Page 5 of 25 FirstFirst ...
3
4
5
6
7
15
... LastLast
  1. #81
    Merely a Setback Reeve's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX USA
    Posts
    28,800
    Quote Originally Posted by Noradin View Post
    While unhelpful (because it is so obviously true) it is at least not potentially harmful like stating "these pants are GMO, GMO is save so they must be save" (which is and obvious fallancy but something people are often happy not to comment on when it is assumed to be true".

    In short: Yes, we know GMO can turn out save products, we also know it can turn out unsave products. Thus we must make sure case by case. This is the same as for any other product someone could come up with. There is no reason to make an exception for GMO.

    Demonstrating unrelated truths we know already again and again won't suddenly produce some reason for such an exception no matter how much money it would save not to do savety tests. So this was simply an useless repetition of something we knew already.
    I agree there's no reason to make an exception for GMOs. I extend that logic to labeling though. There's no reason to think GMOs are inherently more risky as a class and should therefore require additional labeling. GMOs should have to go through the same FDA (or whatever equivalent various nations have) testing as everything else, but labeling everything that was GMO as a GMO thing is going to cause people to make uninformed choices based on fear instead of good informed decisions, which is counter to why mandated product labeling exists.
    'Twas a cutlass swipe or an ounce of lead
    Or a yawing hole in a battered head
    And the scuppers clogged with rotting red
    And there they lay I damn me eyes
    All lookouts clapped on Paradise
    All souls bound just contrarywise, yo ho ho and a bottle of rum!

  2. #82
    Quote Originally Posted by Noradin View Post
    No, unresonable isn't the word you are searching for. At most it would be irrational or baseless.
    There is no harm in trying to avoid GMO foods in Europe.
    If I were to avoid eating apples if I do not like them, would you call that unresonable? According to your logic you would have to.
    Avoiding apples because you don't like them is, once again, a subjective thing. Avoiding GMO's because you think they're unsafe is unreasonable, because 'they're unsafe' isn't subjective.

    My logic doesn't dictate that I have to say your choice of avoiding apples is unreasonable, because you haven't understood the logic.
    Quote Originally Posted by Zantos View Post
    There are no 2 species that are 100% identical.
    Quote Originally Posted by Redditor
    can you leftist twits just fucking admit that quantum mechanics has fuck all to do with thermodynamics, that shit is just a pose?

  3. #83
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Garnier Fructis View Post
    I don't support labeling because the main reason is fear of GMO's.

    We're going to have a lot of good food going to waste because people are afraid.
    So you base your opinion on assumptions. Aye ok.
    And you're supposed to be the scientific guy?

  4. #84
    The Insane Underverse's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    The Underverse
    Posts
    16,333
    Not surprised.

    But most of these crops, GMO or not, are still not great for human health.

  5. #85
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Canpinter View Post
    your honesty think that's a good idea? that we should label something as dangerous out of baseless fear with no actual evidence to support it?
    We should label something like GMO. Your addition of "baseless fear with no actual evidence" is not even taken into consideration. And it shouldn't.

  6. #86
    Quote Originally Posted by superfula View Post
    I'm all for GMO crops but the only GMO crop you listed is corn. The rest are cultivars.



    There are no GMO oranges available. They are cultivars or hybrids.

    There are very few GMO foods publicly available. Corn and soy are the big ones. Hawaiian Papaya, some zucchinis and a few more approved listed here http://www.isaaa.org/gmapprovaldatabase/cropslist/
    GMOs are a part of cultivars. Also, the picture shown earlier shows that some of those listed were genetically altered en masse to take on characteristics of another plant. The way you're trying to use cultivar is simply selective breeding within the plant species which is not the case with most of those on that list.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Djalil View Post
    We should label something like GMO. Your addition of "baseless fear with no actual evidence" is not even taken into consideration. And it shouldn't.
    Then we would label a majority of the food in the world today.

  7. #87
    The Insane Underverse's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    The Underverse
    Posts
    16,333
    Quote Originally Posted by Djalil View Post
    So you base your opinion on assumptions. Aye ok.
    And you're supposed to be the scientific guy?
    It's not really an assumption. If people see 'GMO' on certain foods, they'll be less likely to buy them. It's classic risk management for the uninformed.

  8. #88
    Quote Originally Posted by Djalil View Post
    So you base your opinion on assumptions. Aye ok.
    And you're supposed to be the scientific guy?
    Hardly an assumption. Google reasons for labeling GMO's and at the core of it, it's fear. You get 'they're untested' (false), 'they're unsafe' (false), 'this doesn't happen in nature!' (nature fallacy).
    Quote Originally Posted by Zantos View Post
    There are no 2 species that are 100% identical.
    Quote Originally Posted by Redditor
    can you leftist twits just fucking admit that quantum mechanics has fuck all to do with thermodynamics, that shit is just a pose?

  9. #89
    Quote Originally Posted by PRE 9-11 View Post
    Yes. It's quite worthwhile, actually. GMO crops have a very bright future. Whether it's creating drought-resistant crops or fighting malnutrition. The ignorance around this subject needs to be fought.
    Yes, I agree. GMO has a bright future if handled responsibly, because it offers opportunities to solve agricultural problems and better adjust plants to the enviroment they are intended for. They can also be used to make things cheaper, which is good in most cases, but not something desirable in Europe. In fact it would create a problem. Instead of paying our farmers for their produce we would have to start paying them for going through the motions, then getting rid of the excess (we already do that to a point, but this would make it worse).
    And just to be frank here, you want to sell us food undercutting our farmers because you want to make money off of us, not because you are afraid we would starve. (Or you would have to be grossly misinformed about the agricultural situation here.) So in effect you want for us to allow you to pile more excess onto us which we then have to get rid of, too, and expect us to give you money for that disservice?

  10. #90
    Quote Originally Posted by Kujako View Post
    Which GMOs? They are not a single thing.... they are many if not infinite. If I genetically alter an egg to contain a lethal dose of cyanid (while trying to make an apple hash egg), it's not safe. Thus not all GMOs are safe.
    What the report says is that something is not unsafe simply because it has been genetically modified, something the crackpots keep insisting otherwise.
    What do you think selective breeding is, only that has less control because if it looks like a dog and barks like a dog you accept that as a success without any consideration for what traits were actually transferred in the process, as long as the ones you want were.
    Genetic Modification is cross-breeding done selectively, simple as that.
    Quote Originally Posted by DeadmanWalking View Post
    Your forgot to include the part where we blame casuals for everything because blizzard is catering to casuals when casuals got jack squat for new content the entire expansion, like new dungeons and scenarios.
    Quote Originally Posted by Reinaerd View Post
    T'is good to see there are still people valiantly putting the "Ass" in assumption.

  11. #91

  12. #92
    Quote Originally Posted by Quetzl View Post
    Not surprised.

    But most of these crops, GMO or not, are still not great for human health.
    if i'm correct that's because of the pesticides that are used on many of them, that can pass to humans. i thing that a ban on pesticides, followed by using natural pest controls (spiders, birds, etc) could be better
    Forgive my english, as i'm not a native speaker



  13. #93
    Quote Originally Posted by Djalil View Post
    We should label something like GMO. Your addition of "baseless fear with no actual evidence" is not even taken into consideration. And it shouldn't.
    why should we label gmos? what reason other then baseless fear of risk is there to label something that's in no substantive way different then the "natural" version.

  14. #94
    The Insane Underverse's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    The Underverse
    Posts
    16,333
    Quote Originally Posted by Djalil View Post
    We should label something like GMO. Your addition of "baseless fear with no actual evidence" is not even taken into consideration. And it shouldn't.
    Companies can already label foods without GMOs. And with the prolific presence of GMO food materials, I think it's just as easy for the wary consumer to assume that anything not labelled 'GMO-free' has GMO materials in it.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Thepersona View Post
    if i'm correct that's because of the pesticides that are used on many of them, that can pass to humans. i thing that a ban on pesticides, followed by using natural pest controls (spiders, birds, etc) could be better
    Sure, that's a concern. But I was more talking about the health impact of eating tons of processed grains, legumes, and seed oils.

  15. #95
    Quote Originally Posted by Garnier Fructis View Post
    Avoiding apples because you don't like them is, once again, a subjective thing. Avoiding GMO's because you think they're unsafe is unreasonable, because 'they're unsafe' isn't subjective.

    My logic doesn't dictate that I have to say your choice of avoiding apples is unreasonable, because you haven't understood the logic.
    I do not avoid them because I think they are unsave, I'm sure our scientist who are assigned to make sure everything that gets sold professionally is up to standards do their jobs properly.
    I avoid them because I see no reason why I shouldn't. Here in Europe that is. What benefit are they supposed to bring to me?
    If you undercut the farmers here, then I have to sustain them with tax money instead. That costs me more.

    If you come up with some new kind of fruit I like the tast of? Well that one I might want to buy. What I do not want to promote here is something that improves productivity when we have excess already and pay money to get rid of it.

  16. #96
    Quote Originally Posted by Djalil View Post
    What I think about the evil Shrimp of death is my own business. I still have the right to think that shrimps will cause me to turn my balls into mush if I want to believe as such. Incorrect? Granted.
    Can we label GMO now or you still don't want to?
    I'm just curious...if you are so fearful of GMO products why not only eat products specifically labeled as being non-gmo, organic, all natural or whatever other buzzwords are popular these days?

    Labeling GMO products will only intensify the misconception that they endanger people's health. Europe is a great example of this. Back in the 90s Europe required they be labeled. Within a couple years, companies began removing GMO ingredients as people were avoiding products with labels. Now it's hard to find GMO products in Europe. Rejecting GMO foods strengthens the stigma toward technology that has produced immense benefits in developing countries.

    GMO products have increased yield per acre, can help curb Vitamin A deficiencies that blind/kill thousands of children per year, and are generally cheaper than normal foods as they require less water/chemicals. Genetic engineering is far more precise and far safer than the conventional breeding techniques companies have used for years.

    So please, continue to tell us how GMO products are so detrimental to YOU and YOUR rights. After-all, what YOU want for YOURself is far more important than feeding the world.

  17. #97
    Quote Originally Posted by Djalil View Post
    Why would I care about what other people do?
    If you don't care why are you posting? lol
    .

    "This will be a fight against overwhelming odds from which survival cannot be expected. We will do what damage we can."

    -- Capt. Copeland

  18. #98
    Quote Originally Posted by Canpinter View Post
    why should we label gmos? what reason other then baseless fear of risk is there to label something that's in no substantive way different then the "natural" version.
    Why shouldn't we label them if the people ask their democratically elected representatives to make it a rule for everyone?
    It is not discriminating against any protected groups, is it? It is no undue hardship to ask for that lable either, it is after all just ink.
    If you really do not know and cannot afford to check what you are doing then you can still lable it the standard way for cases such as this: "Might contain GMO products".

  19. #99
    Legendary! Ealyssa's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Switzerland, Geneva
    Posts
    6,999
    Quote Originally Posted by Belize View Post
    Enjoy having your produce covered in Dicamba and other pesticides then. GMO can make ctops insect resistent.

    Sorry, Dicamba is a herbicide, but crops are made resistant to that too, so the point still stands.
    You don't even understand what you write... Making a plant resistant to herbicide isn't a good thing for humans. Sure the plant survive massive dose of chemicals used to kill other not wanted plants. But you will still eat these chemicals, even more than an non GMO since it was specificaly made to survive that kind of treatment.

    GMOs aren't bad per say. But they are useless in their actual use. It's just made to profit a few massive companies. Destroy a lot of smaller producters. And doesn't have a single benefit for the consumer.
    Quote Originally Posted by primalmatter View Post
    nazi is not the abbreviation of national socialism....
    When googling 4 letters is asking too much fact-checking.

  20. #100
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by purebalance View Post
    GMOs are a part of cultivars. Also, the picture shown earlier shows that some of those listed were genetically altered en masse to take on characteristics of another plant. The way you're trying to use cultivar is simply selective breeding within the plant species which is not the case with most of those on that list.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Then we would label a majority of the food in the world today.
    We do. Organic, free range eggs, Fish from farms.... shit like this. You have a problem with that?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •