Cornsyrup changes how your body develops muscles.

Any evidence to back it up? or is it "gahwd its not my jb tp educat you!!!!!!2222!!!!three"

Edited 3/17/2015 02:38:53

Lol lucid nobody listens to you

°~° I retract everything I said. Take it as hollow words

If I may say something, just an observation: You guys are not debating. You are not exchanging facts. Some of you are trying to, but are dragged back down by the people that refuse to listen or take anything other than their viewpoint into consideration. The people that at first believe that I am talking about them, that's probably for a good reason. The people that see this and are instantly filled with a feeling of being "on the right side", whatever that would mean, I'm talking even more about you. Seriously. Get along, you people. If you burn me for this, you're just proving my point.

Also, GMO's aren't just confined to merely foods. They are also related to health and recovery methods, most of which when applied to humans are either banned or, rarely, only the cause of sincere ethical debate and the target of skepticism. I'm not giving my view one way or another, but have any of you any thoughts about that?

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.

This is bullshit.

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

This is off topic.

Also, GMO's aren't just confined to merely foods. They are also related to health and recovery methods, most of which when applied to humans are either banned or, rarely, only the cause of sincere ethical debate and the target of skepticism.

could you elaborate on this?

Edited 3/17/2015 13:26:58

This is bullshit.

I'll take "How to not contribute to discussions" for 500.

This is off topic.

No it isn't. People go on about how GMOs might contain bad chemicals or other substances, but don't seem to care that their non-GMO food is already covered in chemicals while being made.

I hate to double post, but just wanted to do an update on the poll results.

Only 7 votes, 4 of them in favor of actually expanding use of genetic engineering. This is odd considering almost everyone who's posted a comment has been fully against it all together.

I think your poll was a little too broad in the responses. For instance, I support the cautious expansion of GMO research but want a many generational studies done on products before consumables can be marketed. Monsanto's influence on the USA and other governments is a political problem, not a scientific one.

... I don't really understand why Montesanto = bad really factors into the GMO = good or bad thing.

1. Montesanto ISN'T the only group making GMO products. How about the Golden Rice project or the Arctic Apple?

2. If Montesanto's so evil, have 3rd parties test out their crops before releasing them to the market. We do the same for vaccines, why not for GMO's?


And as for some of the responses people have given here:

The first hyperlink Taisho posts doesn't even link to the "research" it quotes ad nausium on it's site. Seems more than a little suspicious in my opinion.

And for Taisho's 2nd/3rd hyperlink, go check out the third hyperlink Taisho posted and check out the top comment, it really rips into the validity of the study. Good quotes from it include:

"The rats used in the study seem to have a genetic predisposition for tumors. "
"There were a lot of statistical anomalies to the data."
"In fact, some of the test group, those that ate the GM foods were healthier than the controls. "
"There was no dose response study, a minimum requirement for toxicological relationships."
"The researchers did not control for the food amounts, especially considering that the rat strains were sensitive to tumors when they overeat."
"Toxicologists do a standard mathematical test, called the standard deviation, on such data to see whether the difference is what you might expect from random variation, or can be considered significant. The French team did not present these tests in their paper."

Edit:
I'll put the link here:
http://www.naturalnews.com/037249_gmo_study_cancer_tumors_organ_damage.html#comment-919449618

Edited 3/17/2015 21:06:43