Why Are We Still Shouting About GMOs?

Why is it so hard for scientists and the public to agree about the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in agriculture? Proponents argue that tweaking a crop’s DNA can increase nutritional value, pest resistance, or yield to help feed the world’s growing population. But many remain vehemently opposed to the technology. Some fear that big businesses like Monsanto will monopolize the agricultural industry by claiming intellectual property rights over GM crops. Others aren’t convinced that GMOs are safe to eat.

Philosopher of science Daniel Hicks of Western University in London, Canada, has studied how sociopolitical and ethical concerns—for example, fears about abuse of intellectual property rights—get mixed up with the technical questions about food safety in the GMO debate. His current research seeks to document how people on either side of the controversy collect and use evidence about the claim that GMOs increase crop yields. He presented a poster titled “Why is the GMO debate so intractable?” here at the annual meeting of AAAS, which publishes Science. Hicks sat down with Science to answer a few questions about the GMO debate. 

Read more (via sciencemag.org)

Who is interested to dig deeper into the issue, I suggest the special that Nature did in 2013 for the thirty years since the introduction of the first transgenic plant.

GMOs and other artificial techniques may be short-term solutions to increasing yields, but they are distorting the natural process and will eventually lead to ruin. Agriculture is heading for a wall

Check out what I found while skinning a bag of potatoes at the Fry Shop!  Does this studly spud remind you of anyone?

Maybe a certain blogger?

It’s me!  It looks just like me!

I’m sure the boys in the White House Science Lab would have you believe this agricultural abnormality is nothing to worry about, but my tater twin here is no doubt part of a plan to replace all of mankind with high carb clones!  Who could be behind such a ssssinister ssscheme?  The answer lies in all those extra s’s!  Ssssssee you next time, Weirdateers!

anonymous asked:

You're wrong about everything being GMO. There is a HUGE difference to making a plant chemically resistant to pesticides and slicing the DNA with foreign DNA from god knows where than to selectively breed it. But that's probably why you deleted the post. Congrats on spreading misinformation though.

 actually!!! no!! ur really wrong and its shitty to spew shit about things you don’t know anything about!! also i never deleted any post? what? bye

in fact no, not bye, let me break it down point by point to publicly prove your dumbassery here so people stop believing this bullshit about ~evil GMOs~~

to anyone reading this, please for gods sake continue reading if you in any way agree with this anon because you really need to be educated and no that’s not me being condescending it’s actually very important that people know this shit (the rudeness in this is directed toward the anon, not you, friend)

firstly, because this is the most hilarious, “DNA from god knows where” ????????? ???? are u literally shitting me ah yes these scientists that have spent years experimenting and figuring out exactly which genes from which plants would work best to splice with what other plants have totally just picked ~~DNA from god knows where~~ like?? lol how idiotic are you to think anyone is going to buy your BS

as for your main argument, what do u think selective breeding is????? ?? it’s called natural genetic modification. when we selectively breed, we are using intentional evolution to enhance the traits we desire, the traits that make the crops more efficient, more hardy, etc. and in doing so, we are modifying their genes – just like nature!! when plants evolve in nature, it’s genetic modification!! their genes are being modified – and are adopting genetic coding from other plants – to make them more resistant against natural selection!!! that’s what nature does!! oh no how dare we use something that occurs naturally to our advantage lol

besides that, genetic modification of crops generally has less to do resistance to pesticides (which is actually mostly untrue anyway - they generally modify them to be pest resistant, not pesticide resistant - which means using less pesticides. in fact, 95% less than those used on your precious crops that ARENT modified to be pest resistant. but you know, awful GMOs right?) and a lot more to do with creating better, more efficient, more profitable, and more enjoyable crops; ie, the corn example i used.

remember what corn used to look like before we genetically modified it??

 

image

we didn’t get it to where it is now by ~making it resistant to pesticides~ although yea that is a very slight part of it. again, not actually what happens, because it’s modified to be PEST resistant, not pesticide resistant, reducing use of pesticides greatly. but congrats on proving how completely misinformed on the subject you are, though. really, thank you for totally discrediting your entire argument so i don’t have to do any more of that.

but in case that wasn’t enough!! here’s a quick list of reasons against the whole ~~I’m gonna say GMOs are evil because I don’t understand them!!!!~~~ dealio u got goin on there:

  • 3rd world countries are now able to grow food where they were never able to before due to crops being genetically modified to be drought resistant, pest resistant, etc. like how the hell can u say something is ~bad~ when it’s literally saving millions of people from starving to death
  • in 20 years we will starve if we don’t have GMOs, and that’s a fact. the rate at which crops grow without being further genetically modified is far too slow to support out growing population, especially with loss of said crops due to pests, drought, etc  etc
  • like I’ve said twice now, the genetic modification creating crops that are more pest resistant means that these crops use 5% of the pesticides used on plants not modified to be pest resistant!! that is a 95% decrease in pesticide use!!!! because of GMOs!!!
  • seriously I cannot stress enough how important it is that this literally allows us to save the lives of people in 3rd world countries – AND without exploiting them for money! that’s a new one for us! whoa

but fucking seriously don’t be an idiotic twat about topics ur clueless on just because the internet says u should be

and if u disagree with me on this feel free to provide any published scientific evidence proving that GMOs are harmful because I guarantee you will find literally none

goodbye ignorant dudebro please stop being a twat thx

Niggas in Hollywood just do the drugs right in front of you and act like aint shit happened. Motherfuckers be gay in Hollywood when you never expect it. They be having these big mansion parties and the whole mansion is a party and its a separate party in the little rooms. You be looking in all the rooms and you look into the wrong room. Is that two niggas kissing? Shut the door. It’s time to stop believing bullshit. We too old, we too smart. We too good to believe shit that don’t make sense. You’re too old to be believing in evolution but you’re too stupid. Evolution says people came from monkeys and the question is why are there still monkeys you dumb. Money can’t solve what’s fucked up about you. They already have concentration camps in the United States of America that they’ve been building for 4 years now (FEMA) and the question is who in the f are they going to put in that. They got to hate and Jesus was perfect. They don’t give a f*ck about us. These motherfuckers don’t give a f*ck about the medicine, they’re out making their motherfucking money. They give you one medication supposed to fix up some shit and the side effect f*ck up your leg. These motherfuckers don’t give a f*ck. One month they say this is the best medicine ever, it’ll cure everything. Then three months later you hear this quiet-ass commercial Have you or one of your loved ones been killed using our medicine? Dial 1-800-OUR BAD. The USDA has approved the sale of cloned meat to the American public. We saw the movie ‘Multiplicity’ we know what cloned means, it means retarded. You’re gonna feed us the retarded-ass cloned cow meat? I though niggas was gonna ride and tear up the streets. Some of you same niggas gonna be eating the shit outta that cloned meat and talking shit this cloned meat is delicious. Some of us are against the Illuminati, and we are against the Illuminati at our own detriment. When people are against the Illuminati, then they get punched in the face all the time, the press hates them and nobody likes them. Dave Chappelle has never been a part of the Illuminati, they don’t want him or me or people like us. But now, it’s not necessarily for us to stir up that hornet’s nest, unless we intent to get stung a million times. I didn’t understand that, they had to sting me a million times. I’m still not going to join, but I respect it a little more. Illuminati want me dead, I walk around like I don’t care. Understand, even if they was gonna kill me for the shit I got to say, I don’t know why I’m still here in the first place. I know if your mouth is really really big and you like to tell the truth for a living and you like to air people out, hatred is coming your way. I didn’t know it was going to be this type of hatred, but I’m concrete in all things because of He who strengthens me. That doesn’t mean I always make the right decisions, but I’m going to stand by what I stand for. At some point you have to figure out what example are you trying to be. If it’s just gonna be you’re gonna make it and live happily ever after and go off into the sunset then that’s what that is, otherwise you’re on the frontline of this battle. And those of us who understand that understand that this is a part of what comes with it. Satan, all your people suck. Satan ain’t shit. Everything he try to do he uses it cause he ain’t shit. His people ain’t shit, nothing he likes is shit.

Vermont’s state Senate voted 26-2 Tuesday in favor of a bill that would make the Green Mountain State the first in the nation to require all genetically modified organism products have clearly denoted packaging. It will also make it illegal for food products containing GMOs to be labeled as “natural” or “all natural.” If passed, the requirements will be enforced starting in July 2016, and Vermont will join 60 countries with similar laws on the books.

According to Senate President Pro Tempore John Campbell (D-Windsor), a key supporter of the bill, “We are saying people have a right to know what’s in their food.”

But it isn’t all smooth sailing

Writing in the Journal of Animal Science, in the most comprehensive study of GMOs and food ever conducted, University of California-Davis Department of Animal Science geneticist Alison Van Eenennaam and research assistant Amy E. Young reviewed 29 years of livestock productivity and health data from both before and after the introduction of genetically engineered animal feed.
The field data represented more than 100 billion animals covering a period before 1996 when animal feed was 100% non-GMO, and after its introduction when it jumped to 90% and more. The documentation included the records of animals examined pre and post mortem, as ill cattle cannot be approved for meat.
What did they find? That GM feed is safe and nutritionally equivalent to non-GMO feed. There was no indication of any unusual trends in the health of animals since 1996 when GMO crops were first harvested. Considering the size of the dataset, it can reasonably be said that the debate over the impact of GE feed on animal health is closed: there is zero extraordinary impact.
I’m amazed how much rejection genetically modified foods are receiving from the public. It smacks of the fear factor that exists at every new emergent science, where people don’t fully understand it or don’t fully know or embrace its consequences, and so therefore reject it. What most people don’t know, but they should, is that practically every food you buy in a store — for consumption by humans — is genetically modified food. There are no wild, seedless watermelons. There’s no wild cows.
Buying seeds used to be a fairly simple matter. Farmers picked four or five varieties offered by a regional dealer, and that was that. But in the mid-1990s, biotech companies started producing seeds genetically modified with traits from other organisms. One trait made soybeans resistant to the herbicide glyphosate; another, using a protein from the soil bacterium Bt, helped corn fend off the insects rootworm and European corn borer.

Huegerich’s father eagerly embraced the new genetically modified (GMO) seeds. They cost more, but he could save money on herbicides and pesticides. His yields and profits went up, helped in part by good weather and favorable market conditions. But as revenue rose and the years passed, trouble was looming.

“Five years ago the traits worked,” says the strongly built Huegerich, who followed in his father’s footsteps and planted GMO seeds. “I didn’t have corn rootworm because of the Bt gene, and I used less pesticide. Now, the worms are adjusting, and the weeds are resistant. Mother Nature adapts.”

Staring at a future of lower corn prices and higher inputs, Huegerich decided to experiment. Two years ago, he planted 320 acres of conventional corn and 1,700 with GMO corn. To his delight, the conventional fields yielded 15 to 30 more bushels per acre than the GMO fields, with a profit margin of up to $100 more per acre. And so in 2013, he upped the ante, ordering six varieties of conventional seeds for close to 750 acres and GMOs for his remaining acres.

Hugerich Isn’t the only farmer retreating from GMO seeds. In pockets across the nation, commodity growers are becoming fed up with traits that don’t work like they used to. Not only are the seeds expensive (GMO corn can cost $150 more per bag than conventional corn), they’re also driving farmers to buy and apply more chemicals. During the growing season, Huegerich sprays both his conventional and his GMO corn twice with herbicides and twice with pesticides, despite the GMO’s theoretical resistance to rootworm. “It gives me peace of mind,” Huegerich says. Between 2001 and 2010, the consumer advocacy group Food & Water Watch reports, total on-farm herbicide use increased 26 percent as weed resistance grew. Today, 61.2 million acres of cropland, including many of Huegerich’s, are plagued by glyphosate-resistant weeds.
— 

"The Post-GMO Economy"

One mainstream farmer is returning to conventional seed, and he’s not alone

on Modern Farmer

By Elizabeth Royte on December 6, 2013

Photography by Daniel Shea

#GMOs #economics #evolution #corn
There is no scientific evidence that GMOs are harmful to health. But it does seem like even though anti-GMO groups say labeling is only about empowering customers, what regular people hear is that GMOs need to be labeled because they are dangerous to eat. According to an ABC News poll conducted last year, 52 percent of people believe GMOs are unsafe, 13 percent are unsure, and just over a third believe they’re safe to eat. Nearly everyone in the same poll—93 percent—said they supported GMO food labeling, and most of those people said that if they knew which foods contained GMOs, they would be less likely to buy them.