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

[Sargerasraider]

Bullshit. We label food as "Kosher" or "Halal", we label what country a product is made in, and we label what farm the food comes from (in sensible countries anyway). There is NO reason whatsoever not to label GMO food, especially as it has proven drawbacks that people may want to avoid. Neo-liberalists always go on and on about market forces and how the consumer has the power, but the moment the consumers want to use that power? Oh no, you don't get to do that, we'll refuse to label our products!

Like I said, if anyone is fearmongering, it is those who oppose labelling. Let people decide for themselves, or are you afraid that they won't want this crap? Well, if so, that is their RIGHT.

Kosher and halal labeling is voluntary, right?

[Osmeric]

Kosher and halal labeling is voluntary, right?

Certainly in the US it is, by constitutional constraint.

[Sargerasraider]

Certainly in the US it is, by constitutional constraint.

Exactly. We have voluntary labels for things like organic, Kosher, halal, gmo free, etc. This allows people who care about these things for whatever reason to seek out or ignore those products to their liking. We should not encourage legislation of pseudoscience.

[Zecora]

I'm fuckin' glad I don't live in the US, where you are constantly at the mercy of whether corporations want to tell you anything or not. You're welcome to it, I know you like it, but keep that chlorine-washed GMO chickenshit to yourself.

[JohnBrown1917]

Why is it so hard for Americans to accept that some Europeans don't want even more corporate influence?

[Sargerasraider]

Why is it so hard for Americans to accept that some Europeans don't want even more corporate influence?

You can do what you like, obviously, but when your reasoning consists of either refuted nonsense or general scaremongering, don't be surprised you get called out.

[JohnBrown1917]

You can do what you like, obviously, but when your reasoning consists of either refuted nonsense or general scaremongering, don't be surprised you get called out.

Being against more patented crops is scaremongering? lolwut. Sorry that I do not buy the American corporate propaganda.
Just really getting sick of the US trying to force shit on us.

[Sargerasraider]

Being against more patented crops is scaremongering? lolwut.

Being against protection of intellectual property is ridiculous.

[JohnBrown1917]

Being against protection of intellectual property is ridiculous.

I really don't care, being be-able to patent crops only benefit the rich. Like how recently broccoli with a longer stem was patented.
But thankfully, American opinions are irrelevant to this, its about what those living in euro countries want. If a country wants to protect its farmers from the American big corps, well tough shit to you guys.


Nothing against patents, but not on crops. Not here atleast. Other countries are free to decide that for themselves.

[Deleted]

This is getting pretty pathetic. You keep shifting the goalposts because people keep pointing out that you're wrong.

No, you are just some zealous person who can't read something, i'm not wrong, i've stated it before that as well, there is biology, and there is biology. And none of these "experts" have anything to do with the fields that concern this. But you just go on and keep defending some multinational because some physicist with a prize told you it's all okay.

[Sargerasraider]

I really don't care, being be-able to patent crops only benefit the rich. Like how recently broccoli with a longer stem was patented.
But thankfully, American opinions are irrelevant to this, its about what those living in euro countries want. If a country wants to protect its farmers from the American big corps, well tough shit to you guys.


Nothing against patents, but not on crops. Not here atleast. Other countries are free to decide that for themselves.

I'm not sure where you think technological innovation in biosciences will come from, but sure, live in your fantasy world.

[Goatfish]

Bullshit. We label food as "Kosher" or "Halal", we label what country a product is made in, and we label what farm the food comes from (in sensible countries anyway). There is NO reason whatsoever not to label GMO food, especially as it has proven drawbacks that people may want to avoid. Neo-liberalists always go on and on about market forces and how the consumer has the power, but the moment the consumers want to use that power? Oh no, you don't get to do that, we'll refuse to label our products!

Like I said, if anyone is fearmongering, it is those who oppose labelling. Let people decide for themselves, or are you afraid that they won't want this crap? Well, if so, that is their RIGHT.

Well, how about battling so that all food that is Non-gmo is forcibly labeled then? Why is one way correct and the other way unacceptable? Should we label all food that wasn't grown in china? Have background sheets showing where every cow came from and its geneology? Make sure that animal didn't come from a line of cows that lived somewhere I don't like!

It's all bullshit, and people like you fighting for this sort of thing are the same people who yell at the common workforce who has nothing to do with this just because their bread was in a batard style loaf instead of a round loaf. Or that we don't carry the exact certain strain of organic free-range Kale they want to have.

[Garnier Fructis]

No, you are just some zealous person who can't read something, i'm not wrong, i've stated it before that as well, there is biology, and there is biology. And none of these "experts" have anything to do with the fields that concern this. But you just go on and keep defending some multinational because some physicist with a prize told you it's all okay.

No, I'm pointing out that you keep redefining the relevant field to be more and more specific sub fields of biology because you just can't admit that you were wrong when you said that the list was a bunch of physicists who don't know biology.

And let's be honest here. Even if all the signatories were scientists that worked specifically on GMO's, you would be questioning their trustworthiness instead of their knowledge. I've seen it enough times on this forum to know how this game is played.




And once more for good measure:

i'm not wrong

So a bunch of people who have absolutely nothing to do with biology what so ever, write a letter saying that people should stop "bashing" these "miracle" foods. Then there are some people here screaming "anti science" for not believing a bunch of physicists who are talking about shit that is so far outside of their chosen field that the opinion of a common biology teacher has more merit on the subject. And no, knowing what the scientific method means doesn't qualify them for this, my 12 year old niece also knows what the scientific method entails, better let her sign the paper too right..

Most of them have a lot to do with biology. This is what I meant about shifting goalposts.

[Varitok]

If the EU wanted GMO it would use it themselves, I as a consumer do not want it.

Why? Are you going to deny scientific fact? Its better for crops and resistant to bugs.

[JohnBrown1917]

Why? Are you going to deny scientific fact? Its better for crops and resistant to bugs.

This thread is filled with them.

[Varitok]

This thread is filled with them.

Its reminding me of the vaccine causing autism thing.

[JohnBrown1917]

Its reminding me of the vaccine causing autism thing.

No, actual valid reasons, its not all related to science, but economic reasons instead.

[Varitok]

No, actual valid reasons, its not all related to science, but economic reasons instead.

Oh patents is the only fear? GMO's will be an economic boon when it comes to blights and insect infestations. I know its just the ingrained fear of GMOs that has been going on in Europe/UK for years. To say GMO's are economically worse is absurd.

[Krille]

Both countries classify obese the same way. Someone with a BMI of 30 or more is considered obese. So the fat in your country (assuming you're from the UK) is considered fat in mine as well. Any other lies or misinformation you wanna propagate?

I'm Swedish. We've got about 10% obesity here. Also i said fat, which can be overweight as well. Doesn't have to be fullblown obesity. And America is filled with regularly fat people (overweight people). Like 2/3 of the country is fat.

[Deleted]

No, I'm pointing out that you keep redefining the relevant field to be more and more specific sub fields of biology because you just can't admit that you were wrong when you said that the list was a bunch of physicists who don't know biology.

And let's be honest here. Even if all the signatories were scientists that worked specifically on GMO's, you would be questioning their trustworthiness instead of their knowledge. I've seen it enough times on this forum to know how this game is played.




And once more for good measure:



Most of them have a lot to do with biology. This is what I meant about shifting goalposts.

Changing the goal post.. Right, as if a micro biologist has anything to do with the concerns raised by GMO. It is not their field of expertise, so no, they have nothing to do with this kind of biology what so ever. As i have said 3 times now, there is biology and there is biology, you can be a great microbiologist, but that doesn't mean that you know anything with soil degradation or invasive species. That is not even counting the implications on economic side that others have put out there. Point remains the same, people talking outside of their fields that claim to be experts.

It isn't about their trustworthiness, it is about the simple fact that it is simply not their field of expertise, and that makes their opinion, because that is what it is, rather meaningless. Just because some guy that won a prize says something is fine isn't exactly scientific, specially if these people are just as clueless as you average biology teacher.