Part of the message is horseshiat. I have also nothing against GMO, but Monsanto is still an amazingly evil company in a variety of other ways, as the article shows.
 
NFA [TotalFark]
2013-05-27 12:58:53 AM  
 
2013-05-27 01:05:27 AM  

HK-MP5-SD: mr intrepid: dj_bigbird: Ever had a seedless grape? A banana? A tomato from a grocery store? Any beef from a grocery store? All of that is GMO.

Now, is that selective breeding? Or tinkering in the lab on the cellular level. As was mentioned earlier, indicate which tomatoes are GM, and which are not, and let the market speak.

The only difference between the two are the number of failures before you achieve your desired goal.  Virtually all the food you eat has been genetically modified.  Brussel sprouts, broccoli, kale, cauliflower, and collard greens are all mutated cabbage, they were all created in the last 500 years.  The original "corn" grew a foot tall and had ears less than 2 inches long.  Potatoes were once the size of grapes.  The changes in other food plants are all similarly extreme.  Every cross breeding failure on the way to the desired mutations of these plants had a chance of disaster.  They could have created invasive species, or plants that were toxic.


Or as the indians called it "maize"
 
NFA [TotalFark]
2013-05-27 01:17:08 AM  

Nonrepeating Rotating Binary: xria: Lets break it down by the elements:

C: Carbon, needed for humans to live.
H: Hydrogen, needed for humans to live
N: Nitrogen, needed for humans to live
Na: Sodium, needed for humans to live
O: Oxygen, needed for humans to live
S: Sulfur, needed for humans to live

Or lets go the chemical formulas are scary:

C12H17ClN4OS: Thiamine, needed for humans to live
C19H19N7O6: Folic Acid, needed for humans to live
C63H88CoN14O14P: Cyanocobalamin, needed for humans to live

Everything you eat is "scary chemicals that have a chemical formula".

Moron.

Cool!  Let's play that game!

H: Hydrogen, needed for humans to live 
O: Oxygen, needed for humans to live
S: Sulfur, needed for humans to live 

So we're totally safe spraying a little H2SO4 on our breakfast cereal or even having a glass of it, right?
Oh wait, no.  That's Sulfuric Acid.

Well then maybe...

C: Carbon, needed for humans to live.
O: Oxygen, needed for humans to live
Cl:  Hey, it's in ordinary table salt, right?

So we're safe with a little COCl2?

Oh wait, no.  That's Phosgene.

Just because something is made of common chemical elements doesn't mean it's harmless.

Retard.


Oooo oooo I've got one too!


Carbon needed for humans to live
Hydrogen needed for humans to live
Oxygen needed for humans to live

C4H4O2

Recognize it?

Dioxin!
 
2013-05-27 01:32:41 AM  
I think that a company should be able to stand behind what they are contributing to the world, and a huge part of that is shouting it from the rooftops by labeling your products as such and trusting that the marker will love them enough to make you money.

That they are fighting tooth and nail for the right to NOT label their pride and joy says worse things about them than anything anybody else ever could.
 
2013-05-27 01:40:29 AM  

Mrbogey: Jjaro: So 2 million people protesting a reduction in worldwide hunger?

Essentially. But they're morons so that makes their advocacy misguided and not sinister.


How have GMO crops helped to ease hunger problems in third world countries?

I'm not accepting any answers without citations, thanks.
 
2013-05-27 01:44:39 AM  

thecpt: Skyday: The cake is a lie.

No. The flower for it was, and that chicken who laid the egg was on roids. I think the cake still counts.


Did you play Portal?
 
2013-05-27 02:02:26 AM  

HK-MP5-SD: mr intrepid: dj_bigbird: Ever had a seedless grape? A banana? A tomato from a grocery store? Any beef from a grocery store? All of that is GMO.

Now, is that selective breeding? Or tinkering in the lab on the cellular level. As was mentioned earlier, indicate which tomatoes are GM, and which are not, and let the market speak.

The only difference between the two are the number of failures before you achieve your desired goal.  Virtually all the food you eat has been genetically modified.  Brussel sprouts, broccoli, kale, cauliflower, and collard greens are all mutated cabbage, they were all created in the last 500 years.  The original "corn" grew a foot tall and had ears less than 2 inches long.  Potatoes were once the size of grapes.  The changes in other food plants are all similarly extreme.  Every cross breeding failure on the way to the desired mutations of these plants had a chance of disaster.  They could have created invasive species, or plants that were toxic.


That is BS,you don't selective breed a resistance to roundup. That's the kind of GMO we are talking about here, not seedless grapes.
 
2013-05-27 02:15:12 AM  

Skyday: thecpt: Skyday: The cake is a lie.

No. The flower for it was, and that chicken who laid the egg was on roids. I think the cake still counts.

Did you play Portal?


....exploding cakes.

/yeah, I was just puttin a Monsanto spin on it.
 
2013-05-27 02:19:41 AM  
cirby:
All of the "studies" that showed GMO corn to be toxic have been revealed as fraudulent or deeply flawed so far.

The "studies" are the problem. We don't know what the effects will be on humans or the food chain 20, 50 or 100 years from now. Remember that what you eat and drink becomes part of your cells at a genetic level. It becomes YOU. Perhaps one human may have already had his or her sperm or egg cell changed, and passed that mutation down through their children... perhaps not. We may not know for hundreds of years and many generations.

Human cells mutated enough in the last several hundred thousand years to give us multiple shades and textures of skin, hair, hairlessness, height, build, eyes, resistance to sunburn and ability to synthesize vitamin D from sunlight, lactose intolerance and tolerance, food allergies, the list goes on. And all that was through natural selection and adaptation.

We simply do not have the science... all we have are Monsanto and other corporations telling us it's safe.
I for one do not trust any entity whose bottom line, stock price and shareholders are their primary concern. If these foods are as safe as claimed, where are the "contains GMO ingredients" labels on packaging in the US? HFCS is listed, along with all the other ingredients... why not GMOs?
 
2013-05-27 02:29:17 AM  
NFA:
Oooo oooo I've got one too!


Carbon needed for humans to live
Hydrogen needed for humans to live
Oxygen needed for humans to live

C4H4O2

Recognize it?

Dioxin!


I've got one!!!

Carbon: Needed for humans to live

C

Know what that is?  IT'S PENCIL LEAD. STOP CHEWING ON YOUR PENCIL YOU NUMBSKULL
 
2013-05-27 02:33:04 AM  

rewind2846: cirby:
All of the "studies" that showed GMO corn to be toxic have been revealed as fraudulent or deeply flawed so far.

The "studies" are the problem. We don't know what the effects will be on humans or the food chain 20, 50 or 100 years from now. Remember that what you eat and drink becomes part of your cells at a genetic level. It becomes YOU. Perhaps one human may have already had his or her sperm or egg cell changed, and passed that mutation down through their children... perhaps not. We may not know for hundreds of years and many generations.

Human cells mutated enough in the last several hundred thousand years to give us multiple shades and textures of skin, hair, hairlessness, height, build, eyes, resistance to sunburn and ability to synthesize vitamin D from sunlight, lactose intolerance and tolerance, food allergies, the list goes on. And all that was through natural selection and adaptation.

We simply do not have the science... all we have are Monsanto and other corporations telling us it's safe.
I for one do not trust any entity whose bottom line, stock price and shareholders are their primary concern. If these foods are as safe as claimed, where are the "contains GMO ingredients" labels on packaging in the US? HFCS is listed, along with all the other ingredients... why not GMOs?




Do you have any evidence at all that any GMO that is eaten has mutagenic properties? "The bottom line for people worried about GMO ingredients in their food is that there is no credible scientific evidence that GMOs pose a health risk."
 
2013-05-27 02:36:14 AM  

traxan: cman: GMOs are healthy. People are basing science off of their political views. Many of you are no better than the Republicans and their anti science stances.

I'll just leave this here.

[www.motherearthnews.com image 600x993]


WTF is that!?

(Please post in thread. I'm not asking because I can't use teh googles; I'm asking to have a conversation)
 
2013-05-27 02:44:41 AM  
Froot Loops doesn't even contain any froot!
 
2013-05-27 02:52:48 AM  

GreatGlavinsGhost: traxan: cman: GMOs are healthy. People are basing science off of their political views. Many of you are no better than the Republicans and their anti science stances.

I'll just leave this here.

[www.motherearthnews.com image 600x993]

WTF is that!?

(Please post in thread. I'm not asking because I can't use teh googles; I'm asking to have a conversation)


As I said before, that is benign mammary tumor. It is a common disfiguring ailment among domestic rats. Many domestic rats are genetically predisposed to develop tumors. Posting a photo of a rat with a tumor is meaningless without data and explanation to back up the context.
 
2013-05-27 03:04:16 AM  
Repo Man:
Do you have any evidence at all that any GMO that is eaten has mutagenic properties? "The bottom line for people worried about GMO ingredients in their food is that there is no credible scientific evidence that GMOs pose a health risk."

I never said I did, or that there was. What I said (read carefully) was "We simply do not have the science... all we have are Monsanto and other corporations telling us it's safe."

That science, positive or negative, will come in time... and we and future generations are the lab rats who will test it. Meanwhile, we still should be given the choice, and that choice can only be made with knowledge. Remember, scientists are STILL using the children of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (now old people) and their children and grandchildren (of those who could still have children) to gather data on atomic weapons testing in human populations sixty-seven years later. How many generations might pass before GMO-caused mutagens, if they exist, show up? We don't know. That's the issue.

We don't know. All we have is their say so.

Label the food.
 
2013-05-27 04:16:12 AM  
Damn. Now I want Fruit Loops. With plenty of Fruit Loop-flavored milk when I finish the bowl.
 
2013-05-27 04:17:02 AM  

Felgraf: I don't dislike them so much for "ZOMG GENETIC ENGINEERING" reasons (although I admit, I don't actually trust Monsanto themselves to, uh, do the dillgent research to prevent an ecological catastrophe).

I dislike them for A) Monopolistic reasons
B) Their policies.


Exactly THIS^^^.

There are studies showing that Mansanto is directly responsible for 'X', but there are just as many studies showing that someone else is responsible. These things take a lot longer to pin down than Mansanto has spent pumping their chemicals into the seeds, and we have polluted the holy fark out of our planet, so there is time to pause here and make sure before we go charging off on the GMO="Bad" thing at the moment. Same with the bumblebees, I need more time on those. Every time they think they have the bumblebee mystery nailed down, someone else comes out with an equally plausible explanation.

Their business tactics, on the other hand are EASY to prove. This bullshiat with patenting seeds and then suing people for using the seeds their own plants produce naturally bullshiat is just that: bullshiat. Same thing with this whole part of getting laws passed that protects them completely if their food IS determined to be poison later on, and people start dying. They can't be sued or penalized in ANY way, all thanks to lobbyists... People like to talk about how lawyers and politicians are evil. They have NOTHING on lobbyists. Every one of those farking shiat stains needs to be burned at the stake. And then hiding the farking thing in a piece of absolutely essential legislation?That shiat has needed to be illegal for years, it's past time we fixed that. There is no legitimate reason for it. We don't need the line item veto to fix it, we need to make so that they don't slip the garbage i in the FIRST place.

This thing about them trying to buy up water supplies? God I hope that's false. If not, it's terrifying. A company like this having a stranglehold on the world's food AND water?I don't want to live in that reality.

Mansanto is becoming the WalMart of the agriculture business either way...
 
2013-05-27 04:22:45 AM  

dj_bigbird: Ever had a seedless grape? A banana? A tomato from a grocery store? Any beef from a grocery store? All of that is GMO.


No, genetic modification and selective breeding are two entirely different things. One takes naturally occurring plants and breeds out undesirable traits while breeding FOR desirable ones. The other breaks it down to the genetic level and starts farking with the cellular material, including introducing chemicals into food that was previously safe to eat. They are also monopolizing the agricultural industry so that even IF their food is found to be unsafe, not only will we not be able to buy seed anywhere else, but they wil not be held responsible in any way, including lawsuits and government sanctions. They could kill a million people next year and not suffer one bit.

Entire companies are banning them, and it's not because of "socialism".
 
2013-05-27 04:27:26 AM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: So, where does selective breeding for desirable characteristics fall on the Scale of Evil?  Just wondering.


Nowhere at all. Selective breeding doesn't alter the genetic composition of the base item with the exception of breeding out undesirable traits. Genetic modification includes introducing chemicals that would never occur in these crops naturally. Good or bad, these things are NOT related in any way. Also, selective breeding doesn't give a single company a potential monopoly on the planet's food crops eventually.
 
2013-05-27 05:05:28 AM  

rewind2846: What these folks are really pissed about (as am I) is not just the fact that these foods are genetically engineered. What the issue is happens to be twofold:
1. Monsanto and other agricorps own too much of everything. When there are two few players controlling too much of the world's food supply, this can only be a bad thing.
2. Here in the united states, these agricorps have lobbied to keep "genetically modified" labeling off food packaging, with Monsanto spending $6 million in 2012 (down from $8.8 million in 2008 - another election year) to make sure it stays that way.

I don't mind the "genetically modified" food, as long as it's labeled as such. Let me decide if I want to eat it. If it's fast food, I know it's GM, and can simply decide to go somewhere else... but at the grocery store that labeling should be mandatory. Of course the agricorps don't want this, as they are afraid the idiot american public will not buy their sh*t anymore... it's all about profit you know.

List what's in the food, let me decide. You can put ground up rat sh*t in it, I don't care... as long as the phrase "ground up rat sh*t" is on the package.


So we should go back to eating tiny little ears of corn with tiny little kernels, or wheat with a few scrawny
seeds that is hard to harvest? People have been "genetically modifying" (Read; selectively growing)
foods for thousands of years. This whole ZOMGODZ GMO thing is BS...


 Now Monsanto, is a scumbag company. As far as I'm concerned their management could DIAF.
Especially the aggressive law talking guys that chase down farmers over seeds or potential mixed
pollinated crops. Those people should be taken and staked out in a field and drive over by combines.
How they can sleep at night, I don't know.
 
2013-05-27 05:06:35 AM  
I'm OK with the GM stuff. It's Monsanto's legal BS I have issues with.
 
2013-05-27 06:15:22 AM  

traxan: cman: GMOs are healthy. People are basing science off of their political views. Many of you are no better than the Republicans and their anti science stances.

I'll just leave this here.


It's a picture of a rat with what looks like a tumor and no context. Please provide more information.
 
2013-05-27 06:24:42 AM  

dj_bigbird: Ever had a seedless grape? A banana? A tomato from a grocery store? Any beef from a grocery store? All of that is GMO.


Not to mention any wheat-based product since the 1950s.
 
2013-05-27 06:27:59 AM  
Mr. Shabooboo:
So we should go back to eating tiny little ears of corn with tiny little kernels, or wheat with a few scrawny
seeds that is hard to harvest? People have been "genetically modifying" (Read; selectively growing)
foods for thousands of years. This whole ZOMGODZ GMO thing is BS...


Genetically modifying = bullsh*t, and don't try to make it otherwise. There is a huge difference between grafting parts of one plant onto another, and waiting to see what happens, and using chemicals to tear the plant's DNA apart so the DNA of some other species can be shoehorned in its place.
Regular splicing is still subject to natural selection; if the plant doesn't take or it dies, it wasn't meant to be.
Fark with a plant at a true genetic level, and anything could happen.
 Choosing the ear of corn with the biggest kernels for replanting so you get more corn plants with big kernels is "selective growing".  "Selective growing" is not what Monsanto is doing.

When a corporation introduces a gene to make a plant not only produce its own insecticide, but THEIR BRAND OF INSECTICIDE (RoundUp), that is not "selective growing".

Seriously... do you work for these bastards? Because the line of bullsh*t you just spewed makes one think that somebody's feeding you a paycheck for this...
 
2013-05-27 06:52:22 AM  
SELECTIVE BREEDING:
straightfromthehorsesmouth2you.files.wordpress.com
plus
www.livinginsidehope.com

gives you =
hoperamsay.com, usually done the natural way.

GENETIC ENGINEERING:
campusbasement.com
plus
images.nationalgeographic.com

gives you=
images.nationalgeographic.com, which cannot be done outside a lab.

That's the difference.
 
2013-05-27 07:29:57 AM  
s14.postimg.org

Protest their lousy stock performance as well.
 
2013-05-27 07:43:14 AM  

NFA: [i1221.photobucket.com image 696x503]


'Monsanto Protection Act'


They didn't. Monsanto can still be sued by injuries, and is still liable. The "Monsanto Protection Act" (not it's real name) simply prevents their products from being taken off the market while litigation is pending. Anti-vaccine/anti-nuke/conspiracy theory Jenny McCarthy-type morons are constantly filing frivolous lawsuits against Monsanto because they bought a box of Cheerios and their kid got chicken pox six days later. If not for this important piece of legislation, all of Monsanto's products would perpetually be off of shelves while in legislative limbo, and the price of food would double, which would be devastating, not to rich white bankers, but to the poor.
 
2013-05-27 08:01:44 AM  

NFA: Carbon needed for humans to live
Hydrogen needed for humans to live
Oxygen needed for humans to live

C4H4O2

Recognize it?

Dioxin!


That's the chemical *properly* called "dioxin", and the main threat from it is that it's flammable.  I still wouldn't care to guzzle the stuff, much as I wouldn't care to drink a cup of gasoline.

Now stick a benzene ring on either side, and you get dibenzodioxin.  We're still not there.

Stick four chlorine atoms on that, two on either of the benzene rings.  Now you have 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzodioxinThat's the nasty stuff.
 
2013-05-27 09:28:49 AM  

Mikey1969: Entire companies are banning them, and it's not because of "socialism".


I'm sure you meant "countries". The problem with this argument is it's a fallacy. Primarily they're banning them due to a vocal and active minority instilling fear in others.

The science that it is unsafe is not there. Just like how the anti-vaccine activists have convinced people to not get vaccinated to the point where third world countries have fewer cases of whooping cough.

Don't mistake irrational fear for sound reasoning.
 
2013-05-27 09:56:34 AM  
I sure hope some of the dissent comes from their big business attitudes when it comes to GMOs.

I've heard a few times now, that they like to limit their seeds potential to 1 crop cycle. Instead of letting farmers grow generations of crops, they force the farmer to come back each year and buy more 1 year seeds, forcing the small time farmers out of business, and holding developing nations hostage in that same sense.

I'd much rather march and protest about that than the fear of Timmy's froot loops growing arms.
 
NFA [TotalFark]
2013-05-27 10:08:24 AM  

The All-Powerful Atheismo: Know what that is?  IT'S PENCIL LEAD. STOP CHEWING ON YOUR PENCIL YOU NUMBSKULL


It's also diamond.

STOP BEING A HARD HEAD!
 
NFA [TotalFark]
2013-05-27 10:11:25 AM  

Lee Jackson Beauregard: Stick four chlorine atoms on that, two on either of the benzene rings.  Now you have 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzodioxin.  That's the nasty stuff.


Chlorine is also essential to human life.  Without it, there are no gastric juices.
 
2013-05-27 10:46:34 AM  

TexanBoy: I sure hope some of the dissent comes from their big business attitudes when it comes to GMOs.

I've heard a few times now, that they like to limit their seeds potential to 1 crop cycle. Instead of letting farmers grow generations of crops, they force the farmer to come back each year and buy more 1 year seeds, forcing the small time farmers out of business, and holding developing nations hostage in that same sense.

I'd much rather march and protest about that than the fear of Timmy's froot loops growing arms.


You heard wrong.  There WAS a gene they developed called the "Terminator" gene that would keep the plants from reproducing, but it is not in use, and never has been.

What you might be conflating with the GMO stuff is that hybrid seeds don't necessarily carry the desirable traits forward past the planted generation.  This, though, has nothing to do with whether it's a "GMO" crop; it's just the nature of hybridization.   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_seed
 
2013-05-27 11:26:43 AM  

rewind2846: Mr. Shabooboo:
So we should go back to eating tiny little ears of corn with tiny little kernels, or wheat with a few scrawny
seeds that is hard to harvest? People have been "genetically modifying" (Read; selectively growing)
foods for thousands of years. This whole ZOMGODZ GMO thing is BS...

Genetically modifying = bullsh*t, and don't try to make it otherwise. There is a huge difference between grafting parts of one plant onto another, and waiting to see what happens, and using chemicals to tear the plant's DNA apart so the DNA of some other species can be shoehorned in its place.
Regular splicing is still subject to natural selection; if the plant doesn't take or it dies, it wasn't meant to be.
Fark with a plant at a true genetic level, and anything could happen.
 Choosing the ear of corn with the biggest kernels for replanting so you get more corn plants with big kernels is "selective growing".  "Selective growing" is not what Monsanto is doing.

When a corporation introduces a gene to make a plant not only produce its own insecticide, but THEIR BRAND OF INSECTICIDE (RoundUp), that is not "selective growing".

Seriously... do you work for these bastards? Because the line of bullsh*t you just spewed makes one think that somebody's feeding you a paycheck for this...


I like how you selectively remove the part where I slam Monsanto and want their management to
DIAF  then make claims that I must be working for them etc..

 You are making such a mountain out of nothing..Yes, there are some plants that have been
modified or selected to tolerate things. Again, this has been done for ages. The Roundup Ready
things, I'm not sure what exactly they did. Is it a modification, selection, both? If they did breed plants
that are simply tolerant of that chemical, is that any different than breeding for heat/drought/seedless?
Should we be spraying that crap on this stuff , probably not! It's not good stuff. A lot of the breeding
that is done is for manufacture.ConAgra wants variety XYZ of a crop to sell or use, they get it,
because Wal-Mart wants 20million Hot Pockets all alike. They want a consistent crop for products and production sake and that means Farmer Brown  grows it because that is what they can sell.
 
2013-05-27 11:32:40 AM  

rewind2846: What these folks are really pissed about (as am I) is not just the fact that these foods are genetically engineered. What the issue is happens to be twofold:
1. Monsanto and other agricorps own too much of everything. When there are two few players controlling too much of the world's food supply, this can only be a bad thing.
2. Here in the united states, these agricorps have lobbied to keep "genetically modified" labeling off food packaging, with Monsanto spending $6 million in 2012 (down from $8.8 million in 2008 - another election year) to make sure it stays that way.

I don't mind the "genetically modified" food, as long as it's labeled as such. Let me decide if I want to eat it. If it's fast food, I know it's GM, and can simply decide to go somewhere else... but at the grocery store that labeling should be mandatory. Of course the agricorps don't want this, as they are afraid the idiot american public will not buy their sh*t anymore... it's all about profit you know.

List what's in the food, let me decide. You can put ground up rat sh*t in it, I don't care... as long as the phrase "ground up rat sh*t" is on the package.


I agree with your points, also:

1) I'm not a fan of Monsanto's patent seeds and DNA policies
2) They've lobbied some states to ban seedpickers, even for heirloom non-patent crops.
3) Pesticide-resistant crops "escaping" farms and entering the wildlife cycle
 
2013-05-27 12:37:10 PM  

Mr.Tangent: traxan: cman: GMOs are healthy. People are basing science off of their political views. Many of you are no better than the Republicans and their anti science stances.

I'll just leave this here.

It's a picture of a rat with what looks like a tumor and no context. Please provide more information.


It's every rat ever, given enough time.
 
2013-05-27 12:38:41 PM  

Tommy Moo: lawsuits against Monsanto because they bought a box of Cheerios and their kid got chicken pox six days later


Citation, please.

/no, I'm not holding my breath for either one of the citations I've asked for
 
2013-05-27 02:24:02 PM  

Mrbogey: Mikey1969: Entire companies are banning them, and it's not because of "socialism".

I'm sure you meant "countries". The problem with this argument is it's a fallacy. Primarily they're banning them due to a vocal and active minority instilling fear in others.

The science that it is unsafe is not there. Just like how the anti-vaccine activists have convinced people to not get vaccinated to the point where third world countries have fewer cases of whooping cough.

Don't mistake irrational fear for sound reasoning.


Yes, I meant "countries".... Stupid predictive text on my phone. Even when I spell it correctly, it tries to insert other words it thinks that I might mean instead. Fine when I'm looking for it...

Anyway, if you'd read my whole post, you would have seen that part where I said that it takes more time and study to confirm that these health risks point definitively to GMOs.

My problem is with their business practices and the fact that they are edging towards a monopoly every day, with control of the world's food and water supplies in their sights.
 
2013-05-27 02:33:08 PM  

Mrbogey: I'd rather we went back to the days when over a billion people were starving to death. If you can't grow the wheat God gave us then you deserve to starve!


So nobody's starving anymore, thanks to the selfless generosity of Mansanto?
 
2013-05-27 02:43:12 PM  

Mikey1969: Mrbogey: I'd rather we went back to the days when over a billion people were starving to death. If you can't grow the wheat God gave us then you deserve to starve!

So nobody's starving anymore, thanks to the selfless generosity of Mansanto?


Actually, it's due to Norman Borlaug, the greatest human being who ever lived. He traveled the world revolutionizing farming techniques and hybridizing crop strains to the point where the world produced enough grain and food to feed billions more.

He was an ardent supporter of GMO food.
 
2013-05-27 03:25:17 PM  
I wish they'd label genetically modifed food in grocery stores so I can make sure all my food is genetically modified.
 
2013-05-27 03:57:23 PM  
On the one hand, Monsanto are farkers of the first order.  On the other hand, GMO-fear mongering is somewhere below EMF allergies on the list of credible issues in the world.

So...fark everyone.
 
2013-05-27 04:10:25 PM  

Mrbogey: The science that it is unsafe is not there.


Monsanto seems to be going to a lot of effort to A) prevent their products from being labeled as GM, and B) insulate themselves from future repercussions caused by their GM products. This suggests that the science is, in fact, there. It just isn't being shared with the general public by Monsanto.
 
2013-05-27 04:17:29 PM  

Barricaded Gunman: Mrbogey: The science that it is unsafe is not there.

Monsanto seems to be going to a lot of effort to A) prevent their products from being labeled as GM, and B) insulate themselves from future repercussions caused by their GM products. This suggests that the science is, in fact, there. It just isn't being shared with the general public by Monsanto.




The lack of evidence is just proof of the conspiracy.
 
2013-05-27 06:45:58 PM  

steamingpile: cman: GMOs are healthy. People are basing science off of their political views. Many of you are no better than the Republicans and their anti science stances.

What nobody will ever acknowledge is that they buy off both parties equally or close enough to barely be a noticeable difference in the two parties. But those on the left never want to admit their politicians are just as dirty as those they hate.


This. I know a hardcore Democrat who literally believes everything the Democrats do is perfect and Republicans evil. She is as anti-GMO as it gets. I mentioned about Obama and the whole Monsanto thing (about how he has staffed a lot of his positions with Monsanto lobbyists) and she is dead silent about it.
 
2013-05-27 08:06:33 PM  

LowbrowDeluxe: On the one hand, Monsanto are farkers of the first order.  On the other hand, GMO-fear mongering is somewhere below EMF allergies on the list of credible issues in the world.

So...fark everyone.


I think this is the issue in a nutshell.  It's like Alien vs. Predator.  They both suck for different reasons.
 
2013-05-27 08:13:51 PM  

Repo Man: The lack of evidence is just proof of the conspiracy.


The amount of money Monsanto has spent to avoid having to accurately label their own products is difficult to explain, except in terms of profit maintenance and exposure limitation.

I don't think it takes a conspiracy theorist to wonder why this enormous company that grows so much of our food is so hellbent on not letting us know what's in it.
 
2013-05-27 08:22:25 PM  

Barricaded Gunman: Repo Man: The lack of evidence is just proof of the conspiracy.

The amount of money Monsanto has spent to avoid having to accurately label their own products is difficult to explain, except in terms of profit maintenance and exposure limitation.

I don't think it takes a conspiracy theorist to wonder why this enormous company that grows so much of our food is so hellbent on not letting us know what's in it.


It's almost like Mandatory labeling of something that ranks somewhere in the public consciousness around DEATH CRYSTALS would put a hamper on your ability to sell your product.
 
2013-05-27 08:25:30 PM  

The My Little Pony Killer: Tommy Moo: lawsuits against Monsanto because they bought a box of Cheerios and their kid got chicken pox six days later

Citation, please.

/no, I'm not holding my breath for either one of the citations I've asked for


Don't be dense. This isn't a professional forum. People speak in sarcasm here. I don't have a citation regarding a parent literally suing Monsanto over Cheerios and chicken pox in particular (though I wouldn't be surprised if it has happened once.) Do you want me to find citations of people who have sued Monsanto for frivolous reasons? Because that would be easy.
 
2013-05-27 08:30:48 PM  
I bet 2 billion people would protest gay marriage does that mean we can ban the gheyz?
 
2013-05-27 09:23:45 PM  

DerpHerder: I bet 2 billion people would protest gay marriage does that mean we can ban the gheyz?


You know... we should at least hold off on it till we have a few generations of studying its effect on society.
 
2013-05-27 09:24:41 PM  

Kinek: It's almost like Mandatory labeling of something that ranks somewhere in the public consciousness around DEATH CRYSTALS would put a hamper on your ability to sell your product.


Are you saying that like it's a bad thing? That laws governing disclosure requirements on product labels should be written with a focus on corporate profitability instead of informing consumers? Or am I reading you wrong?
 
2013-05-27 10:44:10 PM  

Tommy Moo: vudutek: Benevolent Misanthrope: AlterNet.  Right.  Okay, let me go touch my clear quartz crystal and work with my chalice well water a bit first.  I wouldn't want to alter the energy of their site by clicking in before I cleansed my aura.

Dislike the messenger, therefore the message is invalid. Makes sense.

The messenger and the message are horseshiat here. GMO feeds billions. Luddite morons who have never taken a science class above middle school protest GMO and pesticides without stopping to think of the famine and pestilence that would literally kill a billion people if not for companies like Monsanto. You can't imagine what a billion corpses looks like. It would fill Manhattan six feet high.

There is no such thing as a toxin. Everything is toxic or healthful, depending on the dose.


What exactly would be a healthful dose of arsenic?
 
2013-05-27 11:16:05 PM  

QueenMamaBee: What exactly would be a healthful dose of arsenic?


According to the EPA, inorganic arsenic, though primarily a carcinogen, has limited application for a specific type of leukemia. Unfortunately it does not elaborate on the proper dosage, but I think it suggests it does have a 'healthful' application.

http://www.epa.gov/ttnatw01/hlthef/arsenic.html#ref1
 
2013-05-28 12:34:29 AM  

Barricaded Gunman: Kinek: It's almost like Mandatory labeling of something that ranks somewhere in the public consciousness around DEATH CRYSTALS would put a hamper on your ability to sell your product.

Are you saying that like it's a bad thing? That laws governing disclosure requirements on product labels should be written with a focus on corporate profitability instead of informing consumers? Or am I reading you wrong?


When it has been thus far not to be any substantially different than crops developed with EMS or Fast neutron mutations, neither of which require disclosure because they don't matter biologically, I can see why they might fight it.

Someone asked what they have to hide. Even if they have nothing to hide, simple disclosure of the label is enough to tank demand because people believe shiatheads like Alex Jones and Alternate.
 
Displayed 183 of 183 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report