Genetic Modification Gone Wild: 10 Signs That Our World May Be Destined To Resemble A Real

[Brown Sapper]

Here you go JFK III: http://www.organicitsworthit.org/quick/gmos-101
How can you avoid GMOs?
The best way to avoid GMOs is to choose organic. By law, organic products must be made and produced without the use of genetic engineering. That is why at every phase in the production process, organic processors and producers are required to take steps to make sure that you and your family are getting all the benefits you need and want and none of the things you don’t—including GMOs. That means not planting or treating land on which organic food and fiber is grown with prohibited substances (including GMOs); creating buffer zones to prevent contact between organic and non-organic crops; cleaning machinery to prevent contact between organic and non-organic items and minimize the risk of contamination; and storing organic and non-organic ingredients separately to ensure that the organic products have as little risk as possible of containing GMOs.

This should help you on your quest to be GMO free.

 

[LawnWake]

There is a long history of the negative unintended consequences of technological "advances".

There's a long history of negative unintended consequences in anything. By your logic we should pretty much stop exisiting because existence can result into a catastrophe. Or that we shouldn't have invented the wheel because it eventually lead to car accidents.

 

[Brown Sapper]

http://www.organicitsworthit.org/learn/lesson-gmo-labels

Many of us are concerned about the effects genetically modified foods have on our health. And for good reason: we also do not have information conclusively proving that GMOs are safe.

The challenge is figuring out how to avoid GMOs, since they are not required by law to be labeled.

Here are some helpful hints to keep in mind as you scan store shelves for products made without the use of GMOs.

Look for the USDA organic label.
By law, organic products must be made without the use of GMOs.

Look at PLU (price look-up) codes on produce items.
Five-digit PLU codes beginning with “8” indicate that produce is genetically modified. Be aware, though, that many genetically modified produce items are not labeled.

Five-digit PLU codes beginning with “9” indicate that produce is organic and not genetically modified.

Be aware of crops that are often genetically modified in the U.S. – as well as the ingredients made from them.
• Corn
• Soy
• Canola
• Sugar beets
• Cotton

Remember: just because you don’t consume these crops by themselves doesn’t mean you’re avoiding GMOs. If you see any of the following ingredients on the labels of products you consume, and the ingredient is not labeled as non-GMO or organic, it is likely genetically modified.

• Corn syrup, starch, oil, meal, gluten
• Soy lecithin, protein, flour, isolate and isoflavone
• Sugar (unless it is made from cane)
• Vegetable oil
• Cottonseed oil

 

[PaulConventionWV]

If GMO crops destroys other farmers crops then who's rights are being infringed? Do you realize the health risks of consuming GMF's?



Do you use Crisco Vegetable oil? Because if you do, it is mostly GMO-soybean oil. 95% of soy grown in the USA is genetically modified.

Sources:
http://www.seedsofdeception.com/Public/AboutGeneticallyModifiedFoods/HealthRisksBrochure/index.cfm
http://www.monsanto.com/newsviews/pages/do-gm-crops-increase-yield.aspx
http://www.seedsofdeception.com/Public/AboutGeneticallyModifiedFoods/index.cfm
http://www.globalhealingcenter.com/nutrition/genetically-modified-foods

All of this stuff is government authorized and government funded. Monsanto and all the other big corporations who use this stuff get special privileges. If the wind blows some GMO seeds onto another farmer's farm, who gets sued? If you guessed the corporation, then you are absolutely 100% wrong. The farmer gets sued for patent infringement, when chances are, the farmer didn't want the GMO product. Everyone bow down to Monsanto et al. They buy out food production worldwide so they can make the world die a little more while they get filthy stinking rich.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

Man noone is saying the government should force you to eat anything. You are trying to ban genetic engineering out of fear of the products. Do you not believe if these products are bad for you that you can sue the shit out of them? Don't you think it is in the best interest of companies making this food to make a safe product from fear of being sued?

They won't be sued because it's not a free market we're talking about. Propaganda and deception is used, and the playing field is tilted in their favor. If anyone gets sued, it's the little farmers who try to fight the government and the victims of Monsanto, not Monsanto itself.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

This fear of science is hilarious, seriously. People don't know what scientists do, stuff can go wrong, they don't understand how scientists do it, they don't understand how/why it can go wrong and they don't know what to do about WHEN something goes wrong and they get nervous when they realize they have no control over it. This is basic fear of the unknown. Kids afraid of the dark.

Seriously, if you're afraid that cameras will steal your soul, don't let people take pictures of you. If you don't morally support genetically engineered food, don't pay for it.

How are we supposed to not pay for something when it's everywhere and is cheaper than the other products, not to mention that it's not even labeled.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

I'd be amazed if any of these guys could explain how DNA is linked to proteins. If they did we wouldn't be having this argument.

Translation. You're welcome.

 

[Anti Federalist]

There's a long history of negative unintended consequences in anything. By your logic we should pretty much stop exisiting because existence can result into a catastrophe. Or that we shouldn't have invented the wheel because it eventually lead to car accidents.

Don't be stupid.

You equated those who have legitimate concerns about GMO technology with dismal savages living in the dirt.

To honestly assess the bottom line of technology and assess its risk/benefit is not Luddism.

This is just another one of those infuriating double standards of modern society.

People will get the vapors and faints over (the horror) a smoldering shred of plant matter or getting into a car without seat belts, roll cages, HANS devices, twenty self inflating blimps and god knows what else, but blindly trusts the government/medical/science complex, that kills hundreds of thousands of people every year.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

If you ask and they don't provide then you have the option of not using that product. If you use it and it harms you than you have the right to sue. Stop playing the victim.

Do you agree that they should at least label their products?

 

[heavenlyboy34]

There's a long history of negative unintended consequences in anything. By your logic we should pretty much stop exisiting because existence can result into a catastrophe. Or that we shouldn't have invented the wheel because it eventually lead to car accidents.

Except walking and creating the wheel don't alter/mutate anyone's DNA. GMO foods do alter DNA. That's why when organic crops are cross-pollinated by GMO seeds blown in from a nearby field, the farmer loses his organic certification.

 

[PierzStyx]

Just another step towards a Brave New World. Next thing you know we'll just go down to our local cloning center for children.

 

[donnay]

All of this stuff is government authorized and government funded. Monsanto and all the other big corporations who use this stuff get special privileges. If the wind blows some GMO seeds onto another farmer's farm, who gets sued? If you guessed the corporation, then you are absolutely 100% wrong. The farmer gets sued for patent infringement, when chances are, the farmer didn't want the GMO product. Everyone bow down to Monsanto et al. They buy out food production worldwide so they can make the world die a little more while they get filthy stinking rich.

We are in agreement. Monsanto's advancement are not for optimum health--it's a slow kill. They should be brought up on charges of genocide.

 

[LawnWake]

Don't be stupid.

You equated those who have legitimate concerns about GMO technology with dismal savages living in the dirt.

To honestly assess the bottom line of technology and assess its risk/benefit is not Luddism.

This is just another one of those infuriating double standards of modern society.

People will get the vapors and faints over (the horror) a smoldering shred of plant matter or getting into a car without seat belts, roll cages, HANS devices, twenty self inflating blimps and god knows what else, but blindly trusts the government/medical/science complex, that kills hundreds of thousands of people every year.

I'm actually just saying that if you don't agree with it, don't financially endorse it and that the assumption that scientists aren't regular people with as much common sense as anybody else and are out to destroy the world reeks of fear of the unknown. I've said myself that there are some legitemate concerns before, but people blow it out of proportions and start fear mongering as if it's the end of the world. 'Unforeseeable consequences' are just that, you can't foresee them and existence itself is full of them, so why single out genetic modifcation?

First society scares us with global cooling, then global warming and pig flu and who knows what else and now it's genetically modified food.

The scientists are supplying a demand and they're only responsible for their products. It's farmers who are responsible for their crops and consumers who are responsible for their groceries. It's funny how no one seems to blame any farmer for using it and hell, PaulConvention doesn't even blame himself (the consumer) for buying it (because it's cheaper and he believes that the government should make his prefered product cheaper) and everyone's raging on those scientists who play God. Share a little responsibility here.

Except walking and creating the wheel don't alter/mutate anyone's DNA. GMO foods do alter DNA.

Uh yeah, that wasn't the argument. He was saying that genetic modification can have bad unforeseen consequences; everything can. Period. So why suddenly draw a magic line because 'they can alter our DNA'? You know that sunlight can alter your DNA as well, right? In your lifetime?

That's why when organic crops are cross-pollinated by GMO seeds blown in from a nearby field, the farmer loses his organic certification.

Property rights are the problem here, or a lack thereof. Not genetically modified food.

How are we supposed to not pay for something when it's everywhere and is cheaper than the other products, not to mention that it's not even labeled.

Do your research? If it's so important to you, you would spend the extra few bucks on it. There's a reason it's more expensive and it's up to you, the consumer, to ultimately decide what the product's worth and if you want to comply with the price. If you want the government to control the market because you don't want to spend more money on certain products or do your own research, that's fine. I don't want that.

 

[donnay]

I'm actually just saying that if you don't agree with it, don't financially endorse it and that the assumption that scientists aren't regular people with as much common sense as anybody else and are out to destroy the world reeks of fear of the unknown. I've said myself that there are some legitemate concerns before, but people blow it out of proportions and start fear mongering as if it's the end of the world. 'Unforeseeable consequences' are just that, you can't foresee them and existence itself is full of them, so why single out genetic modifcation?

Really? Is that all we have to do? Kind of like the government resurrecting and generically engineering the 1918 Spanish Flu (which had be eradicated), from a body of a frozen corpse who died of it.

Disease by Design: 1918 "Spanish" Flu Resurrection Creates Major Safety and Security Risks

The resurrection of 1918 influenza has plunged the world closer to a flu pandemic and to a biodefense race scarcely separable from an offensive one, according to the Sunshine Project, a biological weapons watchdog.

"There was no compelling reason to recreate 1918 flu and plenty of good reasons not to. Instead of a dead bug, now there are live 1918 flu types in several places, with more such strains sure to come in more places," says Sunshine Project Director Edward Hammond, "The US government has done a great misdeed by endorsing and encouraging the deliberate creation of extremely dangerous new viruses. The 1918 experiments will be replicated and adapted, and the ability to perform them will proliferate, meaning that the possibility of man-made disaster, either accidental or deliberate, has risen for the entire world."

The 1918 experiments are part of the US biodefense program and are of no practical value in responding to outbreaks of "bird flu" (H5N1). The 1918 virus is a different type (H1N1) of influenza than "bird flu". 1918 flu is more than eighty five years old and no longer exists in nature, posing no natural threat. While it is reasonable to determine the genetic sequence of 1918 and other extinct influenza strains, there is no valid reason to recreate the virulent virus, as the risks far outweigh the benefits.

But the most significant story isn't Tumpey, Taubenberger, and colleagues. It is the Centers for Disease Control's (CDC) attitude about the experiments and its implications. "The biggest news about resurrecting 1918 flu is the US government's enthusiastic embrace of designer disease and the impact that it will have on our future." says Hammond, "By encouraging genetic riffs on influenza and other viruses with the explicit intent of building more dangerous pathogens, CDC is fueling the gathering dangers of competition to discover the worst possibilities of biotechnology applied to bioweapons agents. Some might do it just to keep up with the Americans, resulting in a further blurring of defense and offense and heightening the biological mistrust evident in US foreign policy."

In addition to the potentially broad damage to international security and cooperation in the biological sciences if novel diseases continue to be created, the 1918 experiments heighten the chance that a flu lab will be the source of the next pandemic.

CDC says that it plans to keep its vials of 1918 flu under close guard in one place. But that's a red herring according to the Sunshine Project. Influenza with as many as five 1918 flu genes, and which are potentially pandemic, have already been handled at labs in at least four places other than CDC, including labs in Athens, GA, Winnipeg, MB (Canada), Seattle, WA, and Madison, WI. With the exception of the Canadian lab, none of these facilities has maximum (BSL-4) biological containment, and it is a virtual certainty that more labs will begin 1918 flu work now.

In fact, the only possible source of a new 1918 influenza outbreak is a laboratory. The situation of the 1918 flu is not dissimilar to SARS, whose natural transmission is believed to have been halted. The experience with SARS accidents is chilling: It has escaped three different labs to date. A 1918 influenza escape would be very likely to take a higher human toll. The US biodefense program has also had a number of lab accidents since 2002, including mishandling of anthrax and plague and laboratory-acquired infections of tularemia. In Russia, a researcher contracted ebola and died last year.

Importantly, human error and equipment failures aren't the only ways for a disease agent to escape a lab - something vividly illustrated by the anthrax letters in the US four years ago. Unlike anthrax, however, 1918 influenza would transmit from human to human.

"We are no safer from a pandemic today than yesterday. In fact, we're in greater danger, not only from influenza; but from the failure of the US to come to grips with and address the threats posed by the research it sponsors, in terms of legislation, ethics, and self-restraint." concludes Hammond.

-end-
http://www.sunshine-project.org/publications/pr/pr051005.html

I guess it is only microbiologist that need to worry about sudden death syndrome eh? 19 mysterious deaths of microbiologist. Here is a list of the dead microbiologist: http://www.rense.com/general62/list.htm

I am sure that is just a coincidence. The government would NEVER harm it's citizens--Oh nooooooo. Hegelian Dialectic--Problem, reaction, solution! Problem: resurrect the 1918 Pandemic. Reaction: Some people die of mysterious disease that resembles that of the 1918 Spanish Influenza. Solution: Government will have antidote.

Sources:
http://history1900s.about.com/od/1910s/p/spanishflu.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/ops/hsc-scen-3_pandemic-1918.htm
http://www.ninthday.com/tauben.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/08/080817223642.htm
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6502-virulent-1918-flu-genes-resurrected.html
http://www.legitgov.org/flu_oddities_shortnews.html

 

[ryanmkeisling]

This ^^^ + rep. Some of us are having a DNA activation others will perish in the coming years.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=k1hmoo3lnTo

Lawnwake and brown sapper: I never implied this stuff would end the world but it really will fuck it up and make life harder as it has been getting so. That is why we are all here, freedom is much more than politics. Responsibility is what its about.

Nature is sentient. The more we screw with it, the more it will screw with us.

Evolution is not only about advancing science at any cost. Responsibility.

 

[ryanmkeisling]

Do you agree that they should at least label their products?

This^^^ + rep. Labeling mandates are actually something the government should be responsible for enforcing.

 

[KingRobbStark]

Its funny how most of the people here are trying to enforce their brand of morality on the rest.

 

[John F Kennedy III]

This ^^^ + rep. Some of us are having a DNA activation others will perish in the coming years.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=k1hmoo3lnTo

Lawnwake and brown sapper: I never implied this stuff would end the world but it really will fuck it up and make life harder as it has been getting so. That is why we are all here, freedom is much more than politics. Responsibility is what its about.

Nature is sentient. The more we screw with it, the more it will screw with us.

Evolution is not only about advancing science at any cost. Responsibility.

Big +rep

 

[KingRobbStark]

This ^^^ + rep. Some of us are having a DNA activation others will perish in the coming years.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=k1hmoo3lnTo

Lawnwake and brown sapper: I never implied this stuff would end the world but it really will fuck it up and make life harder as it has been getting so. That is why we are all here, freedom is much more than politics. Responsibility is what its about.

Nature is sentient. The more we screw with it, the more it will screw with us.

Evolution is not only about advancing science at any cost. Responsibility.

How will it fuck it up exactly? Genetic mantipulation will allows to transgress our limitations, and help us save lives.

Nature is now sentient? Interisting. We should start the Church of Evolution. Lol. You are as bad as creationist.

 

[donnay]

How will it fuck it up exactly? Genetic mantipulation [sic] will allows to transgress our limitations, and help us save lives.

Your choice of words is REALLY telling...

Definition for Manipulation:
Web definitions: exerting shrewd or devious influence especially for one's own advantage; "his manipulation of his friends was scandalous".

Transgress - trans·gress/transˈgres/
Verb:

Infringe or go beyond the bounds of (a moral principle or other established standard of behavior).

You got that right, it will allow the 1% running the show to transgress upon others.

You know in a perfect world I would agree with you about advancements in science, but since we do not live in a perfect world, people have a right to know those whom are manipulating and transgressing upon other sentient beings.