5 ms·

It's so wonderful to now live in a forthright European country that cares for their citizens and doesn't permit this kind of fraudulent advertising of unnatural

It's so wonderful to now live in a forthright European country that cares for their citizens and doesn't permit this kind of fraudulent advertising of unnatural and unhealthy modifications of foods. Firms like Monsanto are barred from the country as are GMOs in general and you'd be hard-pressed to find anything other than natural eggs from free-range chickens, untreated with any hormones or antibiotics. It seems the inverse is the case in the US.

higherpurpose 12y ago
I agree. I have nothing against researching how to modify food to be better (emphasis on better, not just "cheaper with compromises") or how to create food entirely in labs. However, I don't want to be a "beta tester" of such food in the 2-10 decades it will take to perfect it. When there's been 3 decades or independent reviews for a particular lab-grown food, then you can start putting it in local supermarkets where everyone can buy it without giving a moment's thought about whether that food is "safe to eat or not?". I think it's the government's jobs to ensure it doesn't happen earlier than that.
heydenberk 12y ago
Why do you support banning GMOs? I don't mean to be snarky, but I don't know of any good scientific case for doing so. In my estimation, GMOs are one of the most promising technologies for increasing quality of life around the world.
- raverbashing 12y ago
  Because Monsanto It's that simple GMOs, surely, are just a technology
- debacle 12y ago
  There are logical reasons for being against GMOs. Many of them have nothing to do with the fact that the product is GMO: * GMOs tend to promote monoculture and pesticide use. * Studies have shown that the same developments that make GMOs more insect resistant can also make them more difficult to digest. * When it comes to animals, GMOs tend to have much poorer quality of life and tend to be completely incapable of surviving without constant support (chickens who can't stand on their own, cows who can't go more than 48 hours without milking, etc). * GMOs almost never focus on the true value of a food item, but rather the sell value. A food that looks nutritious is more valuable than one that actually is and GMOs make it easier to create that false association (deep red tomatos that taste like wall paper glue, etc). It's important to note that all of these things are really a byproduct of industrial agriculture, but many people associate them more directly with GMOs. I think the development of GMOs is a completely normal part of our agriculture and has been for thousands of years, we just need to make sure we're responsible about it.
  - Someone 12y ago
    "When it comes to animals, GMOs tend to have much poorer quality of life and tend to be completely incapable of surviving without constant support (chickens who can't stand on their own, cows who can't go more than 48 hours without milking, etc)." I am sure we do not we need genetic manipulation to create such animals (regular breeding does 'wonders', too) and do not know of any case where we used GM here. Care to elaborate?
  - lyagusha 12y ago
    Your first two points are good for GMOs, but the other two are the result of breeding efforts rather than lab work. There are no GMO cows and chickens in high commercial production, and FWIW no GMO tomatoes either. Then again, GMOs and conventional breeding taken to a commercial extreme get tangled so often it's hard to separate them in these sorts of arguments.
    - debacle 12y ago
      I had grouped in intensive breeding with more Dr. Moreau style GMO development. In my mind, there isn't a huge difference.
    - dubfan 12y ago
      The first GM crop to be licensed for human consumption in the US was the Flavr Savr tomato, which contained a trait that improved their shelf life and appearance. It was a commercial flop and taken off the shelves after a few years on the market.
  - Kalium 12y ago
    > * GMOs almost never focus on the true value of a food item, but rather the sell value. A food that looks nutritious is more valuable than one that actually is and GMOs make it easier to create that false association (deep red tomatos that taste like wall paper glue, etc). A more nutritious food that nobody wants to eat is a food that is not of improved value.
  - kvb 12y ago
    Increased pesticide use can be a bit misleading, since an increased amount of something like Roundup could still be better for the environment than the typical amount of alternative pesticides.
- Cyther606 12y ago
  For those of you undecided on the GMO question: If you do nothing else this month, I implore you to watch The World According to Monsanto [1]. A mind bogglingly awesome documentary featuring a copious amount of boots on the ground and expert testimonial. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6_DbVdVo-k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6_DbVdVo-k
  - dubfan 12y ago
    I place "The World According To Monsanto" in the same league as "Zeitgeist" and "Loose Change". Great if you want affirmation of your worldview, pretty underwhelming if you're interested in facts.
    - Cyther606 12y ago
      I'll take my facts from doctors, university professors, whistleblowers and affected families over corporate mouthpieces any day, thank you very much. Experts interviewed include: - Robert Bellé, Ph.D., French National Center for Scientific Research - Dan Glickman, US Secretary of Agriculture, 1995-2000 - John Hoffman, Vice President of the American Soybean Association - Richard Burroughs, D.V.M, FDA Veterinarian, 1979-1989 - James Maryanski, Ph.D., Biotechnology Coordinator at the FDA, 1985-2006 - Michael Hansen, Ph.D., Senior Staff Scientist of the Consumers Union - Samuel Epstein, Ph.D., President of the Cancer Prevention Coalition - David Carpenter, Ph.D., University of Albany
chestnut-tree 12y ago
"...you'd be hard-pressed to find anything other than natural eggs from free-range chickens" Which European country is that? Battery cages are banned in the EU, but caged hens are still permitted as long as the space in the cage meets EU welfare standards.
- kalleboo 12y ago
  In Sweden most of the large supermarket chains have stopped selling caged eggs or limited to selling them when supply is short[0]. Less than 10% of eggs sold are from caged hens.[1] Of course, any pre-fabricated food will still contain caged eggs since that doesn't have to be declared in the ingredients. [0] http://www.dn.se/ekonomi/matkedjor-slutar-med-agg-fran-burhons/ http://www.dn.se/ekonomi/matkedjor-slutar-med-agg-fran-burho... [1] http://www.landetsfria.se/artikel/114064 http://www.landetsfria.se/artikel/114064

higherpurpose 12y ago

I agree. I have nothing against researching how to modify food to be better (emphasis on better, not just "cheaper with compromises") or how to create food entirely in labs. However, I don't want to be a "beta tester" of such food in the 2-10 decades it will take to perfect it. When there's been 3 decades or independent reviews for a particular lab-grown food, then you can start putting it in local supermarkets where everyone can buy it without giving a moment's thought about whether that food is "safe to eat or not?". I think it's the government's jobs to ensure it doesn't happen earlier than that.

heydenberk 12y ago

Why do you support banning GMOs? I don't mean to be snarky, but I don't know of any good scientific case for doing so. In my estimation, GMOs are one of the most promising technologies for increasing quality of life around the world.

raverbashing 12y ago
Because Monsanto It's that simple GMOs, surely, are just a technology
debacle 12y ago
There are logical reasons for being against GMOs. Many of them have nothing to do with the fact that the product is GMO: * GMOs tend to promote monoculture and pesticide use. * Studies have shown that the same developments that make GMOs more insect resistant can also make them more difficult to digest. * When it comes to animals, GMOs tend to have much poorer quality of life and tend to be completely incapable of surviving without constant support (chickens who can't stand on their own, cows who can't go more than 48 hours without milking, etc). * GMOs almost never focus on the true value of a food item, but rather the sell value. A food that looks nutritious is more valuable than one that actually is and GMOs make it easier to create that false association (deep red tomatos that taste like wall paper glue, etc). It's important to note that all of these things are really a byproduct of industrial agriculture, but many people associate them more directly with GMOs. I think the development of GMOs is a completely normal part of our agriculture and has been for thousands of years, we just need to make sure we're responsible about it.
- Someone 12y ago
  "When it comes to animals, GMOs tend to have much poorer quality of life and tend to be completely incapable of surviving without constant support (chickens who can't stand on their own, cows who can't go more than 48 hours without milking, etc)." I am sure we do not we need genetic manipulation to create such animals (regular breeding does 'wonders', too) and do not know of any case where we used GM here. Care to elaborate?
- lyagusha 12y ago
  Your first two points are good for GMOs, but the other two are the result of breeding efforts rather than lab work. There are no GMO cows and chickens in high commercial production, and FWIW no GMO tomatoes either. Then again, GMOs and conventional breeding taken to a commercial extreme get tangled so often it's hard to separate them in these sorts of arguments.
  - debacle 12y ago
    I had grouped in intensive breeding with more Dr. Moreau style GMO development. In my mind, there isn't a huge difference.
  - dubfan 12y ago
    The first GM crop to be licensed for human consumption in the US was the Flavr Savr tomato, which contained a trait that improved their shelf life and appearance. It was a commercial flop and taken off the shelves after a few years on the market.
- Kalium 12y ago
  > * GMOs almost never focus on the true value of a food item, but rather the sell value. A food that looks nutritious is more valuable than one that actually is and GMOs make it easier to create that false association (deep red tomatos that taste like wall paper glue, etc). A more nutritious food that nobody wants to eat is a food that is not of improved value.
- kvb 12y ago
  Increased pesticide use can be a bit misleading, since an increased amount of something like Roundup could still be better for the environment than the typical amount of alternative pesticides.
Cyther606 12y ago
For those of you undecided on the GMO question: If you do nothing else this month, I implore you to watch The World According to Monsanto [1]. A mind bogglingly awesome documentary featuring a copious amount of boots on the ground and expert testimonial. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6_DbVdVo-k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6_DbVdVo-k
- dubfan 12y ago
  I place "The World According To Monsanto" in the same league as "Zeitgeist" and "Loose Change". Great if you want affirmation of your worldview, pretty underwhelming if you're interested in facts.
  - Cyther606 12y ago
    I'll take my facts from doctors, university professors, whistleblowers and affected families over corporate mouthpieces any day, thank you very much. Experts interviewed include: - Robert Bellé, Ph.D., French National Center for Scientific Research - Dan Glickman, US Secretary of Agriculture, 1995-2000 - John Hoffman, Vice President of the American Soybean Association - Richard Burroughs, D.V.M, FDA Veterinarian, 1979-1989 - James Maryanski, Ph.D., Biotechnology Coordinator at the FDA, 1985-2006 - Michael Hansen, Ph.D., Senior Staff Scientist of the Consumers Union - Samuel Epstein, Ph.D., President of the Cancer Prevention Coalition - David Carpenter, Ph.D., University of Albany

chestnut-tree 12y ago

"...you'd be hard-pressed to find anything other than natural eggs from free-range chickens" Which European country is that? Battery cages are banned in the EU, but caged hens are still permitted as long as the space in the cage meets EU welfare standards.

kalleboo 12y ago
In Sweden most of the large supermarket chains have stopped selling caged eggs or limited to selling them when supply is short[0]. Less than 10% of eggs sold are from caged hens.[1] Of course, any pre-fabricated food will still contain caged eggs since that doesn't have to be declared in the ingredients. [0] http://www.dn.se/ekonomi/matkedjor-slutar-med-agg-fran-burhons/ http://www.dn.se/ekonomi/matkedjor-slutar-med-agg-fran-burho... [1] http://www.landetsfria.se/artikel/114064 http://www.landetsfria.se/artikel/114064