GMO debate general

So the less organic farming we have, the longer people will live? I got it.

Diet was the only determining factor for life expectancy back in the 17th century, sure.

>you cannot delete a post this old
Eh.

Pretend that post was deleted.

>Unfortunately, a lot of the common GMO options taste worst than organic alternatives (don't bother calling it a placebo or confirmation bias or any other stupid shit).
I don't know what you're talking about. I buy both and they taste the same to me. Its the same shit.
Maybe some non-GMO options are high-quality for other reasons or maybe non-GMOs really are held to higher standard in some ways, but I'll at least say they are not future proof and once people start accepting that, GMOs will become better quality.

Actual OP here.
Because its inevitable. The Kurzgesagt video outlined a lot of this, but GMOs are forward progress because they allow us to produce more food and have more control over the food we produce.
GMOs are only a faster means of what we've already been doing; breeding.
In time, GMOs will be advanced enough that it will be unlikely for sensible people to really argue against them a lot.
They will solve a lot of problems.

And in time, even the people who find that GMOs taste worse than organic (I'm not going to try to argue about the actual taste of what's currently available) will convert as we start to get more and more control over what we make; GMOs will eventually be very clearly superior in every respect to organic as we will simply have more options and more ways to control the taste of a food.
Plus, there is nothing wrong with any GMO food we have now, its just cheaper and easier to produce.

Wanna add to this I think a possible reason organic *might* be a better choice in some respects is because the ridiculous price they charge for them allows for some leeway.

I'm talking about experience. I'm talking about having used common ingredients both marked and not marked organic and using this as a basis for making a claim.

If I had to come up with an explanation, it's that smaller organic growers put a lot more effort into the taste of their final product than large companies do with theirs.

I try to buy local in order to reduce carbon foorprint, which I imagine means that I often buy my organic options from farmers running smaller operations. If I bought from larger organic farms, I doubt I would find much correlation between the difference in taste of the GMO and organic options. But ultimately, large producers are making poducts for the mass market, and most people (in America at least) don't know how a vegetable is supposed to taste.

Why do you format your posts like this?
Its fucking stupid.
Either use paragraphs or don't.
You use ellipsis too much...
Kill yourself.
Retard.

>kill yourself retard
>I personally dislike your habitual post format
I'm glad you are bringing up such important points in this discussion.

Back to r3ddit faggot

You do realize that every dollar you spend on these "smaller organic growers" is a dollar spent on a company bent on inhibiting progress that could help all of humanity simply because you think a particular brand of tomato tastes nice? You're thinking shallowly.
Just because a farm is small and local does not inherently mean they are any less selfish than a bigger corporation. Moreover, you're making it harder for small GMO farms to be a thing.

Again an excellent point.

>Big corporations should run all food production. It's more efficient that way and I literally don't see any downsides. Science, bitches!

I didn't say that. I said, or what I meant to say at any rate, is that just because a farm is small and local does not automatically mean you need to buy from them.
It is actually possible to farm GMO crops on a smaller scale, especially since they can't do that whole terminator seed thing any more.

I think in fact there are some examples of non-organic labelled local food around here, come to think of it.
I believe I've seen ones that only advertise that they are local. I'll have to check that out later.

I'm all for GMO. But when companies breed plants that only stay fertile for one generation I draw the line. If this ever becomes the standard and society collapses, humanity is royally fucked.

>petrochemical garbage
>quantity over quality
>billions more africans
Norman Borlaug was the worst human to ever live. And corporations may be efficient, but efficiency isn't always desirable at the expense of other factors. Your Roundup shit is killing bees. Do you really want to live in a cyberpunk dystopia where farmers have to buy pollinator drones? Fuck you.

Unnatural niggers will be our downfall.

>corporations may be efficient, but efficiency isn't always desirable at the expense of other factors
Irrelevant. We are not discussing the efficiency of corporations, we are discussing the efficiency of GMO crops and this isn't a simple quantity over quality discussion. Its much broader than that. GMOs can have better quality than regular crops AND be produced easier.
>Your Roundup shit is killing bees
I'm sorry, remind me again whose side you are on and whether or not you actually watched the video where he explains that pesticides are a bigger problem for non-GMO crops? If you don't want Roundup, maybe you should stop overpaying for organic.
>Do you really want to live in a cyberpunk dystopia where farmers have to buy pollinator drones?
No. No one wants that. But GMOs do not inherently lead to that. We need to focus on stopping things specifically like that from happening instead of arguing about whether GMOs are good or bad. It is by far not impossible to create GMOs that are capable of reproduction and the public has already made progress in that regard by not allowing terminator seeds to become a thing. We can see clearly what the general public thinks of that.

Once people start understanding the inevitability of GMOs, problems like crops not being able to reproduce after one generation can take the forefront of discussion.
>fuck you
Okay.

Sorry I misread pollinator drones as seeding drones. Its been a long night.

My grandpa was a large scale crop farmer in Aus. I remember when he brought up Monsanto once in a positive light...like that they had provided crops that needed less water or something like that.

Why would anyone want to be anti gmo? Your pets are gmos. Plenty of shit in your life is gmo. I am all for gmos in my food because we can't go back to nongmo times unless we want to live like peasants.

Yeah, GMOs are perfectly fine. What's wrong is this bullshit thing of having them fertile only for a certain amount of generations.

>I WANNA TALK GMO, FITE ME FAGGOTS

not even that user but it’s hard to have a conversation about GMOs without involving some degree of the corporate and political risks involved with them. im a pro-GMO guy so we’re on the same page, i agree with you on your main points that gmos are generally the future of food and are a far more efficient way to feed people, but my concern lies elsewhere rather than the typical inner city HURR DURR MUH ORGANIC.
if corporations are made up even in the slightest of people acting in self interest (and by and large they are) then there are chances that they may operate within self interest. that might seem super obvious but bear with me. operating within corporate self interest regarding gmos looks like genetically limited fertility, patented genomes, and all of the fun that comes with corporate obfuscation of what’s actually in the food. if corporate and political self interest can lead to the chance (im not trying to say anything is for certain here, mainly focusing on the odds) of having an estrogonized water supply or mushy food meant to create the general population weak and docile or media programming to sway general opinion then who’s to say those same interests might not pollute the golden cornucopia of gmos. that’s what makes me iffy about the whole thing

Don't type like that.

Yea you fuck, how dare you buy things you want, what kind of asshole actually buys things they prefer! Oh you think it tastes better? Too fucking bad idiot.

>Selective breeding is the same as genetically modifying plants in a lab to make them repel bugs and taste like sugar
I love this meme

See these? Did you know that these aren't natural? The fruit itself is man-made but beyond that, they didn't originally grow to be this large. This fruit is entirely a genetic manipulation.

By some stroke of luck though, through means I don't fully understand, a natural, wild strawberry bush started growing in my flower garden and it's still there to this day. Every summer, it pumps out a ton of very small strawberries and these berries, unlike the ones I've ever gotten from the store, have a very strong and very sweet flavor.

Always thought it was weird how strawberry flavored drinks/candies etc never tasted like actual strawberries until the day I tried the berries from my own plant.

GMO is a heavensend for the sake solving hunger crises and is absolutely a good thing for the world and agricultural economies but this comes at the sacrifice of flavor and complex sugars.

>bent on inhibiting progress
What the hell is this appeal to technology? People have lived without this shit for eons but we're supposed to embrace this technology because Africans can't farm for themselves? Next you'll be telling me all the petrochemical crap large corporations put into a simple loaf of bread is good for me too.

I don't even care about organic, but gmo makes too many assumptions about being safe for consumption.
>Let's have this plant secrete a type of insecticide
>That residue totally won't continue to secrete after harvest and definitely won't affect the fruit
>We sell seeds by the ton, please buy

And this faggot, can't tell the difference between artificial genetic modification and breeding for traits.

Those look distasteful.

>genetically modified organism
>implying we didn't breeding out of displeasing genetic traits out of things to get a better organism that functions better
Split the hair all you want. But breeding to get rid of something is genetically modifying it.

People don't trust procreation without penil and bagina

I dislike GMO because it turns food into another liscenced intellectual property.

There is already enough rent-seeking in this world without adding another layer on top of something so intimate to daily survival.

I'd be more okay with it if patent exclusivity expired within just 5 years or so.

What's stopping you from making your own GMO farm?

What's stopping you from running your own (legal) radio station?

Licensing, capital, inside connections

Hydroponics when?
Also objective answer is GMOs aren't inherently bad, but they can be used improperly, especially with monoculture practice

i watched it and i liked it

...

Why is there no Vat Meat yet? Theoretically, you could grow massive amounts of perfect meat cuts, with perfect marbling patterns. The whole inefficient, polluting meat industry would be turned on its head. No more massive fields, methane gas, or massive processing plants. Meat production would become something a layman could do, like vegetable gardening or homebrew.

It is the same thing. Just faster. In time, breeding would reap the same results. This is just more controlled.

fuck off you stupid literal retard

The problem with megacorp GMOs is the loss of genetic diversity on a scale much greater than what human domestication has ever accomplished.

It becomes easier and easier for a single virus or disease, either natural or manmade, to wipe out almost all of the world's food supply.

That's actually a really interesting concept. I imagine it's a long way off though. They don't have that much control yet.

GMOs can be used as bioweapons just like the x-files movie where the field of GMO corn was used as a vector point for the alien antidote.

gmos are tools of the international jewry to sway me from the holy cult of god emperor trump

>The problem with megacorp GMOs is the loss of genetic diversity on a scale much greater than what human domestication has ever accomplished.
Except this is just false. GMOs have not in any way contributed to loss of genetic diversity

This is wrong. If anything GMO would increase genetic diversity with clonal cultivars that are all genetically the same (hello, bananas?).

Also your logic hinges on faulty reasoning. If we're already genetically engineering the species why wouldn't we just continue to engineer it to adapt to changing circumstances?

Humans only have a few years left before the turd world wipes us out. Once the muzzies get the nuclear codes in France and the UK (15 years at most)and the rest of the white people get cleansed from the USA (30 years) GMOs won't matter to anyone

...do you eat a lot of grain corn and soybeans, user?
for the most part there aren't any GMO versions of things you'd really be able to taste. the overwhelming majority of biotech crops are used in animal feed or in processed food and I guarantee you that oreos would not be improved in flavor by use of organic soy lecithin
exceptions: most papayas are biotech, but who the fuck eats papayas, and there's a virus-resistant potato variety that your grocery store probably doesn't carry

Monsanto can suck a dick

terminator seeds are a myth. engineering for infertile offspring _could_ be done fairly easily, but there's no real point to it. allow me to explain:
most higher organisms, including plants and humans, have two sets of genes, one set each from their mother and father. when we reproduce, our maternal and paternal genes get randomly shuffled and half of them are passed on to our offspring. this randomness is considered undesirable in plant breeding, because you want all the plants in your field to grow at the same rate and be the same size (so they don't shade each other), to mature at the same time (so you can harvest them all at once), and to produce identical fruit/grain/what have you. this means that traditional crop varieties are intentionally inbred until there's no variation left within their genomes, and the offspring are identical to the parents.
this inbreeding is good for consistency, but often not great for plant vigor, since less genome diversity means fewer tools to respond to different environmental stresses. one solution to this problem that modern agriculture uses is to make hybrid crop varieties. a hybrid is a plant that has one of each parent from two different inbred strains, and for reasons beyond the scope of this shitpost, this generally leads to getting the strengths of both parent varieties with the weaknesses of neither. the one problem with hybrid crops is that while their parents are completely inbred, they are not. because of the gene shuffling I mentioned, the second-generation offspring of hybrid crops will be a random assortment of traits from each inbred grandparent and therefore useless for mechanized farming. that means that farmers using hybrid crops (which for industrial crops like soy, corn, etc. is ALL of them), buy new hybrid seed from seed producers every year _already_. for farmers to save their seed would mean hugely reduced profits, so they don't, and there's no incentive to try and force them not to

the signals that direct stem cells to become a tenderloin are outrageously complex
not only are there chemical signals acting on a submicroscopic scale that we're only beginning to understand, but a large part of what makes a muscle develop into a muscle is electrical and mechanical:
have you ever seen a person with cerebral palsy? how their muscles are twisted and deformed? there's nothing wrong with their muscles, genetically. what they lack is a nervous system that tells their muscles how to move properly, and as a result those muscles don't develop correctly.
vat-grown meat would need to be enervated, mechanically exercised, and cells often stop growing because they run into other cells, so I'm not sure how you'd replicate that
vat-grown ground beef with an odd texture: has been done, is incredibly expensive, but doable
vat-grown ribeye: 50 years away

Thanks for this post, I knew of hybrids and that farmers don't want to reuse seeds but didn't know the details behind it.

>different process doesn't lead to different results
top quality retard

You're either a 'i fucking love science' retarded brainlet or a scummy GMO shill. Either way you should just fucking kys for the good of humanity.

OP you disingenuous piece of shit faggot. Who the fuck do you think you're tricking with your fake science? Only a retarded brainlet will believe your claim that cross breeding is the same is gmo manipulation. You're human scum.

better than atrazine, cunt

I work in R&D in biotech. Can say 2 things.
1.- GMO is harmless; if anything, roundup-ready crops are a little heavier on the herbicide side, but it shouldn't harm humans.
2.- The bad side is not really health related but hear this. It FUCKS UP BADLY farmers economy and crop diversity.

>strawberry bush
Way to out yourself, my botanically-challenged brother.

>strawberries only come in one variety

strawberryplants.org/2010/05/strawberry-varieties/

what did he mean by this?

You call THAT a bush??
Plantlets will never learn.

quora.com/Do-strawberries-grow-on-vines-or-bushes

Samefagging, but yeah, forbs. Though I would have just said "strawberry plant."

I had strawberries growing up, and lived near strawberry fields. Never as large as what you posted, but also definitely not bush-like.

>Human beings cannot and do not move backwards.

ahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahaha
ahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahaha
ahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahaha
ahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahaha
ahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahaha

>I work in biotech
>GMO is harmless
>I have to tell myself this to sleep at night
>hehe they're just a little heavy on the poison heh

Don't beat yourself up OP. I'm sure next post, you're gonna hit it out of the park!

Does anyone here happen to know if the rate at which the Earth's topsoil is degrading is as worrying as articles make it sound?

>Oh no not enough food will be raised to breed billions more Africans to flood the west telling us we are raycez n sheeit

just till it with the lower dirt

lower dirt cannot replace topsoil I'm pretty sure. It's pretty different.

>I work in biotech
do you know of any job openings, user? I'm very close to getting a phd in a closely related field and I think plant biotech would be really cool to work on!

fun fact: pesticide-resistant crops enable no-till farming, because you can just nuke the weeds with chemicals before planting instead of the traditional method of mechanically plowing them under. in general, this is better from a topsoil-preservation and also carbon sequestration viewpoint

Don't link Kurzgesagt vids if you want to keep any sense of credibility. That channel is fucking embarrassing.
better science channel regarding GMOs and other stuff, despite the cringy humor:
youtube.com/watch?v=Mdkt2qemNcQ
youtube.com/watch?v=wCK7W1Nl34A

kys Monsanto shill

Which Portland? I'm an east Portlander, and I agree with you.

Extreme pollination and total domination.

>don't bother calling it a placebo or confirmation bias or any other stupid shit

That's literally what it is though.The blind tase tests are very clear on this. Everything is subjective and preconceptions change peoples interpretations but somehow YOUR psyche is infallible and YOU alone see the universe clearly?

Give me a break.

"GMOs aren't nutritio--"

I don't take anyone anti GMO seriously since they burned the betacaroten rice pads
I bet they will destroy the saltwater rice too

I mean, as long as it's corporate it's okay, or how does it work?

If GMO was just about providing healthier food grown in indoor farms I wouldn't care about it, but it's not.

Most GMO however is about putting biocides and biocide resistance into plants to allow more efficient monoculture agriculture. As anti-biotic resistance is showing, this path is a dead end.

The major crop that farmers save their seeds is wheat. There is little or no advantage to a F1 hybrid for wheat.

>2% more nutritious + cancer in 15 years
totally worth it