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.

(The Atlantic)   "The anti-GMO movement, largely a product of the political left, has reached levels of delusion, paranoia and anti-intellectualism worthy of Michele Bachmann and young-earth creationists"   (theatlantic.com) divider line 257
    More: Obvious, GMOs, Michele Bachmann, Science Party, Yucca Mountain, Obama, philosophy of science, house science committee, Office of Science  
•       •       •

1510 clicks; posted to Politics » on 12 Nov 2013 at 8:44 AM (36 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-11-12 08:34:58 AM
Global warming is a product of the evil corporations and their bought political lackeys. If we all had farms and local sourced our foods things would be so perfect.
 
2013-11-12 08:42:00 AM
I think the problem with many anti-GMO folks is that they focus on the wrong issues.  Doesn't mean GMO companies are all sunshine and light and have our best interests at heart.
 
2013-11-12 08:44:40 AM

WTF Indeed: Global warming is a product of the evil corporations and their bought political lackeys. If we all had farms and local sourced our foods things would be so perfect.


Plus it's a lot easier to locally source all the vegetables you want when the fine folks over at Monsanto are genetically engineering those plants to actually grow in your climate.
 
2013-11-12 08:45:00 AM
We've been genetically modifying crops since we crawled out of caves
 
2013-11-12 08:46:52 AM
Sigh. Another "both sides are bad" piece.
 
2013-11-12 08:47:02 AM
Conservative conflict with science on evolution and global warming has been exaggerated-while liberals get a free pass for their own failings.

No, it hasn't -- no, they don't.
 
2013-11-12 08:48:01 AM
Political left, or bat shiat left?

There is a difference. We don't really have many Bachmanns in positions of power.
 
2013-11-12 08:48:55 AM
This headline is true.    I attended a talk about GMO food, and the opposition to it seems to boil down to, "Well, a lot of European countries are banning them so we should too."

Meanwhile golden rice, which could prevent millions of cases of blindness, sits unused.
 
2013-11-12 08:50:20 AM
When I see articles about GMO issues I often think, "Seriously, why do these whiny hippies give a f*ck? Stop hindering science. Why do you care what kind of modifications the crops you put in your body have?" Then I realize I'm overweight and unhealthy because I think like that.
 
2013-11-12 08:53:54 AM
Anti-GMO (not talking about anti-business practices of Monsanto and such, which I agree with) is all based on flawed studies and pseudo-science. It is similar to the anti-vaxxers (and is mostly the same people) on both sides of the political aisle. Probably more left than right on the anti-GMO, though.

It is like those retards that say Wakefield's "Autism cases vaccines" study was vindicated by a recent Wake Forest study, when the Wake Forest study didn't have anything to do with autism and vaccines and the doctor that did the study even said that vaccines don't cause autism. But, of course, the anti-vaxxer retards ignore this and keep shelling it. Same with the whole HPV vaccine thing that is going around; total bullshiat.
 
2013-11-12 08:54:22 AM

Bareefer Obonghit: When I see articles about GMO issues I often think, "Seriously, why do these whiny hippies give a f*ck? Stop hindering science. Why do you care what kind of modifications the crops you put in your body have?" Then I realize I'm overweight and unhealthy because I think like that.


You, your parents, and possibly your grandparents have been eating GMO crops since birth. And so have all those "whiny hippies."
Even some of the so-called "heirloom" varieties of plants have been genetically modified.
 
2013-11-12 08:54:54 AM

give me doughnuts: Conservative conflict with science on evolution and global warming has been exaggerated-while liberals get a free pass for their own failings.

No, it hasn't -- no, they don't.


Hey, someone actually RTFA.

Nice strawman subby, but republicans show themselves to be anti-science time and time again.
 
2013-11-12 08:57:09 AM
I'm not against GMO's. But Monsanto is as evil as fark, and have been so evil and unscrupulous in their means, I believe all GMO's and their research suffers when consumers know companies can trademark genetics and act like the RIAA in preserving their "Intellectual Property", which is completely uncontrollable in nature.

If GMO companies showed a semblance of ethics early on, I don't think there would be the backlash against them from the "Hippy Left" or whatever. But, to reiterate:

Diogenes: I think the problem with many anti-GMO folks is that they focus on the wrong issues.  Doesn't mean GMO companies are all sunshine and light and have our best interests at heart.


THIS.
 
2013-11-12 08:58:47 AM

sendtodave: Political left, or bat shiat left?

There is a difference. We don't really have many Bachmanns in positions of power.


www.priestsforlife.org

You sure about that?
 
2013-11-12 08:59:48 AM

acad1228: sendtodave: Political left, or bat shiat left?

There is a difference. We don't really have many Bachmanns in positions of power.

[www.priestsforlife.org image 640x371]

You sure about that?


Yes. Please explain how Pelosi is anywhere near as crazy as Bachmann. Or, even, just crazy at all.
 
2013-11-12 09:00:47 AM
Stupidity isn't bound by political affiliation. What else is new?
 
2013-11-12 09:01:48 AM

Doom MD: We've been genetically modifying crops since we crawled out of caves


domesticating corn is a lot different than genetically modifying soybeans to be resistant to round up. I am anti-gmo, not because of the inherent unhealthiness of gmo food which hasn't been researched enough and right now the research points to it being relatively healthy, but because I don't want the food I eat covered in pesticide. Regardless of the healthiness of gmo crops, I'm pretty sure eating food covered in pesticide isn't good for you. Pesticide definitely isn't good for the bee populations that we use to pollinate most of our crops, and it's not good for the farmers who get sued because their crops cross pollinate with someone who is using gmo's. Being able to copyright seeds and not allowing farmers to reuse seeds for next year is unsustainable and has caused a lot of harm to the small time farmer on a lot of levels.

/I guess I'm one of those crazies because I try to eat as responsibly as possible
//I know my farmer's name
 
2013-11-12 09:03:35 AM

abb3w: Sigh. Another "both sides are bad" piece.


both sides have agendas that are not altruistic and mainly benefit them and their cronies. this is news to you?
 
2013-11-12 09:04:07 AM
There's a "political left" in this country?
 
2013-11-12 09:06:19 AM

dr_blasto: acad1228: sendtodave: Political left, or bat shiat left?

There is a difference. We don't really have many Bachmanns in positions of power.

[www.priestsforlife.org image 640x371]

You sure about that?

Yes. Please explain how Pelosi is anywhere near as crazy as Bachmann. Or, even, just crazy at all.


She's making a crazy face! Look how crazy she is!
 
2013-11-12 09:06:54 AM

dr_blasto: acad1228: sendtodave: Political left, or bat shiat left?

There is a difference. We don't really have many Bachmanns in positions of power.

[www.priestsforlife.org image 640x371]

You sure about that?

Yes. Please explain how Pelosi is anywhere near as crazy as Bachmann. Or, even, just crazy at all.


Just look at that craaaazy picture!

That's all that needs to be said!
 
2013-11-12 09:09:28 AM

ModernPrimitive01: Doom MD: We've been genetically modifying crops since we crawled out of caves

domesticating corn is a lot different than genetically modifying soybeans to be resistant to round up. I am anti-gmo, not because of the inherent unhealthiness of gmo food which hasn't been researched enough and right now the research points to it being relatively healthy, but because I don't want the food I eat covered in pesticide. Regardless of the healthiness of gmo crops, I'm pretty sure eating food covered in pesticide isn't good for you. Pesticide definitely isn't good for the bee populations that we use to pollinate most of our crops, and it's not good for the farmers who get sued because their crops cross pollinate with someone who is using gmo's. Being able to copyright seeds and not allowing farmers to reuse seeds for next year is unsustainable and has caused a lot of harm to the small time farmer on a lot of levels.

/I guess I'm one of those crazies because I try to eat as responsibly as possible
//I know my farmer's name


Uhh, you do know they also genetically modify food to be resistant to pests and thus not need pesticides, right? And if I am not mistaken, beans are one crop where pesticides don't matter all that much.

Also, there is no way to feed all 7 billion people on earth without using GMOs, pesticides and fertilizer.

I agree about the copyrights, though.
 
2013-11-12 09:12:07 AM
If it's really not a big deal, label your produce accurately and let the market decide.
 
2013-11-12 09:12:53 AM

Doom MD: We've been genetically modifying crops since we crawled out of caves


Right, because there's no difference whatsoever between cross-breeding crops for favorable traits over dozens of generations and spending a few months splicing specifically designed resistances to pesticides into the DNA of a plant in a lab. If they don't carry exactly the same odds for benefit and detriment, then the lab-designed version will be that much safer and better because  Science!
 
2013-11-12 09:13:40 AM
Decades ago, people thought that heating food in microwave ovens made food unsafe to eat.  The fear of GMO food being unsafe to eat is the modern day equivalent.
 
2013-11-12 09:14:35 AM

Uranus Is Huge!: If it's really not a big deal, label your produce accurately and let the market decide.


The problem with that is that idiots automatically assume "GMO = BAD" and thus will avoid it always. The anti-GMO lobby is pretty good at distorting facts and producing flawed studies.

Just let the non-GMO foods label themselves as non-GMO and all will be good. Useless regulation is useless.
 
2013-11-12 09:17:29 AM

Bareefer Obonghit: When I see articles about GMO issues I often think, "Seriously, why do these whiny hippies give a f*ck? Stop hindering science. Why do you care what kind of modifications the crops you put in your body have?" Then I realize I'm overweight and unhealthy because I think like that.


Except that there is no evidence to suggest this possibility.

I do think that somewhere over the past few decades, we suffered what could be called an anthropo-ecological disaster, leading to a rise in health problems that cannot be entirely dismissed as better diagnostic procedures. But we've also been eliminating potential causes of this disaster at a surprising rate. Vaccines and GMO have both been thoroughly debunked. HFCS, another popular contemporary scapegoat, is all but off the table as well. Even the older findings of high-fat diets being problematic are now having to be revisited.
 
2013-11-12 09:18:40 AM

sendtodave: Political left, or bat shiat left?

There is a difference. We don't really have many Bachmanns in positions of power.


Do we know that though? How many Congresspeoples are in favor of meaningless GMO regulation?

//not a rhetorical question
 
2013-11-12 09:19:06 AM

Bareefer Obonghit: When I see articles about GMO issues I often think, "Seriously, why do these whiny hippies give a f*ck? Stop hindering science. Why do you care what kind of modifications the crops you put in your body have?" Then I realize I'm overweight and unhealthy because I think like that.


Nah, it is much more likely you are overweight and unhealthy because you eat too many calories.
 
2013-11-12 09:19:11 AM

Diogenes: I think the problem with many anti-GMO folks is that they focus on the wrong issues.  Doesn't mean GMO companies are all sunshine and light and have our best interests at heart.


Big agricultural companies are somewhat amoral, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the product.  The product is one of the few things in the world that has almost no downsides.  Pretty much any  valid complaint about the industry is going to include all the other monopolist industries (telcoms, etc), GM products in themselves are better-researched, verified safer, more nutritious, better for the environment and so on than "normal" food.

ModernPrimitive01: Regardless of the healthiness of gmo crops, I'm pretty sure eating food covered in pesticide isn't good for you.


Firstly, round-up isn't a pesticide and a crop being round-up ready in no way changes the amount of pesticide used.

Secondly, you can 100% solve this problem by washing your fruit/vegetables, since pesticides pretty much have to be water soluble to some degree to work.  It's not something that requires rewriting an industry from the ground up.

So, basically, yes. You're one of the crazies.  Not because your'e trying to "eat responsibly", but because you haven't made even the most basic effort to educate yourself about how to eat responsibly and are basing your theory of how to do so on a mix of conspiracy theory and outright ignorance.

// There are some concerns about overuse of herbicides, but they have nothing to do with consumer health whatsoever and they've largely been addressed by careful monitoring and tweaking of the chemistry.
 
2013-11-12 09:22:49 AM
I love GMOs.  I just want them labeled as such.  That is all.

But that apparently is too much to ask.

/same goes with milk
 
2013-11-12 09:23:18 AM

machoprogrammer: ModernPrimitive01: Doom MD: We've been genetically modifying crops since we crawled out of caves

domesticating corn is a lot different than genetically modifying soybeans to be resistant to round up. I am anti-gmo, not because of the inherent unhealthiness of gmo food which hasn't been researched enough and right now the research points to it being relatively healthy, but because I don't want the food I eat covered in pesticide. Regardless of the healthiness of gmo crops, I'm pretty sure eating food covered in pesticide isn't good for you. Pesticide definitely isn't good for the bee populations that we use to pollinate most of our crops, and it's not good for the farmers who get sued because their crops cross pollinate with someone who is using gmo's. Being able to copyright seeds and not allowing farmers to reuse seeds for next year is unsustainable and has caused a lot of harm to the small time farmer on a lot of levels.

/I guess I'm one of those crazies because I try to eat as responsibly as possible
//I know my farmer's name

Uhh, you do know they also genetically modify food to be resistant to pests and thus not need pesticides, right? And if I am not mistaken, beans are one crop where pesticides don't matter all that much.

Also, there is no way to feed all 7 billion people on earth without using GMOs, pesticides and fertilizer.

I agree about the copyrights, though.


I'm not saying outlaw GMOs (change the copyright law though to help farmers and do something to stop organic farmers from losing their certification due to pollen drift). I just made it a personal choice not to eat GMOs since I don't know which ones are modified to be naturally resistant to pest and which are "round up" ready to be drenched in pesticides. Although there have been reports by Cornell and Iowa State that some beneficial insects like monarch butterflies and lady bugs are dying due to eating gmo corn. Again, further study is needed
 
2013-11-12 09:23:31 AM
How many of the people who freak out about GMOs have any idea about this? Atomic Gardening: Breeding Plants With Gamma Radiation
 
2013-11-12 09:24:34 AM

Jim_Callahan: Diogenes: I think the problem with many anti-GMO folks is that they focus on the wrong issues.  Doesn't mean GMO companies are all sunshine and light and have our best interests at heart.

Big agricultural companies are somewhat amoral, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the product.  The product is one of the few things in the world that has almost no downsides.  Pretty much any  valid complaint about the industry is going to include all the other monopolist industries (telcoms, etc), GM products in themselves are better-researched, verified safer, more nutritious, better for the environment and so on than "normal" food.


I agree with your point about Big _____.  Definitely a larger, or at least less specific, problem with some businesses.  But it's because of Big Behavior that we can't verify your second point very well - that these things are safer and all-around  better for us.
 
2013-11-12 09:24:51 AM

Marcus Aurelius: I love GMOs.  I just want them labeled as such.  That is all.

But that apparently is too much to ask.

/same goes with milk


Me too.

Once again, a crappy lobbyist action by GMO's that actually fans the flames of Anti-GMO paranoia.
 
2013-11-12 09:25:24 AM
Challenging is it is for the binary world of fark but there can be two true things.

1) GMO food is not, per se, bad
2) Monsanto are a bunch of evil unethical farks

The notion that a few people on the left disagreeing with point 1 is in any way near as bad as every single republican presidential candidate saying they don't believe in the foundation of modern biology is just piss stained lazy bullshiat column filler.
 
2013-11-12 09:27:19 AM

Wessoman: I'm not against GMO's. But Monsanto is as evil as fark, and have been so evil and unscrupulous in their means, I believe all GMO's and their research suffers when consumers know companies can trademark genetics and act like the RIAA in preserving their "Intellectual Property", which is completely uncontrollable in nature.

If GMO companies showed a semblance of ethics early on, I don't think there would be the backlash against them from the "Hippy Left" or whatever. But, to reiterate:

Diogenes: I think the problem with many anti-GMO folks is that they focus on the wrong issues.  Doesn't mean GMO companies are all sunshine and light and have our best interests at heart.

THIS.


Pretty much this.  When I say I'm "anti-GMO" I mean I'm anti-trademarking farking plants and seeds and creating seeds that only produce one round of crops because they want you to buy more Monsanto/insert crap company here-branded seeds.  I am all for GMO to increase crops for more access to food, but that's hurting the hungry more than helping.
 
2013-11-12 09:28:24 AM

Repo Man: How many of the people who freak out about GMOs have any idea about this? Atomic Gardening: Breeding Plants With Gamma Radiation


Don't tell them about the irradiated meat, whatever you do.
 
2013-11-12 09:30:03 AM
I'm really not in the mood for this discussion today.  Can we get some pictures of Tomacco?

I'd love to find an image of the GM food Marge served to the family in another episode.  The one where the carrot eats the other food on the plate.
 
2013-11-12 09:30:38 AM

ModernPrimitive01: domesticating corn is a lot different than genetically modifying soybeans to be resistant to round up.


It's also very different from exposing seeds to gamma radiation, x-rays, and chemicals that cause mutation, then sticking the seeds in the ground and seeing what comes up.

We've been doing that since 193o.

A lot of the fruits, vegetables, and cereal grains you've eaten in your life have been the result of those sorts of genetic modification
 
2013-11-12 09:30:51 AM

Jim_Callahan: Diogenes: I think the problem with many anti-GMO folks is that they focus on the wrong issues.  Doesn't mean GMO companies are all sunshine and light and have our best interests at heart.

Big agricultural companies are somewhat amoral, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the product.  The product is one of the few things in the world that has almost no downsides.  Pretty much any  valid complaint about the industry is going to include all the other monopolist industries (telcoms, etc), GM products in themselves are better-researched, verified safer, more nutritious, better for the environment and so on than "normal" food.

ModernPrimitive01: Regardless of the healthiness of gmo crops, I'm pretty sure eating food covered in pesticide isn't good for you.

Firstly, round-up isn't a pesticide and a crop being round-up ready in no way changes the amount of pesticide used.

Secondly, you can 100% solve this problem by washing your fruit/vegetables, since pesticides pretty much have to be water soluble to some degree to work.  It's not something that requires rewriting an industry from the ground up.

So, basically, yes. You're one of the crazies.  Not because your'e trying to "eat responsibly", but because you haven't made even the most basic effort to educate yourself about how to eat responsibly and are basing your theory of how to do so on a mix of conspiracy theory and outright ignorance.

// There are some concerns about overuse of herbicides, but they have nothing to do with consumer health whatsoever and they've largely been addressed by careful monitoring and tweaking of the chemistry.


http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=weed-whacking-herbi ci de-p
 
2013-11-12 09:30:58 AM
The anti-GMO people are usually the scientifically illiterate who think that since they passed high school chemistry they KNOW man. They, much like the "organic is the best ever" people completely forget that it would be damn near impossible to have these bountiful harvests without the efforts of genetically modified organisms.

Now, there IS something to be said for the overuse of antibiotics in agriculture leading to more antibiotic resistant strains of bacteria. But last I checked they're working on actually vaccinating herds in order to avoid using antibiotics.
 
2013-11-12 09:32:06 AM
"Mischa Fisher is a former Republican science-policy staffer and legislative director in the House of Representatives."

ah hahaha
 
2013-11-12 09:32:51 AM
I'm not anti GMO because of food quality. I'm anti GMO because of farking Monsanto
 
2013-11-12 09:34:05 AM

give me doughnuts: ModernPrimitive01: domesticating corn is a lot different than genetically modifying soybeans to be resistant to round up.

It's also very different from exposing seeds to gamma radiation, x-rays, and chemicals that cause mutation, then sticking the seeds in the ground and seeing what comes up.

We've been doing that since 193o.

A lot of the fruits, vegetables, and cereal grains you've eaten in your life have been the result of those sorts of genetic modification


so.....I should be taken aback by this and stop trying to eat as responsibly as possible? I guess I'll go to McDonalds for lunch then
 
2013-11-12 09:36:28 AM
well this thread has shown one thing, Americans might be lazy in regards to most social ills, but mess with your ability to carelessly consume products in a supermarket regardless of the environmental or social consequences and everyone seems to come together
 
2013-11-12 09:36:32 AM
Both sides are badding aside, this article does illustrate what the fringe left in America actually looks like.
 
2013-11-12 09:37:00 AM

machoprogrammer: Uranus Is Huge!: If it's really not a big deal, label your produce accurately and let the market decide.

The problem with that is that idiots automatically assume "GMO = BAD" and thus will avoid it always. The anti-GMO lobby is pretty good at distorting facts and producing flawed studies.

Just let the non-GMO foods label themselves as non-GMO and all will be good. Useless regulation is useless.


So because "idiots" won't buy foods that's labeled accurately, we shouldn't label food accurately? And you're also saying that the anti-GMO lobby is so effective that poor companies like Monsanto just can't compete?
 
2013-11-12 09:37:47 AM

CPennypacker: I'm not anti GMO because of food quality. I'm anti GMO because of farking Monsanto


No doubt Monsanto is evil. But genetically modifying food can be an awesome thing. You can actually MAKE a tomato more nutritionally sound.

I'm waiting for lembas bread, personally.
 
2013-11-12 09:38:19 AM

CPennypacker: I'm not anti GMO because of food quality. I'm anti GMO because of farking Monsanto


Seeing a lot of this.

Shouldn't we be pushing for "Monsanto" labeling, then?
 
Displayed 50 of 257 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report