or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Social Life, Food & Drink, Travel › Why do people hate genetically modified food?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why do people hate genetically modified food? - Page 4

post #46 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by foodguy View Post

I am not rabidly pro-GMO, but I think it's important to recognize that the technique's use does not stop with Monsanto corporation.

I'd go further and say that it is terribly silly to be rabidly pro or anti GMO, which is a group of technologies, real and possible. If you find yourself hating something like that, it is worth questioning exactly from where you are coming. Concentrate on the uses and abuses, not on some prelapsarian golden age when all vegetables were heirlooms and a small number of people could have enough of them to survive. children frolicked in fields of fraises des bois.
post #47 of 74
http://www.goldenrice.org/
post #48 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by itsstillmatt View Post

I'd go further and say that it is terribly silly to be rabidly pro or anti GMO, which is a group of technologies, real and possible. If you find yourself hating something like that, it is worth questioning exactly from where you are coming. Concentrate on the uses and abuses, not on some prelapsarian golden age when all vegetables were heirlooms and a small number of people could have enough of them to survive. children frolicked in fields of fraises des bois.
you could replace GMO with almost any issue. problem is these days people only seem to be able to find identity in extreme positions. Yes/no on/off for/against evil/blessed
post #49 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by foodguy View Post

(...)
I think the real problem people are having with GMO is that the argument hasn't been made for how it will benefit them. growing crops that don't have to be sprayed as often is a benefit, but at a remove from most consumers. That, and the leading player has been notoriously *ssholish whenever it has had the opportunity. so any discussion becomes a referendum on monsanto rather than the merits of the technology.
(...)

Which reminds me of this

and I'm also scared that if I consume a Monsanto product that they'll have a patent on me and any of my work product. I might also become resistant to Roundup which ...probably isn't an issue.
post #50 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas View Post

I might also become resistant to Roundup which ...probably isn't an issue.
but then what would you do for deodorant?
post #51 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas View Post

Which reminds me of this

and I'm also scared that if I consume a Monsanto product that they'll have a patent on me and any of my work product. I might also become resistant to Roundup which ...probably isn't an issue.

Man, I love the South. laugh.gif The way that guy says "fat boy" cracks me up every time.
post #52 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by foodguy View Post

but then what would you do for deodorant?

line my pits with aluminum foil, I guess.
post #53 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by foodguy View Post

OK, I'll rise to the bait. There is no correlation between GMOs and increased use of pesticides, herbicides or fungicides. In fact, GMOs can reduce the amounts used because they allow more efficient and targeted spraying.

Not so if this study from Washington State is true.
Quote:



Genetically engineered, herbicide-resistant and insect-resistant crops have been remarkable commercial successes in the United States. Few independent studies have calculated their impacts on pesticide use per hectare or overall pesticide use, or taken into account the impact of rapidly spreading glyphosate-resistant weeds. A model was developed to quantify by crop and year the impacts of six major transgenic pest-management traits on pesticide use in the U.S. over the 16-year period, 1996–2011: herbicide-resistant corn, soybeans, and cotton; Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) corn targeting the European corn borer; Bt corn for corn rootworms; and Bt cotton for Lepidopteron insects.
Results

Herbicide-resistant crop technology has led to a 239 million kilogram (527 million pound) increase in herbicide use in the United States between 1996 and 2011, while Bt crops have reduced insecticide applications by 56 million kilograms (123 million pounds). Overall, pesticide use increased by an estimated 183 million kgs (404 million pounds), or about 7%.
Conclusions

Contrary to often-repeated claims that today’s genetically-engineered crops have, and are reducing pesticide use, the spread of glyphosate-resistant weeds in herbicide-resistant weed management systems has brought about substantial increases in the number and volume of herbicides applied. If new genetically engineered forms of corn and soybeans tolerant of 2,4-D are approved, the volume of 2,4-D sprayed could drive herbicide usage upward by another approximate 50%. The magnitude of increases in herbicide use on herbicide-resistant hectares has dwarfed the reduction in insecticide use on Bt crops over the past 16 years, and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

Then you have Penn State saying a year or so ago regarding the planned escalation to stronger pest and herbicides to combat resistance that "new products are "likely to increase the severity of resistant weeds." As proven alread in Nebraska: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/08/120816151812.htm When the farmers see their chemical-infused seeds NOT resisting bugs and weeds... they'll dump more chemicals on them. They already do.

Again- I'm not rabid anti-anything regarding feeding our planet, but we will never win this nuclear escalation against weed/insect resistance. Mother Nature always has the last say.


PS- as to GMO's having failed to market the benefit- I'd counter that they have no benefit to offer that is of interest to a SIGNIFICANT percentage of consumers. As Kimbrell wrote a few years ago, "Genetically modified foods do nothing for the "eating public". They provide no extra nutrition, flavor, safety or any other trait that people actually want."
post #54 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cary Grant View Post

PS- as to GMO's having failed to market the benefit- I'd counter that they have no benefit to offer that is of interest to a SIGNIFICANT percentage of consumers. As Kimbrell wrote a few years ago, "Genetically modified foods do nothing for the "eating public". They provide no extra nutrition, flavor, safety or any other trait that people actually want."

People want cheap food, which is what a lot of this comes down to.
post #55 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibonius View Post

People want cheap food, which is what a lot of this comes down to.
as matt pointed out, that is not an inconsiderable benefit.
again, though, it's complicated (that ought to be my middle name). because the vast majority (almost all) of the gmo crops grown in the us are, arguably, things we shouldn't be eating more of anyway -- corn, soy and wheat.
post #56 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by foodguy View Post

because the vast majority (almost all) of the gmo crops grown in the us are, arguably, things we shouldn't be eating more of anyway -- corn, soy and wheat.

Ding ding ding...
post #57 of 74
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cary Grant View Post

PS- as to GMO's having failed to market the benefit- I'd counter that they have no benefit to offer that is of interest to a SIGNIFICANT percentage of consumers. As Kimbrell wrote a few years ago, "Genetically modified foods do nothing for the "eating public". They provide no extra nutrition, flavor, safety or any other trait that people actually want."

Below.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huntsman View Post

Indeed. Witness Norman Borlaug. How many millions of lives were saved by dwarf wheat?
post #58 of 74
Movements to:

1) require establishments to list caloric content
2) more stringent labeling requirements on supermarket products
3) ban trans fats

The health of the vast majority would be greatly improved if they picked healthier foods from the current selection, without any modification to labeling or the removal of ingredients, (the vast majority is eating a lot of processed food and fast food) and exercised on a regular basis. I sincerely wonder how much of this is a subconscious attempt to alleviate responsibility from the individual and pretend that outside forces are somehow preventing them from leading a healthier lifestyle.
post #59 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by foodguy View Post

because the vast majority (almost all) of the gmo crops grown in the us are, arguably, things we shouldn't be eating more of anyway -- corn, soy and wheat.

What's wrong with eating corn, soy or wheat?
post #60 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by hendrix View Post

What's wrong with eating corn, soy or wheat?
there's absolutely nothing wrong with eating corn, soy or wheat. it's a matter of how much of it we eat and how much of it we eat without knowing it in processed foods. and, to start another debate, how much of that is underwritten by the government, keeping the prices of processed and fast foods artificially low.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Social Life, Food & Drink, Travel › Why do people hate genetically modified food?