User Tag List

123 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 56

  1. #1
    Freaking Ratchet Rail Tracer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,041

    Default Monsanto doesn't want you to know you eat genetically engineered food.


  2. #2
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    wait what? did i get it right that companies are trying to buy off government for not making some law get through?
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  3. #3

    Default

    I am not against genetic modification. We have been doing it for millenia. Maybe they are referring to food created through direct modifications of the genes through molecular replacement? I do not believe we can sustain the populations that are emerging without this sort of technology.

    But, then again, I don't see what the big deal is if people want to know they are eating genetically modified food. They would just see it on everything.

    Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.
    Robot Fusion
    "As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
    "[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
    "[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

  4. #4
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    13,989

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    I am not against genetic modification. We have been doing it for millenia. Maybe they are referring to food created through direct modifications of the genes through molecular replacement? I do not believe we can sustain the populations that are emerging without this sort of technology.

    But, then again, I don't see what the big deal is if people want to know they are eating genetically modified food. They would just see it on everything.
    Genetic modification can allow the feeding of 20,000,000,000 people. But that doesn't mean politics or economics will allow it, even if there was enough room on the Earth for all those people. It's just saying that, yes, this is a gigantic scientific breakthrough, from a humanistic perspective it is greater than relativity and quantum mechanics combined.
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  5. #5
    Feline Member kelric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    INtP
    Posts
    2,169

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    I am not against genetic modification. We have been doing it for millenia. Maybe they are referring to food created through direct modifications of the genes through molecular replacement? I do not believe we can sustain the populations that are emerging without this sort of technology.

    But, then again, I don't see what the big deal is if people want to know they are eating genetically modified food. They would just see it on everything.
    The really important thing isn't that people know if their food was "genetically modified" (generally taken to mean the use of molecular genetic techniques as opposed to breeding/natural hybridization to introduce new genes). The issues there, while worthy of consideration and study, probably aren't all that major. What *is* important is *what* Monsanto (and their ilk) are putting in these crops they're selling as food. Would you:

    a) be willing to eat an apple that has genes from oranges that result in a little bit of vitamin C and defray early browning?

    b) be willing to eat corn that has genes to create internal pesticide (that's right - washing your fruits won't help) so that insects won't eat it (or will get sick/die if they do) in the field, reducing costs? (and "trust us" that it kills insects but won't hurt people)?

    The problem is largely "b". Issues with "a", taking something from a commonly eaten food and putting it into another commonly eaten food, while noteworthy enough to warrant disclosure (I believe there have been issues with people who for purposes of this example are allergic to oranges get reactions from eating modified apples), aren't the really scary stuff. It's Monsanto wanting to legislate that there is no requirement to tell people what they're eating when there are legitimate concerns about what it may really be.

    After all... most people aren't going to pick up that ear of corn in the store and think "hey, I wonder if this is poisonous and may have long-term affects on my health" if the existence of a possible issue isn't raised. Hide the facts of what that ear of corn is, and people won't ask questions that Monsanto may not like to answer.

    In general... my opinion is that anyone trying to hide the truth is probably a bit shady. And Monsanto? They've *long* since lost any benefit of the doubt. It's no shocker that they've been described as the most evil corporation out there.

    That's the problem.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  6. #6
    Freaking Ratchet Rail Tracer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,041

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    I am not against genetic modification. We have been doing it for millenia. Maybe they are referring to food created through direct modifications of the genes through molecular replacement? I do not believe we can sustain the populations that are emerging without this sort of technology.

    But, then again, I don't see what the big deal is if people want to know they are eating genetically modified food. They would just see it on everything.
    That's the issue. I'm not directly against genetic modification, per se, but people do want to know if a product has been genetically modified in some way or not.

    It is like seeing the difference between enriched and fortified foods. One has lost so much of its nutrients that the company had to put outside nutrients back in while the other has added nutrients with existing nutrients that came with the contents.

    I think America is one of the few nations in the world that don't monitor these type of things.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    Genetic modification can allow the feeding of 20,000,000,000 people. But that doesn't mean politics or economics will allow it, even if there was enough room on the Earth for all those people. It's just saying that, yes, this is a gigantic scientific breakthrough, from a humanistic perspective it is greater than relativity and quantum mechanics combined.
    In a case like Monsanto, they won't even allow the farmers to keep the seeds to regrow. They would need to buy them on a yearly basis.

    I can't forget the bill, but the U.S government regulates how much food is pushed into the market to keep all farm prices on a certain threshold. Even if we have a plentiful harvest here in America, there is only enough crops the government is willing to bring into the market.

    Quote Originally Posted by kelric View Post
    After all... most people aren't going to pick up that ear of corn in the store and think "hey, I wonder if this is poisonous and may have long-term affects on my health" if the existence of a possible issue isn't raised. Hide the facts of what that ear of corn is, and people won't ask questions that Monsanto may not like to answer.
    What was that saying again? Somewhere along the lines of, to be close to your food, become a farmer.

    Most people (including me,) don't ever see the days in and days out of what happens to food. The least people should be able to know is how it was created, what process was used to create it, and the end product.

  7. #7
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    13,989

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kelric View Post
    The really important thing isn't that people know if their food was "genetically modified" (generally taken to mean the use of molecular genetic techniques as opposed to breeding/natural hybridization to introduce new genes). The issues there, while worthy of consideration and study, probably aren't all that major. What *is* important is *what* Monsanto (and their ilk) are putting in these crops they're selling as food. Would you:

    a) be willing to eat an apple that has genes from oranges that result in a little bit of vitamin C and defray early browning?
    Yes.

    Quote Originally Posted by kelric View Post
    b) be willing to eat corn that has genes to create internal pesticide (that's right - washing your fruits won't help) so that insects won't eat it (or will get sick/die if they do) in the field, reducing costs? (and "trust us" that it kills insects but won't hurt people)?
    It's not an insecticide. It's a genetically produced odor that repels insects but that humans can't detect.

    Quote Originally Posted by kelric View Post
    The problem is largely "b". Issues with "a", taking something from a commonly eaten food and putting it into another commonly eaten food, while noteworthy enough to warrant disclosure (I believe there have been issues with people who for purposes of this example are allergic to oranges get reactions from eating modified apples), aren't the really scary stuff. It's Monsanto wanting to legislate that there is no requirement to tell people what they're eating when there are legitimate concerns about what it may really be.
    One can readily see the reason for them wanting that legislation. This thread, for instance. But developing the capability to feed 20 billion people is by no means evil unless you morally approve of starvation.

    Quote Originally Posted by kelric View Post
    After all... most people aren't going to pick up that ear of corn in the store and think "hey, I wonder if this is poisonous and may have long-term affects on my health" if the existence of a possible issue isn't raised. Hide the facts of what that ear of corn is, and people won't ask questions that Monsanto may not like to answer.

    In general... my opinion is that anyone trying to hide the truth is probably a bit shady. And Monsanto? They've *long* since lost any benefit of the doubt. It's no shocker that they've been described as the most evil corporation out there.

    That's the problem.
    "They've been described" (by whom and for what purpose?) is not equivalent to "they are."
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  8. #8
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    13,989

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rail Tracer View Post
    That's the issue. I'm not directly against genetic modification, per se, but people do want to know if a product has been genetically modified in some way or not.

    It is like seeing the difference between enriched and fortified foods. One has lost so much of its nutrients that the company had to put outside nutrients back in while the other has added nutrients with existing nutrients that came with the contents.

    I think America is one of the few nations in the world that don't monitor these type of things.

    In a case like Monsanto, they won't even allow the farmers to keep the seeds to regrow. They would need to buy them on a yearly basis.
    Because the Round-Up Ready gene is patented.
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  9. #9
    WALMART
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    Genetic modification can allow the feeding of 20,000,000,000 people. But that doesn't mean politics or economics will allow it, even if there was enough room on the Earth for all those people. It's just saying that, yes, this is a gigantic scientific breakthrough, from a humanistic perspective it is greater than relativity and quantum mechanics combined.

    Greater than the capability to control little robots the size of a large molecule?

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sp/so
    Socionics
    IEI
    Posts
    2,841

    Default

    I support not just genetically engineered food, but genetically engineered everything. Seriously, get the test tubes and lab coats ready; creating food is but the first step, the next will be full scale living organisms.

Similar Threads

  1. The TED talk TED doesn't want you to hear.
    By 011235813 in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 05-21-2012, 06:08 PM
  2. Would you want to know the date of your death?
    By Such Irony in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 08-27-2010, 04:09 AM
  3. what the oil companies don't want you to know
    By INTJ123 in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 10-16-2009, 01:31 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO