Wikileak: US Trade War on Europe Over GM Crops

if that's the folks with the green suits video they're a-okay by me

[and this coming from mister-no-popular-culture]

 

The problem with GMO's is not health, but with Corporate fascism. GMO's are rather safe, and has nothing to do with synthetic or toxic materials and chemicals. It's the introduction of natural benefiicial genes into the genes of a different species. It's organic because it's organic chemistry still. The only scientific threat isn't to human nutrition but rather ecological effects a change in part of an ecosystem might cause, but isn't automatically a threat. It depends on what time of Genetic Modification is taking place, making a plant resistant to herbicide is not the same as introducing beneficial genes the help increase vigor, and natural pest responses.

 

I must take issue with this assertion based on the fact that GMOs have not been in the food supply long enough to determine whether or not there are long term health effects from their consumption. My very un-scientific "spidey sense" screams "stay away" and I will abide by that.

Are we relying on government to assure us about the safety of products biologically engineered by a corporation that is essentially in bed with the government? Bear in mind that it was the government that assured us for decades that the product made by their buddies in the tobacco industry had no proven health effects... and while the first verifiable effects of asbestos were documented as early as 1906 in the US, it wasn't until 1989 that they issued a ruling that the long proven carcinogen was to be phased out.

Reading the intent through government actions (or inactions) I can only conclude that the standard used to determine whether something is to be labeled "safe" is strictly whether its sale is sufficiently profitable for entities with the resources to lobby congress. That describes Monsanto to a tee.

 

I shouldn't have said it like all are, but I think a lot of them probably are, and this is just what I have learned in my agriculture studies. My teacher may be slightly biased, but he has supported organic and sustainability so I don't know why he'd really lean one way or another. Monsanto can not be trusted however. I do know a lot of Genetic engineering is transplanting genetic information that is only natural in other genetics. But it is true that this is still messing with ecological roles, but nearly every agricultural practice has it's consequences. Perhaps we should just go back to hunting and gathering.

 

Well- I think I get what you meant and I cannot say that you are wrong. I would expect there would be little if any ill effects for a majority who might ingest GMOs- but when we take into account that some of the modifications are intended to reduce the need for chemical pesticides by essentially having a plant produce its own pesticide I am given pause. Perhaps 99% of the population who eats GMOs wouldn't react to them... at least not right away... and of those, probably 75% will never feel any severe effects from long term regular consumption, but the minority whose immune systems see the modified food as a poison- an invader. Perhaps some unsuspecting consumer has an anaphylactic reaction their next go at some corn or soy.

As far as nutritional value, hunting and gathering would be far preferable to products of the food industry- whose sole purpose for existence is to make money... this they share with pharmaceutical corporations whose profits wouldn't be as possible without the motivated demand created by an adulterated food supply... with chemical colors, flavors, and preservatives added for the purpose of profit and limiting loss- and to consider the trace pesticides, hormones, and antibiotics present in every agricultural product and it becomes less of a mystery that auto-immune specialists, oncologists, and drug makers are doing so well these days. Cancer and diabetes epidemics are not accidents and neither are arthritis, MS, Parkinson's, and lupus.

Of course, a BIG part of the equation is our collective inactivity of people today. Inactivity will slow metabolism and leave food adjuncts and purposefully mutated crops in the system longer, just like the plaques that like taking residence in coronary arteries. Having to hunt and gather would help immensely on that end as well.

That you are in an agriculture related field of study gives you a perspective on this that most of the rest of us can not enjoy. It does give me some appreciation for what you have to say. Thank you for sharing your views here.

 

This isn't to say that it doesn't have the potential to cause adverse reactions in some people, or that it wouldn't have an impact on the ecological effect of a cropping system on the natural world in its environment but this is what I'm talking about...

Yes, technically, the genetic modifications are to help produce "pesticides" in the plant, but it is not pesticides like you think (I only suspect). What you are referring to is Bacillus thuringiensis, it is a naturally occurring bacteria that is detrimental to most insect populations. As the farmers choice in many "Organic" or sustainable cropping systems Bacillus thuringiensis is applied separately as a means of pest control. The scientific controversy lies in placing a gene for it, within the genes of a plant. To lots of people it doesn't sound like a safe practice, but people commonly fear what they don't understand. That doesn't mean it is completely safe, and any plant, modified or not, that is planted in mass amounts in monoculture is not ecologically sound. I would take the risk as a farmer to do controlled and integrated managed applications of Bt, realizing that any overuse or blind use will lead to ecological impact greater than just having a crop in the first place.

This is why we look into things like intercropping and rotations. Not only for the case of Bt, but to break cycles that build up in ecological significance throughout time.

Edited,
The ecological impact of a cropping system is not only something cared for, to protect the natural world, but also to ensure that our crops receive the best natural benefits from their ecosystem as possible.

 

it's more than an individual farmer - it's a farm community that is experimenting with applications of Bt . there is vague control when farmers do not even speak of it over coffee , thus , such a community is weak and the situation just rolls on and the $$$$ oh the $$$$

that gmo corn project began with a 30% refuge . a refuge is planted to conventional hybreds . it is now recommended by the seedsalesmen to plant only 5% refuge . the theory of refuge is to allow some plants that the insects will eat so they don't just adapt and bio-learn to eat the gmo . it's theory . it's a vast mass experiment . there are worried U.S farmers , but most whisper to the moon .

 

Yes, but apparently you mistook what I wrote. I wasn't even getting into the politics of it, so don't address my statements as if. The large scale use of anything is sketchy at best. Yes a lot of the "traditional" conservative american farmers do not SHARE anything about their endeavors, and Monsanto is taking advantage of these people who ignorantly trust them. But there is a whole outgrowth of a community that does share, and this is why we have things like University or State co-ops that do research and make individual recommendations relative to farmer's conditions, and also the NRCS, a federal agency, is taking part in this very good sharing of information. Also when I say application I mean it's placement on a crop like any other insecticide, except it's natural. This is organic practice. It is genetic modification that you politicos are concerned over, and rightly so. The conventional seed situation is not a new problem, but it doesn't make it less important, and I think it is good the business practices are being called into question. I just wonder why it's the same people on here who have a problem with Government regulation. There was a huge misunderstanding over the Food Safaty Bill, and I suggest in an issue that is actually a legitimate concern, not necessarily only ecologically, but also for the livelihoods of the people who grow most of our food, that we get all the different pieces straight.

 

ewwww, they so greedy!!!! they can't patent natures products, so they find a way of destroying natures products and offering interfered with alternatives that are patentable... they makes their monies and we will pay more than the required 1lb of flesh if GM carries on...

 

I think they can.

 

^^^ you are wrong... you can't patent a naturally occurring plant...

 

What they can patent is their modifications to the organism. In a case where cross pollination of their GMO into an unsuspecting farmer's crop they can sue that farmer for patent infringement.

Source

 

Here! Watch this video!!!
Perhaps it can explain things to you that popular "television" way

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3m5lq9FHDo"]YouTube - THE CORPORATION [5/23] Case Histories

I love the part about Mansoto.

 

i don't have a television

and i'm on dialup so can't watch a 23 minute youtube thing

[please summarize]

btw it helps to first know something about the people you hurl insults at, don't you think?

 

i have this DVD... it is factual and sickening... would recommend it to everyone! i especially loved the bit where they illustrated how corps, (such an apt abbr. don't you think? ) actually share the same "qualities" as a psychopath....

so we got psychopaths running things... hmmm... no wonder we live in inherently neurotic, doomed societies

 

It says don't take the brown acid. But hey man, it's your trip.

It would appear that it is difficult for you to comprehend most of what is written or posted and you either don't realize your inadequacies or you're caught up in your own suppositions. Furthermore you continuously play the victim and you make excuses for not trying to improve yourself.

I might be wrong, afterall it's difficult to know someone from just forum postings. But that's the perception I'm left after having read your comments. You're probably a great guy in person. (Most people are)

When I log on to the Internet, it's because I have to and not for pleasure. Trust me, I like to take the fight to the streets. Anyhow, since I'm left with free time waiting for things to upload, I might as well use that time productively. Like some people spam forums for viagra pills an porn, I troll several forums with political messages trying to motivate people to take to the streets.

So in your defence,
On every forum there is someone like you. The person that appears to just "not get it" even less than most others. I can not educate you or make it any more clear the danger this planet is in. You need to do that for yourself. Therefore, you can either invest in the time to download the clip I posted or not. Take the initiative or not. It's up to you.

 

There is less and less documentaries every day that are based on facts and not propaganda. This was one of the best factual documentary I have seen in a long time.

As it stands,
We are a doomed species. We'll be lucky to have another 30 years before mass extinction of humanity begins. And it's not just the environment that is ready to collapse, it's our entire social system and societies that are falling apart. A dark Orwell based future is here, it's today. In a very short period of time, we won't even have that.

Think of it this way,
We might be the last generation to have children. Because our children may not live long enough to have children of their own. And all because less than 1,000 greedy mega-rich-assholes decided they wanted even more.

**** Yes I said less than "one-thousand people in the whole world are responsible for causing this mess" ****

 

unfortunately, people like you are more common - a person who assumes that they're smarter than everyone else

most of the posters in here, perhaps even myself included, know as much or more than you do about the issues raised here

good luck with the brick throwing thing . . .

 

Fixed that last post for ya.

 

Exactly. I think it's been mentioned previously.