7 ms·

> my only option is to buy non-GMO everything. That doesn't make any sense. A viable option actually.

baumandm 9y ago
Surprisingly, avoiding GMO foods may not be as viable as one might think: > Currently, up to 92% of U.S. corn is genetically engineered (GE), as are 94% of soybeans and 94% of cotton (cottonseed oil is often used in food products). It has been estimated that upwards of 75% of processed foods on supermarket shelves – from soda to soup, crackers to condiments – contain genetically engineered ingredients. [1] [1] https://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/issues/311/ge-foods/about-ge-foods https://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/issues/311/ge-foods/abou...
- code_duck 9y ago
  You can buy all organic or non-GMO certified foods.
  - RobLach 9y ago
    Close, but it’s food producers who buy organic and non-gmo certifications which additionally makes them jump through a couple arbitrary hoops to make it seemingly mean something.
    - code_duck 9y ago
      So, you are saying that the certifications are not meaningful in that companies and certifiers cheat on the standards, or that the standards are inadequate?
  - baumandm 9y ago
    My point was that it's easy for the average person to want to avoid GMO foods, but harder for them to give up their Coca-Colas, Oreos, etc.
    - AstralStorm 9y ago
      And unlike giving up the unnatural extreme sugar content of the latter, let's spend money to fix a problem that is likely not even real considering pest control practices used in organic farming.
    - code_duck 9y ago
      Consumers who are attached to eating food like Oreos or Coca Cola, the ingredients of which have been demonstrated to be unhealthy in every way possible, are generally not as concerned about avoiding GMOs as consumers of other products. I suppose there is some overlap, but I would think that as a first step people with dietary health concerns would cut out things like white flour and high fructose corn syrup.
- teslabox 9y ago
  > cottonseed oil is often used in food products Cottonseed oil is not food, it is a waste product of the cotton industry that should only be used for biodiesel.
pugio 9y ago
Viable, but not a good strategy for everyone. GMOs are often cheaper, due to higher yields and greater resistance to pests. It _might_ be healthier to avoid them, but that's another example of eating healthy being a luxury. Better to investigate, report, regulate, so all society can benefit from the benefits of targeted engineering without fear.
JumpCrisscross 9y ago
> A viable option actually We've come up with a definition for "GMO" which is about as arbitrary as "plants grown on the north side of a mountain." Look at a wild carrot [1]. There is no good reason for plants to stuff their roots with beta carotene. But nutrient-rich roots are tastier and healthier, so we bred them. It blows my mind that someone might consider a mutation bred [2] vegetable healthier or safer than one where the desired gene is precisely injected. The economics of GMO produce are compelling. They will be produced. All anti-GMO consumers guarantee is having their views, tastes and concerns ignored as agriculture develops. That lack of consumer input is, in my opinion, unhealthy for us all. [1] http://www.carrotmuseum.co.uk/wild.html http://www.carrotmuseum.co.uk/wild.html [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutation_breeding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutation_breeding
- kazinator 9y ago
  How about "contains genetic modifications that are strictly Copyright (C) Mother Nature". Seems like a good first approximation at a working definition. So, "north side of the mountain" is non-GMO right off the bat.
  - sanxiyn 9y ago
    This is a meaningless distinction. It's like saying two files with idential content and checksum are different because one file was written by Vim and the other by Emacs.
    - roywiggins 9y ago
      The law can and does make this sort of distinction. http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/entry/23 http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/entry/23
      - chc 9y ago
        I don't see what IP law has to do with nutrition.
asdsa5325 9y ago
You are lucky you live in a rich, first world country where you can make decisions to not eat certain foods. Guess what? GMO food saves millions of people from malnutrition in the 3rd world. But yet it's just not good enough for the cocky American consumers, despite that scientists agree it's perfectly safe and despite that GMO food is everywhere (without you realizing). I happily by GMO food, I proudly support GMOs because it saves lives, and I can't believe ignorant people would rather these people starve.
- SlowBro 9y ago
  > GMO food saves millions of people from malnutrition in the 3rd world. Kindly provide evidence for such assertions.
  - asdsa5325 9y ago
    https://share.america.gov/scientists-genetically-modified-foods-save-lives/ https://share.america.gov/scientists-genetically-modified-fo...
    - mPeriodFRESH 9y ago
      you honestly believe the BS on that site counts as scientific evidence?
      - SlowBro 9y ago
        Well it is a USA government website so it holds some credence. Let's not commit a genetic fallacy. (Hah, pun totally not intended.) The article points to an open letter signed by a number of scientists (are they all food/agricultural/health-related scientists?) who evidence Golden Rice, which in my opinion is thin evidence. But I am definitely not a food/agricultural/health-related scientist, so my opinion counts for a hill of non-GMO beans.
      - asdsa5325 9y ago
        A US government run website is not credible? But the article isn't the thing, anyway. The letter that the article refers to, if you bothered to read the article, is why I posted it.
Spooky23 9y ago
Are you against selective breeding? It seems unnatural to eat a big sweet apple. Nature provided small bitter apples.

Surprisingly, avoiding GMO foods may not be as viable as one might think: > Currently, up to 92% of U.S. corn is genetically engineered (GE), as are 94% of soybeans and 94% of cotton (cottonseed oil is often used in food products). It has been estimated that upwards of 75% of processed foods on supermarket shelves – from soda to soup, crackers to condiments – contain genetically engineered ingredients. [1] [1] https://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/issues/311/ge-foods/about-ge-foods https://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/issues/311/ge-foods/abou...

code_duck 9y ago
You can buy all organic or non-GMO certified foods.
- RobLach 9y ago
  Close, but it’s food producers who buy organic and non-gmo certifications which additionally makes them jump through a couple arbitrary hoops to make it seemingly mean something.
  - code_duck 9y ago
    So, you are saying that the certifications are not meaningful in that companies and certifiers cheat on the standards, or that the standards are inadequate?
- baumandm 9y ago
  My point was that it's easy for the average person to want to avoid GMO foods, but harder for them to give up their Coca-Colas, Oreos, etc.
  - AstralStorm 9y ago
    And unlike giving up the unnatural extreme sugar content of the latter, let's spend money to fix a problem that is likely not even real considering pest control practices used in organic farming.
  - code_duck 9y ago
    Consumers who are attached to eating food like Oreos or Coca Cola, the ingredients of which have been demonstrated to be unhealthy in every way possible, are generally not as concerned about avoiding GMOs as consumers of other products. I suppose there is some overlap, but I would think that as a first step people with dietary health concerns would cut out things like white flour and high fructose corn syrup.
teslabox 9y ago
> cottonseed oil is often used in food products Cottonseed oil is not food, it is a waste product of the cotton industry that should only be used for biodiesel.

pugio 9y ago

Viable, but not a good strategy for everyone. GMOs are often cheaper, due to higher yields and greater resistance to pests. It _might_ be healthier to avoid them, but that's another example of eating healthy being a luxury. Better to investigate, report, regulate, so all society can benefit from the benefits of targeted engineering without fear.

JumpCrisscross 9y ago

> A viable option actually We've come up with a definition for "GMO" which is about as arbitrary as "plants grown on the north side of a mountain." Look at a wild carrot [1]. There is no good reason for plants to stuff their roots with beta carotene. But nutrient-rich roots are tastier and healthier, so we bred them. It blows my mind that someone might consider a mutation bred [2] vegetable healthier or safer than one where the desired gene is precisely injected. The economics of GMO produce are compelling. They will be produced. All anti-GMO consumers guarantee is having their views, tastes and concerns ignored as agriculture develops. That lack of consumer input is, in my opinion, unhealthy for us all. [1] http://www.carrotmuseum.co.uk/wild.html http://www.carrotmuseum.co.uk/wild.html [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutation_breeding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutation_breeding

kazinator 9y ago
How about "contains genetic modifications that are strictly Copyright (C) Mother Nature". Seems like a good first approximation at a working definition. So, "north side of the mountain" is non-GMO right off the bat.
- sanxiyn 9y ago
  This is a meaningless distinction. It's like saying two files with idential content and checksum are different because one file was written by Vim and the other by Emacs.
  - roywiggins 9y ago
    The law can and does make this sort of distinction. http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/entry/23 http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/entry/23
    - chc 9y ago
      I don't see what IP law has to do with nutrition.

asdsa5325 9y ago

You are lucky you live in a rich, first world country where you can make decisions to not eat certain foods. Guess what? GMO food saves millions of people from malnutrition in the 3rd world. But yet it's just not good enough for the cocky American consumers, despite that scientists agree it's perfectly safe and despite that GMO food is everywhere (without you realizing). I happily by GMO food, I proudly support GMOs because it saves lives, and I can't believe ignorant people would rather these people starve.

SlowBro 9y ago
> GMO food saves millions of people from malnutrition in the 3rd world. Kindly provide evidence for such assertions.
- asdsa5325 9y ago
  https://share.america.gov/scientists-genetically-modified-foods-save-lives/ https://share.america.gov/scientists-genetically-modified-fo...
  - mPeriodFRESH 9y ago
    you honestly believe the BS on that site counts as scientific evidence?
    - SlowBro 9y ago
      Well it is a USA government website so it holds some credence. Let's not commit a genetic fallacy. (Hah, pun totally not intended.) The article points to an open letter signed by a number of scientists (are they all food/agricultural/health-related scientists?) who evidence Golden Rice, which in my opinion is thin evidence. But I am definitely not a food/agricultural/health-related scientist, so my opinion counts for a hill of non-GMO beans.
    - asdsa5325 9y ago
      A US government run website is not credible? But the article isn't the thing, anyway. The letter that the article refers to, if you bothered to read the article, is why I posted it.

Spooky23 9y ago

Are you against selective breeding? It seems unnatural to eat a big sweet apple. Nature provided small bitter apples.