4 ms·

I hope it is apocalyptic. We shouldn’t be growing so much poor quality subsidies. GMO corn, soybeans, and wheat are extremely poor quality, overproduced, bad f

I hope it is apocalyptic. We shouldn’t be growing so much poor quality subsidies. GMO corn, soybeans, and wheat are extremely poor quality, overproduced, bad for health and artificially abundant, so they destroy a lot of the crops, and sell it overseas to prevent the market from crashing due to supply as it naturally would. They did this with milk so farmers would make more money if they resold milk on the market. The results of subsidies is extremely detrimental to the environment. https://time.com/4530659/farmers-dump-milk-glut-surplus/ https://time.com/4530659/farmers-dump-milk-glut-surplus/ >American farmers have purposefully poured out more than 43 million gallons’ worth of milk due to an excessively abundant supply of the dairy product in the county.

ineedasername 5y ago
What makes GMO crops bad for health?
- GhettoComputers 5y ago
  GMOs are not interently bad, but the US crops are less nutritionally dense and have worst effects on health. They’re bred to be hardy and easy to transport, not for taste, nutrition or quality, mostly just volume and resistance to disease and pesticides.
  - redisman 5y ago
    Won’t the non GMO crops be selectively bred for the same qualities? BigAgri is never going to sell their farms back to the families and start selling Organic Heirlooom Beets to the factory farms for feed. GMO is just a diversion
    - GhettoComputers 5y ago
      Not always, but for staple crops I can't think of one that isn't. Sure you can say they don't need to use GMOs in a bad way but that is not what bears out in reality. Here is selective breeding against the same qualities. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cotton_Candy_grapes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cotton_Candy_grapes
  - ineedasername 5y ago
    It seems like many GMO crops can actually have more (or in some cases just different?) Nutrients. In any case, it would a balance of some sort-- 20% increase in crop yields would more than offset 10% reduction in nutrients. Though I have no idea what the actual balance is. https://allianceforscience.cornell.edu/blog/2018/06/unfairly-demonized-gmo-crops-can-help-fight-malnutrition/ https://allianceforscience.cornell.edu/blog/2018/06/unfairly...

ineedasername 5y ago

What makes GMO crops bad for health?

GhettoComputers 5y ago
GMOs are not interently bad, but the US crops are less nutritionally dense and have worst effects on health. They’re bred to be hardy and easy to transport, not for taste, nutrition or quality, mostly just volume and resistance to disease and pesticides.
- redisman 5y ago
  Won’t the non GMO crops be selectively bred for the same qualities? BigAgri is never going to sell their farms back to the families and start selling Organic Heirlooom Beets to the factory farms for feed. GMO is just a diversion
  - GhettoComputers 5y ago
    Not always, but for staple crops I can't think of one that isn't. Sure you can say they don't need to use GMOs in a bad way but that is not what bears out in reality. Here is selective breeding against the same qualities. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cotton_Candy_grapes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cotton_Candy_grapes
- ineedasername 5y ago
  It seems like many GMO crops can actually have more (or in some cases just different?) Nutrients. In any case, it would a balance of some sort-- 20% increase in crop yields would more than offset 10% reduction in nutrients. Though I have no idea what the actual balance is. https://allianceforscience.cornell.edu/blog/2018/06/unfairly-demonized-gmo-crops-can-help-fight-malnutrition/ https://allianceforscience.cornell.edu/blog/2018/06/unfairly...