GMOs

>anons
It's not the GMO that fucks you up, it's the pesticide.

GMOs have not existed for hundreds of years, no.

The ultimate aim of the big projects from big businesses in GMO seems to be to make food more like soylent. It isn't poisonous for you, but if you want healthy you'd do a lot better growing some of your own food. I like growing heirloom varieties. You'll improve your immediate environment, have a better understanding of your relationship to food and how it comes about, and have some better food in general.

GMO is not great for farmers or the environment. I'm not against the technology in theory, but it's almost useless as is.

Some produce high amounts of insecticide within the plant tissue.

We have been genetically modifying organisms for a very long time. Do you know what corn used to look like? Or bananas? Modern bananas can't even reproduce because their seeds are too small, so every banana you eat is a clone. We did that by selective breeding, which was far more drastic than any modern gene transfers

I don't know the details of farmer but generally speaking most report losing income once they switch to GMO.

They're also hooked because after planting GMO they're legally not allowed to grow anything else because there's a high chance that they'll be a cross-pollination or some trace of the previous years crop left in their fields, at which point Monsanto can sue you for stealing their product aka the genetic material and shut down your business.

They send vans out to take samples; not only from people who try to quit, but from neighbor's of GMO farms since the seed/pollen can carry over the wind and by animals. If you want to switch off GMO, you pretty much have to left you fields lie for a year or two, which of course almost nobody can afford to do.

Lmao senpai. Do you know how plants work? The plant absorbs them and sequesters them in the tissues. If a crop has been sprayed, its impossible to get the chemical out.

Monsanto are is pretty much the plant Jew, take some random farmer, he will have to buy a new season of seeds each havest since they engineer there plants to not produce seeds, because of the suicide seeds farmers are constantly having to pay for new seeds, even worse for poor farmers in shitty places, if there havest fails they can't get a refund in the seeds and will most likely be up in debt

Let me say this they HAVE the seeds that can reproduce yet they just don't bother selling them since it's bad for business

I personally think that we could all have enough food if those Jewish companies simply gave the farmers the proper seeds

But nahh

And yet in most cases, non GMOs need to be sprayed more, as GMOs are often made to be unappetizing to insects. So eating non GMOs is often more chemically toxic.

This is so wrong it hurts. You realize that the sees DO NO produce fertile plants, right? They are annuals. The plants from the GMO seeds DO NO reproduce. They fruit once and that's it.

You're being fear mongered by the couple of cases of neighbor farmers stealing seeds from GMO farmers and planting them. The anti-GMO nuts thought that "hurr the wind blew them over", except for the fact that the seeds need special attention to germinate and that the dude had like an acre of the GMO seeds growing on his farm.

Okay. But that's a problem with unethical economic practices, not GMOs

...

You're retarded. That's like saying that if you mix a white person with an Asian, the difference is greater than mixing a white person with a fish. Not even equivalent.
In my opinion though, the biggest problem with GMOs is the chance of allergies. My sister has a severe allergic reaction to certain brands of strawberries because they use a particular GMO. So let's say you don't have a severe reaction, but a minor one. You probably won't know what's going on, and your health will get fucked up over time.

Wrong. Roundup ready corn is round-up ready, ie resistant so they can spray more. Others are GMO'd to produce pesticides internally, in which case you're still eating them.

Bt-corn is probably what you're thinking of. Bt-corn produces a weak pesticide that is usually destroyed in the stomach

Make that argument to the EU and try to import GMO feed. You are deliberately being a shit with that argument and if you don't know it you're retarded.

You have no idea how horizontal gene transfer works if you think it's less invasive or sophisticated than plant breeding. You are nearly right on one thing tho, selective breeding is still superior to the multi billion dollar GMO industry. Right now selectively bred crop varieties are being used in high salt marginal lands and thus combatting world hunger and famine in a big way. GMO is a solution in search of problems and hasn't managed to solve much of anything.

Again, I am not against it in theory, but as it is now it's a shitty industry that true believers like yourself want us all to praise.

GMO's are completely fine. They've been around since the 90s and there have been no recorded incidents of it causing harm

it's a vegan meme

>They've been around since the 90s and there have been no recorded incidents of it causing harm

yea, fuck having bees and an environment and shit.

It has been found that the practice causes "weeds" to become resistant to roundup themselves. This then means other farmers have to use more weedkiller.

Bt has a bunch of problems that I won't go in to.

Redpill me on Bt-corn. All of my professors have raging hard ons for GMOs

how is that related to gene splicing, retard

>vast majority of US crops are GMOs
>many specifically designed to kill insects
>"o shit senpai why are all the bees dying???"

we have to use GMOs though. there's no way we could feed ourselves without all the extra corn and shit that we throw away and send to africa

>he thinks GMOs are killing bees

that's completely anecdotal logic.

Whats your explanation, then? You do know that there is a massive bee crisis? They're all getting sick and dying of diseases, even when well kept (sort of like Americans generally).

Some beekeepers are turning to Africanized honey bees. They'll fuck your shit up but at least they don't die

>bees pollinate plants
>plants are GMO
>bees die

pure coincidence

the vast majority of a bees pollen comes from trees and other non-agricultural sources.
you obviously don't know shit

Go back to highschool and take a basic biology course.

yea nah senpai.

Fun fact: there are no honey bees in China. The communists nuked them all with pesticides. Now they have to pollinate everything by hand

And you instantly assume that it's GMOs and not the conditions of the wildlife and the spraying of herbicides to quell invasive plant species?

I know the bees are dying, but GMOs aren't to blame.

That's not how pollination works. Nor how GMO works.

pesticides =/= GMO
god, you're retarded

>tfw aced collegiate zoology and botany this year

GMOs kill animals. Thats exclusively what they are DESIGNED to do.

Bees pollinate plants. This is what happens when you nuke the bees with pesticides. You have to take a stick and dab every flower. Luckily China is overflowing with slave-tier labor

GMOs =/ pesticides you retard. And furthermore, since GMOs aren't self pollinating, why on earth would they kill their pollinator? That's not what they're designed to do. You've got no idea what you're talking about, so stop acting like you do.

in practice, pesticides do = GMOs.

>hur dduuru no coincidence herbicide and pesticide companies manufacture GMOS

No they fucking don't holy shit are you taking me for a ruse?

Think for a second if you could modify yourself to make muscle gains 100% faster would you do it? If yes then why are you such a huge selfish prick, plants also want faster gains.

>tfw aced collegiate zoology and botany this year
some backwater community college doesn't count
>GMOs kill animals. Thats exclusively what they are DESIGNED to do.
Nope. They're designed to be more resistant to herbicides

I hope you're trolling

GMO means less pesticides.

>pesticide and herbicide companies don't manufacture GMOs

Hmm...

>car company makes radios
>therefore radios are cars

This is literally your argument. Pesticides are NOT GMOs. Are you fucking stupid?

And I didn't say pesticide companies didn't make GMOs. Learn to read.

>Nope. They're designed to be more resistant to herbicides
>what is Bt-corn

Wrong!

>what is roundup-ready corn

Wrong!

And how does this translate into them killing bees, which do not eat the plant?

>I will never be this retarded
feels good

>GMOs allow you to spray more pesticides/herbicides and/or produce pesticides/herbicides interally
>b-but GMOs have nothing to do with pesticides

How much is Monsanto paying you?

Once again, I didn't say they had nothing to do with pesticides. You literally argued that pesticides = GMOs, which they don't.

How much are anti-GMO lobbys paying you?

>And how does this translate into them killing bees, which do not eat the plant?

>what is nectar and pollen
They do eat the plant.

>Bt-corn produces an insecticide
>>REEE BT CORN DOESNT HARM INSECTS

>Roundup ready corns lets you spray more roundup
>REEEE ROUNDUP READY CORN HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PESTICIDES

>he thinks GMOs kill their pollinators

Tell me, what good is a plant that can't be pollinated?

They produce it in their flesh, not their pollen you bumbling retard.

No, it's like saying if you selectively breed wolves for hundreds of years, you get a huge variety of different dogs. Giving a wolf a few fish genes is not going to have any effect that can be compared to that whatsoever. The modern banana or the pug are both so different from their natural counterparts that they are nearly indistinguishable, they might as well be an entirely human invention. But adding a few fish genes? Genes are genes. Fish genes are just genes we got from a fish, they're made up of the same things every other living thing is, they just build their body a little different. Fish genes are nothing in comparison to extensive selective breeding.

Haha it's not like the EU doesn't not like GMOs because of any scientific reason, the EU doesn't like GMOs because the people are scared of them. It's politics, not science. You might as well say that the Green Party doesn't like nuclear energy, therefore it's bad.

>Tell me, what good is a plant that can't be pollinated?

really good because the farmer has to buy more next year

>They produce it in their flesh, not their pollen you bumbling retard.

If you pump a cow full of chemicals and drink its milk, you'll ingest some of the chemicals.

>he thinks a plant can fruit without being pollinated

Holy. Fucking. Shit. You have got to be trolling.

This isn't a thread about if monsanto is bad or not, it's about if GMOs are. Yes, monsanto does shitty things, but you might as well say that people shouldn't use the internet because american ISPs have awful practices.

Thats the problem.

Decline of bees forces China's apple farmers to pollinate by hand
chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/5193-Decline-of-bees-forces-China-s-apple-farmers-to-pollinate-by-hand

pollution and climate change are the likely culprits, dipshit

i-its not real

Stop feeding the troll

You don't know history. The communist Chinese intentionally obliterated insect populations in an attempt to raise productivity. Here's the story

>BIRDS STEARING OUR CROPS, KIRR BIRDS
>BIRDS NO MORE EAT INSECT, SPRAY PESTICIDE, KILL INSECT
>NO MORE INSECT PORRINATE PRANTS, COMRADE, YOU PORRINATE BY HAND

Well, its pretty simple user, do you have anyone you know or are yourself diabetic? (type 1 or 2)

Then the Insulin you/they inject is created from genetically modified Bacterium, without them no diabetics would be alive today.

GMO is a faster more efficient way of making food, there also a lot of research into using them to cure genetic diseases.

That's a worldwide problem

Fucking bees are dissapearing off of the face of the earth. This could actually like...change the face of the world and lead to starvation and death of species.

It's being shown that wireless signals and wi-fi are the cause of it, but people are not listening to that shit.

>avoiding GMOs

GMOs are the ONLY way to feed an exponentially growing population.

Don't listen to scientifically illiterate liberals!

Right, where to begin?

Firstly it's better than some other pesticides used not long ago, but past actions should make you suspicious of present claims. Carbamyl was a popular insecticide prior to Bt, and was supposedly very safe and not really dangerous to humans. It is now known to be real bad for you. It's also what caused the Bhopal disaster (that had a lot to do with their specific route of synthesis tho). So while I have a healthy dose of suspicion about the safety profile, it's almost certainly worlds better than some of the stuff that came before it.

Bt has serious delitirious effects on local insect and soil populations. This can turn decent farming soil into infertile nothing, and this is beginning to have some effects on US agriculture. Elsewhere, such as Asia, it's common to use local insects to your advantage, such as farming fish alongside your rice. These techniques allow poor farmers to have pretty good diets. With crops that kill those insects, this kind of practice is impossible. And the results are not always obvious to the poor farmers with shitty education ahead of time.

Now while Bt is quite selective (it can depend on dose how selective it is, and how much the plant produces will vary a lot depending on growth cycle and soil conditions), this leads to new or other pests becoming more prevalent. This has often lead to more broad spectrum insecticides such as the neonicitinoids being bought and used to control what were unusual pests. These then have the effects of doing things like killing bees.

It's also important to remember that Bt insecticide is nearly always a modification on the chloroplast, so it affects pretty much the entire plant. Any leaves (which have very high concentrations) or other plant matter can go into the surrounding environment, the effects are no so easy to contain.

The only other thing I can think of is a worse nutrition profile. The more the plant puts into making the cry toxins the less goes elsewhere.

>YEAH! WE NEED MORE GMO CORN, STAT!
>FUCK ALL THIS FOOD WE THROW AWAY

Hmmm nigger

CRISPR>GMO

What we need is not to accommodate an exponentially growing population but to get rid of all non-whites (i.e 90% of the world's pop)

>want to prove GMO's are bad
>specifically select a strain of rats that are known to spontaneously develop tumors

WE VEGAN SCIENTISTS NOW

and the rest of you fucks, don't you find it ironic that they use CORN of all things in that picture? Corn, in it's 'organic' state, is also called indian corn, and it's completely inedible. now, it's the highest caloric yield crop around, saving literal millions of people from starvation, through genetic modification and selective breeding.

BUT ITS BAD LOL

this comment hurts my head

>the EU doesn't like GMOs because the people are scared of them.
The average person doesn't care all that much, you've fallen for the "le Europeans are stupid" meme. Europe has a very different view on agriculture, to some degree you'd be correct in claiming protectionism, but frankly people are not convinced of the American food model either. The aims of each are quite different.

I actually have loads of scientific links showing that Vegans are wrong about GMO's anyone want the link dump?

Fine, maybe they aren't scared of them, I assumed they are because people in north america are scared of them. But even if they don't like them because of different views on agriculture or whatever, and even if it's completely reasonable, it's still not based on science.

do it

those who can read and understand actual science already know that.

those who can't, refuse to learn. would pretty much just be a waste.

>breed crops to produce higher yields with less resources
>not good for the environment

Stop posting

>ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20122394
>plantphysiol.org/content/155/4/1752#T1
>ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/behindtheheadlines/news/2012-09-20-claims-of-gm-foods-link-to-cancer-disputed-by-other-researchers-/
>geneticliteracyproject.org/2013/10/08/with-2000-global-studies-confirming-safety-gm-foods-among-most-analyzed-subject-in-science/?utm_source=buffer&utm_campaign=Buffer&utm_content=bufferb87bc&utm_medium=twitter#.UrmR-Bz5NvC
>academicsreview.org/reviewed-content/genetic-roulette/section-1/1-10-roundup-ready-soy-is-safe-1/
>sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691511006399
>ec.europa.eu/research/biosociety/pdf/a_decade_of_eu-funded_gmo_research.pdf
>ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2793308/
>aaas.org/news/releases/2012/1025gm_statement.shtml
>academicsreview.org/reviewed-content/genetic-roulette/section-1/1-10-roundup-ready-soy-is-safe-1/
>who.int/foodsafety/publications/biotech/20questions/en/
>cibpt.org/gabcomunicacao/21022007/artigo-animalnutritionwithfeedsfromgmplants2005.pdf
>cattlenetwork.net/docs/forum/gmo_forum/Studies on feeds from genetically Anim Feed Sci a Techn.pdf
>agbioworld.org/biotech-info/articles/biotech-art/peer-reviewed-pubs.html
>nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10977#toc
>anrcatalog.ucdavis.edu/pdf/8180.pdf
>blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2011/08/11/genetically-engineered-crops/

The world's population is not growing exponentially. Vast majority of the world now is having 2.4 children or less. The last place where we're likely to see a large population growth is Africa and that'll probably occur alongside their agriculture becoming more productive and a gradual decline in birth rates like everywhere else.

You've fallen into the is ought.. in fact you haven't even that. You like GMOs because it tickles your tech fetishism, probably like you think the internet is the most important thing to happen to mankind and so on. The EU does very well without any need of GMOs, and the food and drink are better and often cheaper than in the US.

all the fearmongering bullshit around GMO's is fearmongering bullshit - i don't support the modifications that essentially makes them their own biocide (even though that wouldn't have an effect on humans) but still, GMO's are just crops that have a better chance of survival ie. crops with deeper roots to get better access to groundwater

>A survey of publications describing comparisons between the intrinsic qualities of GM and non-GM reference crop lines (comparing genomes, proteomes, and metabolomes of the plants themselves, not the plants' effects on an organism eating them) indicates that transgenic modification of crops has less impact on gene expression or on protein and metabolite levels than the variability generated by conventional breeding
>plantphysiol.org/content/155/4/1752#T1
regarding the rats:
>ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7817120
>ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7659952
>ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7659953
>cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/33/11/2768
>cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/33/11/2768.full.pdf
>forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2012/09/20/monsantos-gm-corn-and-cancer-in-rats-real-scientists-deeply-unimpressed-politics-not-science-perhaps/
>reuters.com/article/2012/09/19/us-gmcrops-safety-idUSBRE88I0L020120919
>bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-19654825
>weedcontrolfreaks.com/2012/09/why-i-think-the-seralini-gm-feeding-trial-is-bogus/
>michaelgrayer.posterous.com/in-which-i-blow-a-gasket-and-get-very-uppity
>efsa.europa.eu/de/efsajournal/doc/753.pdf
>npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/09/19/161424735/as-scientists-question-new-rat-study-gmo-debate-rages-on
>petmd.com/exotic/conditions/cancer/c_ex_rt_cancers_tumors#.UXv_aBw0Tt4
>cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/33/11/2768
>cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/33/11/2768.full.pdf
[Food safety of GMOs]. [J Soc Biol. 2009] -

In this context it is extremely different. If you take something and selectively breed out the traits you don't want, it is still 100% that organism. For instance, a pug, even though it looks different from its ancestor, is still 100% dog. It isn't now a different species, it has no genetic material linking it to members of another kingdom. If you took the Same pug and implanted mushroom DNA (not that they do that, or that it's possible) it is no longer 100% dog. It has genetic code from another kingdom. Selective breeding is guided evolution, as in it could happen naturally(not that it would). GMOs could never exist without human intervention, and are contrary to the laws of nature.

I can't understand how any guy could be into cara. Just look at that.

>try to make that argument to the EU

The EU is stupid as fuck

read

"A survey of publications describing comparisons between the intrinsic qualities of GM and non-GM reference crop lines (comparing genomes, proteomes, and metabolomes of the plants themselves, not the plants' effects on an organism eating them) indicates that transgenic modification of crops has less impact on gene expression or on protein and metabolite levels than the variability generated by conventional breeding"

>plantphysiol.org/content/155/4/1752#T1

Nature =/= good, you're using naturalistic fallacy, like a retard.

Yeah, they're not having food shortages, and their food is better. But the quality is a cultural thing, their food is prepared better, it is fresher, etc. But the rest of the world can't be fed based on how good european food is, the rest of the world needs other solutions.

>cara
>appeal to nature

>They're also hooked because after planting GMO they're legally not allowed to grow anything else because there's a high chance that they'll be a cross-pollination or some trace of the previous years crop left in their fields, at which point Monsanto can sue you for stealing their product aka the genetic material and shut down your business.
>They send vans out to take samples; not only from people who try to quit, but from neighbor's of GMO farms since the seed/pollen can carry over the wind and by animals. If you want to switch off GMO, you pretty much have to left you fields lie for a year or two, which of course almost nobody can afford to do.

That's a fucking lie

Provide a citation of this happening

They are resource intensive tho. Yield might be better in some cases but I can't think of a single crop where this is the case. Maybe corn? But then corn got fucked over on several fronts. Soy also has some issues. Over the long term I would think yield has declined, but GM corn is incredibly boring and never produces anything good. GM soy has had serious problems in S America.

Neither best traditional companion cropping either.

>he thinks that human "good" is more important than nature
You should look into nihilism, it might make your world view a little bit more realistic.

Absolutely true

fuck you

M8

>GMOs could never exist without human intervention, and are contrary to the laws of nature.

List off things contrary to nature that would not have existed without humans

-Cars
-Computers
-Selective breeding
-Houses,
-Internet
etc.......

Cancer is natural, death is natural, rape is natural, humans are natural, hence everything we make is part of nature.

really, get off your unnatural computer and fuck off.

Am I the only one who thinks that she looks like a dude?

she has kind of grown on me, i quite like her now whereas i didn't before.

she has a huge mouth, which I think is part of it. She definitely looks really weird, but is still really attractive.