A Black Falcon Wrote:So it's new and not totally understood... so we should just believe Monsanto and let whatever get into the food supply, even though it's as you say not entirely understood? The first and second halves of your last sentence make little sense together. Going from taking a very long time to slowly turn one plant into something else, to doing that in a matter of months, is a huge change.
Of course not. But a label stating that GMOs are in a product teaches the consumer nothing about the effects of genetic modification. It explains nothing. It just scares people into thinking that they'll grow extra arms if they eat Lance crackers. And of course, consumers don't want to read an explanation on the side of their food containers, or wouldn't even if it was there. So what's the actual good being done here? What's the point of awareness without any actual effort made to introduce understanding?
This isn't just a peeve, either. If people become terrified of GMOs like this, it could seriously disrupt the field and many potential benefits may be lost.
GMO labeling is just a real life version of the dihydrogen monoxide meme. People fall for it all the time because dihydrogen monoxide sounds like some flesh-eating industrial chemical and they don't bother trying to learn anything about it, so they write Congress and ask for a ban on water.
Quote:But even if they are maybe safe to eat, there are other serious issues with GMOs -- as I said before any GM product which exists to make it easier to douse the thing in pesticides is horrible! It increases pesticide usage, which then moves up the food chain into us, doing harm.
Mature GMOs would be designed such that pesticides would not be necessary, the plants (in this case) would be made to repel pests on their own.
Quote:And on top of that, it ties farmers into a bad cycle of having to buy seeds from Monsanto every year, instead of just being able to use their own... bad stuff.
This is the most frustrating thing about the conversation for me. People conflate a specific corporation with the entire concept of genetically modifying food organisms. It's like calling for a ban on all restaurants just because some of them are filthy and poorly run.
Quote:http://time.com/4369809/very-hot-coffee-...-says-who/ :p (Yes, I know, not very similar. But what you said made me think of this.)
Bring on cancer then, I fucking love coffee. Besides, I smoke enough kush to never have cancer. Or so some people say.
Quote:As for wireless signals and health, I know most but not all studies show no links between cellphones and cancer. It seems like it might not be a problem, but it's still a "might". And as with anything, many studies are useless industry-funded things; those will never be reliable, of course. "Considering how many people use the things now we sure hope we won't have a big problem here in a few decades" probably sums it up?
In a couple of decades people probably won't even remember what cancer is without looking it up.
YOU CANNOT HIDE FOREVER
WE STAND AT THE DOOR
WE STAND AT THE DOOR