or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › Most cotton clothing is GENETICALLY MODIFIED... ****The Official List of GM-Free Cotton Clothing****
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Most cotton clothing is GENETICALLY MODIFIED... ****The Official List of GM-Free Cotton Clothing**** - Page 13

post #181 of 255
Kamakura has some great shirts with GMO "Xinjiang strain" cotton in them. See this thread from the MC subforum

The cotton is supposedly a genetically modified version of Haitian cotton

I have 3 oxford shirts from them and the quality is great. Very soft due to the long fibers.

Thought the pro-GMO people here would appreciate knowing this.
Quote:
cotton-staple.jpg?w=610

Here's the link for the Kamakura store: http://shop.kamakurashirts.com/index_en_usd_13.html
Quote:
goods_599_1.jpg
Quote:
post #182 of 255
Here's an excellent article published in Scientific American this year. Written by Dr. Nina Federoff, a Penn State professor and one of the leading plant sciences authorities in the US.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=can-we-trust-monsanto-with-our-food


Quote:
logo_new.jpg

Quote:
Humans began genetically modifying plants to provide food more than 10,000 years ago. For the past hundred years or so plant breeders have used radiation and chemicals to speed up the production of genetic changes. This was a genetic shotgun, producing lots of bad changes and a very, very occasional good one. That’s the best we could do until the three laureates (and their colleagues) developed molecular techniques for plant genetic modification. We can now use these methods to make precise improvements by adding just a gene (or two or a few) that codes for proteins whose function we know with precision. Yet plants modified by these techniques, the best and safest we’ve ever invented, are the only ones we now call GM. Almost everyone believes we’ve never fiddled with plant genes before, as if beefsteak tomatoes, elephant garlic and corn were somehow products of unfettered nature.

The anti-GM storm gathered in the mid-80s and swept around the world. Most early alarms about new technologies fade away as research accumulates without turning up evidence of deleterious effects. This should be happening now because Scientists have amassed more than three decades of research on GM biosafety, none of which has surfaced credible evidence that modifying plants by molecular techniques is dangerous. Instead, the anti-GM storm has intensified. Scientists have done their best to explain things, but they’re rather staid folk for the most part, constitutionally addicted to facts and figures and not terribly good at crafting emotionally gripping narratives. This puts them at a disadvantage. One scare story based on a bogus study suggesting a bad effect of eating GMOs readily trumps myriad studies that show that GM foods are just like non-GM foods.

Farmers don't have to buy Monsanto seed, nor is anyone preventing them from saving and replanting any seed they want, except for patented seed they've signed an agreement not to save and plant. Farmers buy seeds from Monsanto and other ag-biotech companies because their costs decrease and their profits increase. If they didn't, farmers wouldn't buy them again.

... If the popular mythology about farmer suicides, tumors and toxicity had an ounce of truth to it, these companies would long since have gone out of business. Instead, they’re taking more market share every year. There's a mismatch between mythology and reality. Maybe it's worth remembering that technology vilification is about as old as technology itself. What's new is electronic gossip and the proliferation of organizations that peddle such gossip for a living.
post #183 of 255
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrd617 View Post

Kamakura has some great shirts with GMO "Xinjiang strain" cotton in them. See this thread from the MC subforum

The cotton is supposedly a genetically modified version of Haitian cotton

I have 3 oxford shirts from them and the quality is great. Very soft due to the long fibers.

Thought the pro-GMO people here would appreciate knowing this.
Here's the link for the Kamakura store: http://shop.kamakurashirts.com/index_en_usd_13.html
Quote:
goods_599_1.jpg
Quote:
 

 

That's cool to know...

Thank you, this is the exact kind of responce I was hoping for.:D

post #184 of 255
This should be required viewing for the OP

Michael Specter: The Danger of Science Denial

http://www.ted.com/talks/michael_specter_the_danger_of_science_denial.html
Quote:
People wrap themselves in their beliefs, and they do it so tightly that you can't set them free. Not even the truth will set them free. And, listen, everyone's entitled to their opinion; they're even entitled to their opinion about progress. But you know what you're not entitled to? You're not entitled to your own facts. Sorry, you're not.
post #185 of 255
Thread Starter 

Do you happen to know what it was modified with? I'm very interested.

post #186 of 255
If you believe plant biotechnology is inherently dangerous, you should really read this article from Oxford Journals:

http://toxsci.oxfordjournals.org/content/71/1/2.full
Quote:
The Safety of Genetically Modified Foods Produced through Biotechnology

The available scientific evidence indicates that the potential adverse health effects arising from biotechnology-derived foods are not different in nature from those created by conventional breeding practices for plant, animal, or microbial enhancement, and are already familiar to toxicologists. It is therefore important to recognize that the food product itself, rather than the process through which it is made, should be the focus of attention in assessing safety.
post #187 of 255
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrd617 View Post

Humans began genetically modifying plants to provide food more than 10,000 years ago
 

We all love science hear, but no one likes a liar…

You really had our interest until you started to stray away from the facts and science of the whole matter…

What you are talking about is called breeding and has been done forever and is a totally different topic.

 

BTW: nobody said "inherently dangerous"

post #188 of 255
4Characters I'd like to see you respond to the bold faced parts of the articles I quoted. Hoping you can step out of your comfort zone. biggrin.gif
post #189 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by "4characters'' 

What you are talking about is called breeding and has been done forever and is a totally different topic.



BTW: nobody said "
inherently dangerous"


Umm, yes you are implying that recombinant DNA technology/introducing exogenous DNA into a plant genome is inherently dangerous. That's the premise of your thread.

If I have it correctly, your argument can be distilled to: "All GMOs are bad - let's avoid them. Don't buy GMO foods or GMO cotton clothes because they're dangerous to your health"

If you'd like to clarify your argument, please go ahead
Edited by jrd617 - 10/6/13 at 12:59am
post #190 of 255
Thread Starter 

I’d prefer to stick to the facts and science rather than editorializing the issue with assorted value judgments and propaganda…

Your logic is flawed; you are jumping to conclusions and over generalizing this thread…

post #191 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4characters View Post

I’d prefer to stick to the facts and science rather than editorializing the issue with assorted value judgments and propaganda…

Your logic is flawed; you are jumping to conclusions and over generalizing this thread…

You're not saying anything of substance here.

And I offered you a chance to clarify your argument. I would not want to overgeneralize what you're saying. Do you think all GMOs should be avoided?

If not, can you cite some peer reviewed studies on the safety of particular strains of GM cotton? You make a lot of baseless accusations about how GM cotton can cause allergic reactions to skin and kill grazing cows, etc. The only evidence you've offered is a dubious "medical examiners report" that conveniently isn't available in the hyperlink, and pictures of dead bodies that could have been taken from anywhere on the internet.

How about GM foods? Should I be worried about eating edamame made from Monsanto's Ready Roundup soybeans?
Edited by jrd617 - 10/4/13 at 10:06pm
post #192 of 255

4characters, are you currently seeking psychiatric help? Because you're exhibiting textbook psychotic denial. That and the manner in general with which you engage this forum leads me to believe that whatever's going on with you is pathological.

 

I'm not being rhetorical; I'm concerned.

post #193 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoodyear View Post

4characters, are you currently seeking psychiatric help? Because you're exhibiting textbook psychotic denial. That and the manner in general with which you engage this forum leads me to believe that whatever's going on with you is pathological.

I'm not being rhetorical; I'm concerned.
Quote:
900x900px-LL-efe3fcdf_011.jpeg900x900px-LL-efe3fcdf_011.jpeg
900x900px-LL-efe3fcdf_011.jpeg900x900px-LL-efe3fcdf_011.jpeg
post #194 of 255
#carwreck
Edited by jrd617 - 10/6/13 at 12:59am
post #195 of 255

600+ peer reviewed GM crop studies, all of which point to gm crops not being dangerous.

 

http://www.biofortified.org/genera/studies-for-genera/

 

And here's another compilation of  1700+ peer reviewed studies

 

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArhhP5QasNtsdEJfMjR4YnVoQ0tZRHBFMVd3MlhjU0E&usp=sharing#gid=0

 

/endthread

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Streetwear and Denim
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › Most cotton clothing is GENETICALLY MODIFIED... ****The Official List of GM-Free Cotton Clothing****