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  
•       •       •

4667 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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
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 33 of 183 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report