3 ms·

I live in Sonoma County California and I'm so sick of all the people around me just assuming that GMOs are obviously bad. It seems people here, a lot of them fa

I live in Sonoma County California and I'm so sick of all the people around me just assuming that GMOs are obviously bad. It seems people here, a lot of them farmers, are not at all interested in facts. They are attracted to the anti-science, anti-corporation, anti-establishment aspects of the anti-GMO movement. Facts take a backseat. Granted, these are also people who believe in Biodynamics and its horns full of crystals which channel cosimic power. Perhaps an expectation of basic reasioning is too much.

mturmon 12y ago
Regarding this irrationality, my pet theory is that the arena of "food" is an attractor for superstition. Maybe it has something to do with the mysterious process by which you are built from the stuff you eat. From fad diets, to religious diet restrictions, to diet-based "studies have shown" trends (antioxidants!), to made up allergies. It's no accident that most established religions have dietary rules. (Yes, I know some of these allergies are real. And some of the diets have merit.) Diet attracts all kinds of attention, and only a small part of it is based in reality. It's like a projector screen where other anxieties play out.
- jcoffland 11y ago
  Wow, well said. I also feel that many people use their diet choices as a way to excercise control in their lives.
KingMob 12y ago
If you prefer a more scientific rationale to be cautious of GMOs, check out any of Nassim Nicholas Taleb's books on risk. The short version is, our standards for safety must match the potential dangers. E.g., you're dying of cancer? No need to worry about minor (or even major) side effects of medication, because you're facing death. There's a 1 in a million chance of producing a GMO with worldwide consequences? You have to be absolutely positive, nearly 100% certain they're harmless. A handful of studies is nowhere near sufficient (without even addressing the inherent conflict of interest in investigating your own GMO for safety). Even if you had a couple dozen studies on one GMO, could you ensure that level of caution for all?
- tptacek 12y ago
  Yes, you could; GMO crops are studied far more carefully than the grab-bag of interventions routinely used in conventional farming is. GMO crops are more efficient --- that being the point of spending more money on GMO stock than on conventional plants --- and so require fewer pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers, which in conventional agriculture also contaminate the land and food supply with carcinogens and endocrine disruptors.

mturmon 12y ago

Regarding this irrationality, my pet theory is that the arena of "food" is an attractor for superstition. Maybe it has something to do with the mysterious process by which you are built from the stuff you eat. From fad diets, to religious diet restrictions, to diet-based "studies have shown" trends (antioxidants!), to made up allergies. It's no accident that most established religions have dietary rules. (Yes, I know some of these allergies are real. And some of the diets have merit.) Diet attracts all kinds of attention, and only a small part of it is based in reality. It's like a projector screen where other anxieties play out.

jcoffland 11y ago
Wow, well said. I also feel that many people use their diet choices as a way to excercise control in their lives.

KingMob 12y ago

If you prefer a more scientific rationale to be cautious of GMOs, check out any of Nassim Nicholas Taleb's books on risk. The short version is, our standards for safety must match the potential dangers. E.g., you're dying of cancer? No need to worry about minor (or even major) side effects of medication, because you're facing death. There's a 1 in a million chance of producing a GMO with worldwide consequences? You have to be absolutely positive, nearly 100% certain they're harmless. A handful of studies is nowhere near sufficient (without even addressing the inherent conflict of interest in investigating your own GMO for safety). Even if you had a couple dozen studies on one GMO, could you ensure that level of caution for all?

tptacek 12y ago
Yes, you could; GMO crops are studied far more carefully than the grab-bag of interventions routinely used in conventional farming is. GMO crops are more efficient --- that being the point of spending more money on GMO stock than on conventional plants --- and so require fewer pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers, which in conventional agriculture also contaminate the land and food supply with carcinogens and endocrine disruptors.