Posts: 3,188
Threads: 216
Joined: Sep 2007
Simple - spraying pesticides / herbicides could cause damage we do not know about
In Canada and Cali the Monarchs affected
What portion of the ecology are we killing off here with copious application of round up - and not looking into any possible consequences? fair question me thinks - may even be of benefit to farmers.
hope this helps you understand the concept I'm trying to present where did you go to school? - advanced degree in science? sounds like brigham young - grin
Posts: 526
Threads: 11
Joined: Oct 2006
I've discussed the monarch situation in a previous GMO thread:
http://www.punaweb.org/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=17194&whichpage=20
Two of the main ideas were that deforestation is taking place in monarch habitat in Mexico and U.S. farmers are planting far more acreage, due to very good market conditions and the ethanol market in particular, reducing the milkweed population in favor of corn and wheat. Herbicide application in this context is incidental. You can be sure, very sure, that if farmers didn't feel the need to use herbicides they certainly would not do so. And glyphosate, in the 30 years I have had experience with it, has been shown to be far safer than the older herbicides, such as the infamous paraquat.
Posts: 124
Threads: 10
Joined: Feb 2011
quote:
Originally posted by geochem
Now please stipulate that no one - ever - has died from consuming GM products and my life will be complete...
So we're going to compare 400,000 years of food eating history to 10 years of GMO with NO KNOWLEDGE of long term effects.
Your original statement was dumb and kneejerk -- "let's support the corporations" -- as is this one.
“Because today we live in a society in which spurious realities are manufactured by the media, by governments, by big corporations, by religious groups, political groups... So I ask, in my writing, What is real? Because unceasingly we are bombarded with pseudo-realities manufactured by very sophisticated people using very sophisticated electronic mechanisms. I do not distrust their motives; I distrust their power. They have a lot of it. And it is an astonishing power: that of creating whole universes, universes of the mind. I ought to know. I do the same thing.” — Philip K. Dick
Posts: 631
Threads: 53
Joined: Oct 2006
Re: "compelling evidence that GMOs are a health risk: In the USA there have been no long term studies that would support or deny this. Monsanto et al have not been required to do any such studies by the FDA or DOA. So it is not surprising that the statement above is technically true. However, in Europe there HAVE been studies on lab animals that show statistically significant organ damage to animals fed GMOs compared to those who ate non-GMO feed. European studies also show a correlation of disease resistence, with GM-fed rats less resistent. I read these more than a year ago and, unfortunately, no longer have the link.
Even if it were eventually shown incontrovertibly that GMOs are safe, there still are other reasons to avoid them in one's diet. For example, a spliced gene inserted into food could cause someone an allergic reaction if the gene comes from something the eater is sensitive to - can't avoid the food if it's not labelled. Also, there are religious reasons for some people, and they are being denied the right to the free practice of their religion if the failure to label prohibits their ability to choose. The argument that labelling is too costly and would increase food prices is shibai. An article in the Mon. 1/27 Star-Advertiser, about Pepsi
Co dropping "Natural" from its labels, quoted Candace Mueller-Medina, a spokesperson for PepsiCo's Quaker brand, as stating that "We constantly update our marketing and packaging.
Posts: 124
Threads: 10
Joined: Feb 2011
It is really tiresome 'DISCUSSING' topics with Sarah-Palin brained people. It's all 'cut and paste' that they got from another Sarah-Palin brained person and so on and so on back to an employee of Monsanto.
I was looking for some real science.
This is what we're up against now: Corporations and governments and a bought-off media AND posters like geochem who cheer on the brave new anti-science world that they are building.
Posts: 3,188
Threads: 216
Joined: Sep 2007
Prince was so right a number of years ago when he declared the internet dead. Even a simple topic like requiring a gmo labeling - the addition of a few lines of text or a symbol generates so much controversy
and then there are paid posters - propaganda really - if they cant win the discussion - they pay to disrupt it.
not to mention startups that use the net to give the wingnuts credibility - did any one else get the weird mass mailed paperback a while ago in the mail? ....that was some serious wing nut money.....
http://www.paidforumposting.com/content/
bottom line - it wont be the end of freedom - if responsible companies would just add "could contain gmo) on a label - save a few micro pennies and double up
"may contain peanuts and or gmo" - problem solved
thats the sentiment on the street and in 65 countries -
wild group out here "In the armpit of modern civilization" - we do not even have a decent medical facility - I dont expect there to be a large brain trust..
yet they local "experts" have the right to farm "gmo facts all" lined up - enough self delusion about that a few reactionary folks and their bought politicians want to up end democracy and trump (good topical visual as well - got hair?) the people of Hawaii and over rule the county level democratic process (read grass roots) council - what gives?
meanwhile back in reality the cereal companies removing gmo from their products - the free market is speaking very loudly
Posts: 998
Threads: 30
Joined: Feb 2012
quote:
Originally posted by Adam-I-Am
I was looking for some real science.
Does anything that doesn't agree with your opinion therefore not count as "real science"?
Me ka ha`aha`a,
Mike
Posts: 4,819
Threads: 83
Joined: Feb 2009
quote:Originally posted by Adam-I-Am
I was looking for some real science.
You can find it here :
http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/ca...rops-food/
Aloha Council Committee Members,
Fact – There is no conclusive scientific evidence that human beings have been harmed by the genetic modification of food crops.
In spite of these facts, Hawaii agriculture is being forced through a gauntlet of wild-eyed accusations. Anti-GMO leaders have threatened farmers and, in Big Island papaya fields, it appears that some may have acted on those threats. Now these same activists are demanding that Maui County require farmers to submit reams of triplicative (Federal, State, County) pesticide paperwork on pain of thousands of dollars in daily fines levied against any who fall short.
Posts: 10,066
Threads: 343
Joined: Apr 2009
Adam-I-Am,
"I was looking for some real science."
Here's a paper you might be interested in reading:
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/jf400135r
Looking forward to your criticism of the paper using "real science" arguments of course, rather than opinion or "Sarah Palin brained" arguments.
Posts: 1,930
Threads: 71
Joined: Jun 2012
quote:
Originally posted by Adam-I-Am
So we're going to compare 400,000 years of food eating history to 10 years of GMO with NO KNOWLEDGE of long term effects.
This is why reading Punaweb is so valuable. It teaches me things I never knew, like the above.
We humans have only been eating food for 400,000 years. Prior to that, we absorbed it from the atmosphere.
There does seem to be an error in the second sentence. We have been eating GMO for 40 years and if you are younger than that, a large percentage of what you have eaten was GMO and is what you are made of. Wait...
"This island Hawaii on this island Earth"
*Japanese tourist on bus through Pahoa, "Is this still America?*
