4 ms·
I honestly don't understand why you are so aggressively against my opinion? Genetic-engineering isn't bad per se, I see huge value of it in Reversing the geneti
by X4 13y ago
I honestly don't understand why you are so aggressively against my opinion? Genetic-engineering isn't bad per se, I see huge value of it in Reversing the genetical damage (esp. RNAi and siRNA therapies).
I said: "..we cannot create something better (in a few hundred years)."
You said: "We created those foods". [..] all been genetically engineered [..]
Where is the proof that these processed or genetically engineered foods are better? To clarify things, we DID NOT create those foods, we modified them. Creating is food is clearly something entirely different. We've not advanced that far in Bio-sciences.
- ceejayoz 13y ago> I honestly don't understand why you are so aggressively against my opinion? Because statements like "took billions of years for the nature to create the foods that are perfect for us" are false and absurd. Nature didn't create foods to be perfect for us. The goal of natural selection was for those organisms to survive, not necessarily to be tasty to humans, and most of the foods we eat were modified by us to our liking. It's the same sort of argument anti-vaccine nuts use. "We were fine before vaccines!" No, we weren't. Millions upon millions died of easily preventable, natural diseases. > Where is the proof that these processed or genetically engineered foods are better? Try surviving off wild bananas or the wild grasses we bred into wheat and rice. They're harder to digest, yield less, etc. > To clarify things, we DID NOT create those foods, we modified them. And? We're doing that with GMO foods, too. Humanity hasn't yet created even a single-celled bacterium from scratch, let alone a corn plant.