Stop Bashing G.M.O. Foods, More Than 100 Nobel Laureates Say

[Damajin]

Just because it is democratically put in place does not mean that it is not authoritarian. Again, I don't think you understand what "authoritarian" means.

I'm pretty sure I know what it means, I think you just want to wiggle around and find some way past the resolute No, and my support of it.

Again, there's no intrinsic right that US multinationals have to the European food supply or markets. They were free to negotiate for it, Europe said No. That's all that needs to be said, and saying no and continuing to say No isn't authoritarian when you are able to clearly identify things you have a choice to accept and then flatly refuse to accept.

[Mayhem]

The anti-golden rice crankery is promoted by Greenpeace. Like I said, I don't know how many blind kids the kooks with Greenpeace are responsible for, but it's not zero.

And greenpeace is an EU association? I´m not following, how is that linked to the EU?

[Khelek]

As a person with a background in biochemistry and molecular biology, this thread makes me sad. So much hysteria and misinformation is ridiculous. GMOs will not make you fat or cause any health effects not seen in other foods!

Think about digestion. A GMO contains a new gene. The new gene codes a protein. This protein is composed of many amino acids in a chain. There are only 20 amino acids. They are the same amino acids present in ever other protein molecule you might eat. During digestion the chain is chopped up and the individual amino acids are sequestered for utilization in building your own protein molecules. To your body there this no difference between the amino acids from a "normal" protein and those of found in a GMO protein.

[Spectral]

And greenpeace is an EU association? I´m not following, how is that linked to the EU?

My statement was that Western anti-GMO loons are causing death in India. Greenpeace certainly has plenty of European support. The European hysteria around GMOs is surely not helping.

[Krille]

My statement was that Western anti-GMO loons are causing death in India. Greenpeace certainly has plenty of European support. The European hysteria around GMOs is surely not helping.

EU is not = Europe though. What random europeans do in their life has nothing to do with the EU blocking the TTIP deal.

[Spectral]

EU is not = Europe though. What random europeans do in their life has nothing to do with the EU blocking the TTIP deal.

I didn't think the thread was narrowly focused on trade deals. Did I miss something?

[Khelek]

Unless that protein is poisonous of course...

A great many venomous compounds are in fact digestible. It's getting to the stomach that is the problem. As for poisons, why would you splice them into a food crop?

[hydrium]

If there was a market for GMOs then GMOs would sell, people do not want them therefor they do not sell. Send that shit to Africa and let them eat it, I'll stick to good old fashioned crops I pulled from my garden.

[Mehrunes]

Not most, only 35.7% of adults in the USA are classified as obese. Also, funny fact. 64% of adults in the UK are classified as obese, so how do you account for that with their anti-GMO policies?

64% of UK adults are classified as overweight or obese. Not just obese. You're comparing apples and oranges.

[Krille]

I didn't think the thread was narrowly focused on trade deals. Did I miss something?

I was under the impression that the OP was about EU blocking TTIP. And the attitude towards GMO in EU legislation.

- - - Updated - - -

64% of UK adults are classified as overweight or obese. Not just obese. You're comparing apples and oranges.

A statistic that the US are above 70% in. I've had friends traveling the US being absolutely shocked at how fat people are on average.

[AlphaOut]

Yeah, i will remain opposed to food that you aren´t allowed to grow freely because it´s copyrighted by a multinational company.

It´s safe to eat, sure, but is it safe to grow? Will they displace normal crops? ... and so on.

In some ways, yes. GMOs vary, however. I just want someone to explain to me why certain companies produce sterile crops and how it's beneficial in any way. In other words, the seeds in whatever produce you buy won't sprout. That's nonsense. I understand the idea behind the methods to create crops that are more durable to heat or cold, or just yield more. But it makes no sense to sit in a lab and say, "yes, let's make our crops sterile for the good of the people." But that's completely contradictive to ending hunger. So the whole GMO is a good thing for us is a bit crazy to me.

[AlphaOut]

FALSE. Organic produce has to be tested, proven and labeled USDA organic in order to be sold it is NOT optional.

If I recall correctly produce has to be 94% organic for the label. However, many farmers opt out of using the label because it's expensive to get

[Sargerasraider]

I'm pretty sure I know what it means, I think you just want to wiggle around and find some way past the resolute No, and my support of it.

Again, there's no intrinsic right that US multinationals have to the European food supply or markets. They were free to negotiate for it, Europe said No. That's all that needs to be said, and saying no and continuing to say No isn't authoritarian when you are able to clearly identify things you have a choice to accept and then flatly refuse to accept.

Without government intervention, those products would come to market and compete with other products on the market.

European governments (with popular support), overtly use their authority to ban those products from coming to market. This removes the ability of those who may choose to purchase these products to do so.

Again, governments can do this and it may have popular support. It is still authoritarian.

FALSE. Organic produce has to be tested, proven and labeled USDA organic in order to be sold it is NOT optional.

Um. Organic labeling is completely voluntary. There is no mandatory government label (nor should there be) for "Not Organically Grown"

[Damajin]

Without government intervention, those products would come to market and compete with other products on the market.

European governments (with popular support), overtly use their authority to ban those products from coming to market. This removes the ability of those who may choose to purchase these products to do so.

Again, governments can do this and it may have popular support. It is still authoritarian.



Um. Organic labeling is completely voluntary. There is no mandatory government label (nor should there be) for "Not Organically Grown"

Those products would come to market if they met European food production standards, which US multinationals are unwilling to do. Market competition is not why society exists, nor is society justified by how many products are competing against each other.

It doesn't remove the ability to purchase them at all, they can be shipped in from the US or somewhere else that sells them. They use the authority invested in them to ban those products yes, but when it's a ban that is based on the products failing to meet specific standards of quality that they as a region and individual nations set and accept, it's the farthest thing from authoritarian. That casts the US multinationals as an injured, aggrieved party somehow abused of their rights something they clearly aren't

[Khelek]

Never heard of scorpion lettuce eh? They add genes that generate toxins to act as pesticides.

Pesticides that are targeted at insects. They are perfectly edible by people. A large number plants produce these molecules naturally to dissuade insects, but are eaten by people everyday. Whether the compound in question occurs naturally in the plant or is from a spliced gene is irrelevant. Swapping them around changes nothing. There are a couple of plants, one is a tree, if I remember correctly, that will actually begin producing a substance that is toxic to herbivores, only if it is over grazed upon, which is neat, but fairly rare and has nothing to do with food crops.

[Super Kami Dende]

It's pretty much like Anti-Vaccine.

Chances are if you are Anti-GMO food, you are a moron.

[sionus]

Looks at American people. Most are fat. Don't want to be fat. Don't want your food. We're not starving.

Generalizations like this are the best way to filter out the people you should ignore completely.

[Sargerasraider]

Those products would come to market if they met European food production standards, which US multinationals are unwilling to do. Market competition is not why society exists, nor is society justified by how many products are competing against each other.

It doesn't remove the ability to purchase them at all, they can be shipped in from the US or somewhere else that sells them. They use the authority invested in them to ban those products yes, but when it's a ban that is based on the products failing to meet specific standards of quality that they as a region and individual nations set and accept, it's the farthest thing from authoritarian. That casts the US multinationals as an injured, aggrieved party somehow abused of their rights something they clearly aren't

Yes, and this is by definition authoritarian.

I'm not casting a judgment on the ban by this alone. An authoritarian regulation is not ipso facto bad or good.

A corporation is not, and has no way, of forcing you to buy a product and thus cannot act in an authoritarian way. A government refusing to allow that product to come to market -is- using its authority. Again, governments do this. They pass regulations through popular will. Please just don't try to imply that an overt ban on all GMO foods is what would happen in the absence of that regulatory authority - if all people and companies had freedom to act in their own fashion.

[Damajin]

Yes, and this is by definition authoritarian.

I'm not casting a judgment on the ban by this alone. An authoritarian regulation is not ipso facto bad or good.

A corporation is not, and has no way, of forcing you to buy a product and thus cannot act in an authoritarian way. A government refusing to allow that product to come to market -is- using its authority. Again, governments do this. They pass regulations through popular will. Please just don't try to imply that an overt ban on all GMO foods is what would happen in the absence of that regulatory authority - if all people and companies had freedom to act in their own fashion.

This is just all sorts of naïve.

Popular Will isn't the driving force behind TTIP or pro GMO legislation for Europe. Corporations using their army of lobbyists and lawyers is what is driving it and the system they're trying to setup is so authoritarian that it makes guys like Pol Pot look like amateurs. It's a complete fucking joke to suggest that Corporations aren't able to act in authoritarian ways, Obamacare by itself which was written by insurance and pharmaceutical companies showcases exactly how they're able to use the Corporatist system of merged government and business to enact authoritarian provisions, and the TTIP with its' "projected profits" tenets that'd let companies sue nations for profits they expected to get and didn't is the brand new example of it.

They pass some regulations through popular will, and this GMO ban is definitely one of them. There's no guarantee regulation is passed through popular will, half of this particular subforum would vanish if all regulations and laws were passed with popular will behind them.

[Khelek]

Ever hear of evolution? Benign poisons can evolve into more dangerous ones over time.

Do you eat or drink foods or beverages that have caffeine? The coffee plant actually produces caffeine as natural insecticide, yet people consume it constantly. There is no increased threat that the natural insecticides spliced into GMO crops will become toxic to people. In fact, the opposite is true. If a substance evolves in a crop that is problematic, that strain will be bred out by farmers and those involved in agriculture. Regardless, this possibility is the same in both natural crops and GMO crops and would be handled the same.