50 ms·
This is an oddly anti-scientific view. We can test and evaluate the safety of the resulting GMO product. Some of the most important and useful pharmaceuticals
by Gatsky 4y ago
This is an oddly anti-scientific view. We can test and evaluate the safety of the resulting GMO product.
Some of the most important and useful pharmaceuticals are GMO products, produced by genetically modified cells in bioreactors. Do you have an issue with those?
There is also the fact that we allow rampant and unregulated frankenfood production which is obviously harmful and purely profit driven (ie modern processed food production). But when it comes to GMO crops, which would improve the nutrition of the hungriest populations, suddenly it is too dangerous and must be banned. A privileged double-standard if there ever was one.
- iroh2727 4y agoYeah I'm definitely not an expert here, just raising the question. I guess compared to pharmaceuticals which are something we'd take only as a last resort/backup plan, is there extra danger in modifying the most basic of our food sources? Any unintended side effects that could happen or limitations to our tests? (I'm definitely am in favor of regulation to prevent overprocessing of food too. So no double standard from my end there.)
- UncleEntity 4y ago> But when it comes to GMO crops, which would improve the nutrition of the hungriest populations, suddenly it is too dangerous and must be banned. A privileged double-standard if there ever was one. There’s a big difference between making Cheese Puffs and genetically modifying a plant and releasing it into the wild. The first is just irresponsible (unless you enjoy Cheese Puffs) but the second could possibly have major unintended consequences because there’s no way to account for all the variables. As a somewhat unlikely example what if some poor third-world farmer plants some GMO and it kills their water buffalo, Buffalo Billy, who they rely on to plow their field?