There seems to be a lot of fear and hatred for GMOs and their creators out there. I'm just wondering where this stems from. I think GMOs are a great thing, not only can we use the process to get more food we can also create crops that resist pests and disease without adding unhealthy chemicals. Genetics is one of nature's most powerful forces, and the potential for advancement in this field is endless. But it's being held back for reasons I don't understand.

Secondly, why are GMOs most often opposed by liberals? The left wing typically supports science more than the more traditional conservatives. Yet in the case of GMOs it's usually leftists that are blocking it more than those on the right. (Best example of this is the extremely liberal European Union being anti-GMO while the more conservative United States is mostly supportive of it)

So what are your thoughts on the above?

Also, have a poll: http://vote.pollcode.com/43482758

Great topic! I've done fairly little research on the subject, but my impression is that intelligent, educated people who are against GMOs do not think they are INHERENTLY dangerous, they are just concerned that large secretive corporations may produce dangerous products with damaging long-term affects for the sake of short term profits. As you said genetics is (are?) one of nature's most powerful forces, and like all powerful forces we should exercise caution when we attempt to harness them for the benefit of humanity.

By selective breeding humans have been "genetically modifying" plants and animals for centuries. The difference now is that we have the ability to cause much greater changes, and much more rapidly. This is cause for concern.

As we struggle to feed a growing population, there is a danger that humans will rely too much on a few key crops. The danger of such a monoculture is that a single problem could damage a large percentage of human crops, and the resulting food shortage could cause billions to starve. This is cause for concern.

This is an exciting technology, and if we are cautious and equitable we could really start to take an active roll in shaping the evolution of life on this planet. With any new technology there are risks, and those who do not understand the technology will fear it. This fear of the unknown is compounded by the very real risks, so fighting public perception may be as important as fighting corporate profiteering if we want to safely and ethically modify the genes of our food sources.

First of all if you dont know the cons, you could start with a web research. There are thousands of articles about that topic.

not only can we use the process to get more food we can also create crops that resist pests and disease without adding unhealthy chemicals.

The first state is naiv and the second is simply wrong. Industry implements GMOs to increase there harvest and by that there profits. GMOs dont resist pest and diseases. Where have you heard that? In the contrary, GMOs are sometimes created to resist specific herbicidals, pesticidals or what ever. So they are delivered in a package and combined used with a massive amount of poison. As a result, there are already super resistent vermins, specifically in america. Furthermore there are GMOs, that are unable to reproduce theirselfes. So farmers have to buy new seets every year and become addicted to the seller.
The whole GMO is only good for one thing: increasing profits of corrupt companies.

Edited 3/16/2015 15:11:46

First of all if you dont know the cons, you could start with a web research. There are thousands of articles about that topic.

There are thousands of more debunking many of the made up cons and supporting GMOs. Most of the cons are limited to corporate greed and corruption, but it's not GMOs themselves that are the problem.

Industry implements GMOs to increase there harvest and by that there profits

So harvests are increased which means more food, and the company responsible gets money. Where's the problem here?

GMOs dont resist pest and diseases. Where have you heard that?

I took an entire class on Biotechnology that focused heavily on GMOs, even got a tour of Mansanto's headquarters. For your information, they DO resist pest and diseases because they've had genes artificially placed from other species that do. It's not that hard, take genes you want from one plant and move them to another. It actually works.

The whole GMO is only good for one thing: increasing profits of corrupt companies.
Corporate corruption is a huge issue in any market. However, GMOs themselves represent huge potential and banning them outright would be hugely ignorant. Resources would be better spent fighting corporate corruption.

http://undergroundhealthreporter.com/genetically-modified-foods/#axzz3UYzjhq3g

- case of specific gene causing damage, still in use.

http://www.motherearthnews.com/natural-health/gmo-safety-zmgz13amzsto.aspx

http://www.naturalnews.com/037249_gmo_study_cancer_tumors_organ_damage.html#

- lab rats on GMOs have higher mortality rates

Listen, we don't know enough about GMOs and it's not a matter of putting one corn gene into another species of corn, nowadays we're putting fish genes in tomatoes and we really don't have enough knowledge on the impact it will have on humans over the long run. A couple of 5-10 year studies aren't enough to provide conclusive evidence.

http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer-info/cancerstats/world/incidence/

http://www.wcrf.org/int/cancer-facts-figures/worldwide-data

- looking through these will give you an idea of how cancer rates are growing percentage-wise and how the developing world seems to be suffering the most (most of the food in our diets have GMOs). Yeah, I know correlation doesn't prove causation, but with the mounting evidence, I'm inclined to be wary of the "cheap and easy" route corporations have been fulling funding for the last 2-3 decades.

Relevant to this discussion: Should companies be allowed to patent an organism if they "design" it? Is it ethical to give a group control of a particular arrangement of life?

I do not think so, but I do not believe in patents or copyrights in any case...

Don't bring ethics into this...

Is it ethical to holocaust nonhumans?

Edited 3/16/2015 16:29:43

For our survival it is ahahwhhajajajajajanana



Jk

... even got a tour of Mansanto's [sic] headquarters.

Now we know where this is coming from. You are an antilope that took a tour to the lion's den and the lion claimed he is not out to eat you.

Mosanto represents everything that is wrong with the USA. A company so powerful that it passed a bill that only serves its interests. It's a morally bankrupt inhumane company, that is only not criminal because it uses its influence to make its own laws. It bribes, it disinformes and it kills.

Mosanto started as a chemical company, producing toxic chemicals, killing people in the thousands. Then it found GMO as a new playing ground and in the beginning GMO crops only served one purpose, to sell more of the chemicals they produce. They modify the crops in that way that they are able to withstand more of their own chemicals. If you buy Monsanto crop, you have to buy their chemicals as well.
Later they found out, that if they make their crops infertile, they can sell the seed again and again, making them even richer and forcing the farmers more and more into dependency. Farmers now cant use their own crops for the next springs seed, they have to buy it from mosanto again.

It's one of the most evil corporations on earth and if the people manage to win the war of power and survival against the mega-corporations they will be the first to put to trial.

Mosanto started as a chemical company, producing toxic chemicals, killing people in the thousands.

I'd like some heavy proof for that. It's hard for me to believe a company that "killed people in the thousands" would still be in operation.

I'll admit that Monsanto has done a lot of unfair legal shenangains and has taken up some unfair business practice. They're also greedy, however, they aren't any worse than other corporations in the world.

Also, we've seemed to have gotten off topic. This thread is not about Mansanto, it's about GMOs. Just GMOs in general, not evil corporations that you think are trying to kill you. So let's ignore companies from here on and just discuss the process of genetic engineering itself.

Edit: Myhand is an example of my second point. Why do liberals oppose GMOs so much? Usually leftists support scientific endeavors.

Edited 3/16/2015 20:08:23

I'd like some heavy proof for that. It's hard for me to believe a company that "killed people in the thousands" would still be in operation.

Are you to inept to google that for yourself, or didnt they tell you that when they gave you their company whitewash tour at their headquaters?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=agent+orange

I'll admit that Monsanto has done a lot of unfair legal shenangains and has taken up some unfair business practice. They're also greedy, however, they aren't any worse than other corporations in the world

haha. That's an understatement. And yes, they are by far worse than many, even bad companies out there.

Also, we've seemed to have gotten off topic. This thread is not about Mansanto, it's about GMOs. Just GMOs in general, not evil corporations that you think are trying to kill you. So let's ignore companies from here on and just discuss the process of genetic engineering itself.

We are exactly on topic. You believe Mosanto propaganda that GMO is some miracle wonder invention to feed the world. I challenge exactly this wrong assumption. GMO exists primarily to increase profits, promote the sales of chemicals and monopolize the agriculture industry.

Myhand is an example of my second point. Why do liberals oppose GMOs so much? Usually leftists support scientific endeavors.

I am there to promote reason. I support any endavours that promote humanity, not scientific endeavours per se. You can have perfect scientific endeavours harming humanity, such a conducted by Mengele in Nazi Germany during WW2. Much of the knowledge on the limits of the human body are made by Mengele. Scientific maybe, but immoral and inhumane and unnecessary.

You on the other hand are a perfect example on what happens if you believe corporate propaganda. I wont even label you "right wing", "conservative" or the like. You are just naive and lazy and arrogant enough to believe you don't have to do research on your own.

Usually leftists support scientific endeavors.


Republicans belive in science to.

For your information, they DO resist pest and diseases because they've had genes artificially placed from other species that do.

That is still no proof or source. But I have to admit, that this is the first time I heard about it. If this is true, GMOs are even worse.

So harvests are increased which means more food, and the company responsible gets money. Where's the problem here?

In times of abundance, more food is the least we need. I dont want to speculate about the intentions of monsanto. It is criminal to produce toxic food.

Up to 50% of males and 70% of females suffered premature death.

• Rats that drank trace amounts of Roundup (at levels legally allowed in the water supply) had a 200% to 300% increase in large tumors.

• Rats fed GM corn and traces of Roundup suffered severe organ damage including liver damage and kidney damage.

• The study fed these rats NK603, the Monsanto variety of GM corn that's grown across North America and widely fed to animals and humans. This is the same corn that's in your corn-based breakfast cereal, corn tortillas and corn snack chips.

[quote by Natural News, Mike Adams, posted by Taisho]

Those rats had a delicious last meal if that corn is the same as the corn in my cornflakes.

GMOs are fine, but you know what's even more stupid? The anti vaccination movement. Like, thimerosal DOESNT HURT YOU IN TWELVE DOSES, let alone one. Oh and about that study that says vaccinations cause autism? The results were faked, and the guy who faked it was fired and imprisoned

First off Myhand, Agent Orange may have been developed by Monsanto but it was used by the military for military purposes. By your logic Boeing and Lockheed Martin are a huge axis of evil because they've helped make military aircraft for the U.S air force.

You on the other hand are a perfect example on what happens if you believe corporate propaganda

They've very typical of you Myhand. You think that anyone who disagrees with you is just brainwashed by propaganda.

You are just naive and lazy and arrogant enough to believe you don't have to do research on your own.

For your information I've done plenty of research. I took an entire class on this and had to write multiple research papers on the subject of GMOs. (I wouldn't of passed said papers without doing research, unless now you're going to say that the evil all-powerful Monsanto owns the education system as well)

Also, that's three insults isn't it? I do love a refreshing serving of ad hominem, may I have another?

GMO gives tumers and crap. Should be banned for public health. As should corn syrup.

GMO gives tumers and crap. Should be banned for public health. As should corn syrup.

According to the modern media 95% of everything will give you cancer. The health craze has been good in some ways but also detrimental as it's given rise to a lot of stupid conspiracy theories.

Why is nobody worried about the crap ton of chemical pesticides and fertilizers being used on non-GMO crops?

Becurz gmo iz bd fo u

First off Myhand, Agent Orange may have been developed by Monsanto but it was used by the military for military purposes. By your logic Boeing and Lockheed Martin are a huge axis of evil because they've helped make military aircraft for the U.S air force.

Yeah? No difference between chemical weapons and conventional weapons? Seriously? Or a failed attempt of ridiculing my statement?

They've very typical of you Myhand. You think that anyone who disagrees with you is just brainwashed by propaganda.

Very typical of you to forget that you started descripting me as a typical liberal that yadda yadda ...

For your information I've done plenty of research. I took an entire class on this and had to write multiple research papers on the subject of GMOs. (I wouldn't of passed said papers without doing research, unless now you're going to say that the evil all-powerful Monsanto owns the education system as well)

You are shitting me right? What does it say about you when anyone who can look up a wikipedia article about Monsanto knows more about it than you do? You didnt even know the companys history, did you take that test at mosanto headquarters?
You are either that lazy as i said, or beyond sloppy that you miss such important facts about the subject of your "research".

Edited 3/17/2015 01:28:15