GMOs Don't Hurt Anyone, But Opposing Them Does

how do you keep any of these crops from effecting the genes of other foods?

You cant.

we don't know enough about its ramifications.

If they really want to help these people send them food with the nutrition in them naturally to grow
 
tekkychick said:
One thing to say they CAN be changed (but they won't be because businesses have too much money in the process); another thing to say they can be broken.
Click to expand...

Read Thoreau. They can be broken. Again, it's not a fact of nature. We have to respect the law of gravity. We don't have to respect a patent law. It is not even a law that civilization is very dependent on. Monsanto aint shit. We could storm it's headquarters and kill everyone of it's executives tomorrow. I am certainly not suggesting we do that, but these ridiculous fears of a dystopian future where we are all compelled to drink roundup is just a bunch of hysteria over nothing. Fuck Monsanto!
 
Professor Baxter said:
Read Thoreau. They can be broken. Again, it's not a fact of nature. We have to respect the law of gravity. We don't have to respect a patent law. It is not even a law that civilization is very dependent on. Monsanto aint shit. We could storm it's headquarters and kill everyone of it's executives tomorrow. I am certainly not suggesting we do that, but these ridiculous fears of a dystopian future where we are all compelled to drink roundup is just a bunch of hysteria over nothing. Fuck Monsanto!
Click to expand...

Monsanto has anticipated your response
http://beforeitsnews.com/war-and-co...hired-blackwater-mercenary-group-2447500.html


And they are immune from liability for health problems that might arise from their products thanks to the Farmers Assurance Act (AKA Monsanto Protection Act)
 
tinfoil said:
Monsanto has anticipated your response
http://beforeitsnews.com/war-and-co...hired-blackwater-mercenary-group-2447500.html
Click to expand...

Are you incapable of smelling bullshit?

Xe (now Academi) has, indeed, been purchased, and while there’s no way of DOCUMENTING who the new owners really are, the logical conclusion would be that Monsanto, who had been employing them prior to the sale are the new owners.

That's not a logical conclusion.


tinfoil said:
And they are immune from liability for health problems that might arise from their products thanks to the Farmers Assurance Act (AKA Monsanto Protection Act)
Click to expand...

More bullshit that I already debunked on the board. It does not protect Monsanto at all.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/hr5973/text
 
Professor Baxter said:
OF COURSE, you can change it. What the hell are you talking about?
Click to expand...

How on earth could one ever garner enough support to strip the owners of patents of their property rights?

What incentive would there then be for invention, inovation, discovery, and research? You are not being logical, you are in a fantasy, like your idea of storming Monsanto and killing it's executives, it is not grounded in reality and neither are you.
 
Rune said:
How on earth could one ever garner enough support to strip the owners of patents of their property rights?

What incentive would there then be for invention, inovation, discovery, and research? You are not being logical, you are in a fantasy, like your idea of storming Monsanto and killing it's executives, it is not grounded in reality and neither are you.
Click to expand...

You just change the patent laws. We have changed them before.

I am making the point that Monsanto has no power we need to fear. It's downright moronic to suppress technology that could save millions of lives based on some vague and unfounded fear of a Trojan horse they are going to spring on us. Their patent rights are fucking meaningless without OUR courts and police to enforce them. The real world aint a bad sci fi movie. In the real world Monsanto aint shit. In the real world we could burn them to the ground in a few hours or deal with them in numerous other ways if they become a problem. I made it quite clear that I was not suggesting we do that but the fears based on nothing but wild speculation need a dose of reality.

I am in no fantasy! You are thanking the post of some conspiratard who is worried about Monsanto building a private army and who is telling blatant lies about the effect of laws recently passed.
 
Professor Baxter said:
You just change the patent laws. We have changed them before.

I am making the point that Monsanto has no power we need to fear. It's downright moronic to suppress technology that could save millions of lives based on some vague and unfounded fear of a Trojan horse they are going to spring on us. Their patent rights are fucking meaningless without OUR courts and police to enforce them. The real world aint a bad sci fi movie. In the real world Monsanto aint shit. In the real world we could burn them to the ground in a few hours or deal with them in numerous other ways if they become a problem. I made it quite clear that I was not suggesting we do that but the fears based on nothing but wild speculation need a dose of reality.

I am in no fantasy! You are thanking the post of some conspiratard who is worried about Monsanto building a private army and who is telling blatant lies about the effect of laws recently passed.
Click to expand...

Tom isn't a conspiratard, he is like you. He is a hired gun who can post on subjects other than those he is paid for, as you also do. Either that or you are an idiot, since your theory is so unsound, unproven, and fraught with danger.

In this case, Tom is correct, since he is posting as a scientist on this topic, since it is not the topic of interest of his masters.
 
Rune said:
Tom isn't a conspiratard, he is like you. He is a hired gun who can post on subjects other than those he is paid for, as you also do. Either that or you are an idiot, since your theory is so unsound, unproven, and fraught with danger.

In this case, Tom is correct, since he is posting as a scientist on this topic, since it is not the topic of interest of his masters.
Click to expand...

? I am not getting paid to post. There is nothing in my "theory" (whatever that is) that is unsound.

Tom has not posted any science. He posted some garbage from homeopathic quacks, the philosopher/political activist Vendana Shiva and his vague fears about the patent laws.
 
evince said:
how do you keep any of these crops from effecting the genes of other foods?

You cant.

we don't know enough about its ramifications.

If they really want to help these people send them food with the nutrition in them naturally to grow
Click to expand...

This is where you lost the debate. When you can satisfactorily answer the questions, then we can talk.
 
Professor Baxter said:
? I am not getting paid to post. There is nothing in my "theory" (whatever that is) that is unsound.

Tom has not posted any science. He posted some garbage from homeopathic quacks, the philosopher/political activist Vendana Shiva and his vague fears about the patent laws.
Click to expand...

Note that you respond to 40% of the content of my posts at best. Your theory is the title of this thread. There is no proof at all of your claim, offered or even available, since as I have told you repeatedly, it is too soon to tell.
 
Rune said:
This is where you lost the debate. When you can satisfactorily answer the questions, then we can talk.
Click to expand...

Fuck off! I have lost nothing.

Cite some real dangers of gene flow for golden rice?

How do we stop it in non gmo crops?

I have already explained why other crops fail to address the issue. Rice is a staple, abundant in their diet but has little nutritive value. Golden rice will help to close the gap in their vitamin deficiency.
 
Professor Baxter said:
Fuck off! I have lost nothing.

Cite some real dangers of gene flow for golden rice?

How do we stop it in non gmo crops?

I have already explained why other crops fail to address the issue. Rice is a staple, abundant in their diet but has little nutritive value. Golden rice will help to close the gap in their vitamin deficiency.
Click to expand...

So you can't answer Evince's questions?
 
Professor Baxter said:
I answered. Apparently, you can't add anything. Maybe desh will.
Click to expand...

I can add something. If this happens, eventually all rice will descend from golden rice, so you better be correct about it's ramifications and cross your fingers about the Law of Unintended Consequences as well. We can easily produce enough food for the world, the political will doesn't exist.
 
Rune said:
Note that you respond to 40% of the content of my posts at best. Your theory is the title of this thread. There is no proof at all of your claim, offered or even available, since as I have told you repeatedly, it is too soon to tell.
Click to expand...

I responded to everyone of your points all of which were without substance.

The proof for the claim of the author is in the article linked in the OP. 18 million dead kids and no proof of any harm from GMO.
 
Rune said:
I can add something. If this happens, eventually all rice will descend from golden rice, so you better be correct about it's ramifications and cross your fingers about the Law of Unintended Consequences as well. We can easily produce enough food for the world, the political will doesn't exist.
Click to expand...

Oooohooooohhh

Gene flows have been found to be very low for GM rice. It is .28% at .2 meters to <.01% with separation of a whole 6.2 meters.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17204081
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17443417
 
Last edited:
Professor Baxter said:
? I am not getting paid to post. There is nothing in my "theory" (whatever that is) that is unsound.

Tom has not posted any science. He posted some garbage from homeopathic quacks, the philosopher/political activist Vendana Shiva and his vague fears about the patent laws.
Click to expand...

Vendana Shiva studied Quantum Physics to doctorate level but you insist on characterising her as a 'philosopher' in an attempt to rubbish her. As I have said before, we won't have anything to do with GM in Europe if you want to do so in the US then good luck with that. We also do not want your growth hormone injected beef.

I took the trouble to look at the UNICEF website, it would seem that they are already doing a huge amount to combat VAD without resorting to GM rice. Looking at the map, not surprisingly Africa figures highly. Apart from some parts of West Africa, rice is not grown and no doubt the Golden Rice would have to be imported from, surprise, surprise, the USA.

This is the current strategy of UNICEF and I frankly cannot see anything wrong with it.

The solution

Programmes to prevent and control vitamin A deficiency enhance a child's chances of survival, reduce the severity of childhood illnesses, ease the strain on health systems and hospitals, and contribute to the well-being of children, their families and communities. Three major deficiency control strategies currently exist, all meant to complement ongoing public health measures for the prevention and control of infectious diseases.

Supplementation: Current international recommendations call for high-dose vitamin A supplementation every four to six months, targeted to all children between the ages of 6 to 59 months living in affected areas. Providing young children with two high-dose vitamin A capsules a year is a safe, cost-effective, efficient strategy for eliminating vitamin A deficiency and improving child survival. Giving vitamin A to new mothers who are breastfeeding helps protect their children during the first months of life and helps replenish the mother's stores of vitamin A, which are depleted during pregnancy and lactation.

Food fortification: Food fortification is being introduced in more and more countries, and holds great hope for long-term control of vitamin A deficiency. Multiple products currently serve as vehicles: Sugar, oil, milk, margarine, infant foods and various types of flour are among the most common. In most cases, fortification can take several years to initiate and longer still to reach all at-risk children and their families. Even countries with successful fortification programmes may need to continue supplementation activities. For example, a number of countries in Latin America are successfully supporting efforts to fortify sugar with vitamin A and are also targeting vitamin A supplementation to high-risk areas of countries or to children (6–24 months) through routine health contacts.

Dietary diversification: Non-animal sources of vitamin A account for greater than 80 per cent of intake for most individuals in the developing world. In order to meet the nutrition needs of children, intake of these sources would need to increase up to tenfold. Feasible control of deficiency through dietary diversification would require increased consumption of bioavailable, vitamin A-rich foods of animal origin, coupled with continued promotion of nutritious fruits and vegetables. Multiple interventions to this effect have been carried out; however, scale-up of these efforts is limited by a lack of well-designed assessments to attest to their efficacy and effectiveness in reducing the burden of deficiency.
In view of the challenges to rapid and large-scale implementation of food-based interventions, supplementation is currently the primary strategy to control vitamin A deficiency and among the key interventions for improving the survival of young children. Countries carrying out two annual rounds of vitamin A supplementation reaching at least 80 per cent coverage among children 6–59 months (considered "effective coverage") are on track to meet international development goals. Concurrently, efforts will be needed in order to achieve equitable coverage by ensuring that the remaining 20 per cent and at-risk populations within countries are fully protected. Coverage at this threshold will ensure the full child survival benefit of vitamin A supplementation, which will be critical to attaining Millennium Development Goal 4. While guidelines do not yet exist for the phase-out of supplementation, it is expected that priority countries will need to continue vitamin A supplementation at effective coverage levels for the foreseeable future in order to realize international goals for child survival and vitamin A–deficiency control while improving dietary approaches and infectious disease control.
Click to expand...

vitamina_challenge_2010_2.jpg


http://www.childinfo.org/vitamina.html
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top