I want to know more about GMOs. Seen a lotta documentaries and read a
lotta websites. Looks like a lotta hype/spin/etc from both sides. The
bottom question is: can they hurt me? If so, how. If not, why?

nb

notbob wrote:
>
> I want to know more about GMOs. Seen a lotta documentaries and read a
> lotta websites. Looks like a lotta hype/spin/etc from both sides. The
> bottom question is: can they hurt me? If so, how. If not, why?
>
> nb

Troll-o-Meter = Full Scale


There are two main issues with GMO foods:

1. The make the scientifically challenged population paranoid with
unsubstantiated "what if" scenarios.

2. For the GMOs that are disease / insect resistant they are a short
term solution only since diseases and insects have this little thing
called evolution and they evolve their way back to infecting/infesting
the GMO crops. This is already happening with some of the earlier GMO
crops.

On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 14:37:05 -0500, "Pete C." >
wrote:

>
>notbob wrote:
>>
>> I want to know more about GMOs. Seen a lotta documentaries and read a
>> lotta websites. Looks like a lotta hype/spin/etc from both sides. The
>> bottom question is: can they hurt me? If so, how. If not, why?
>>
>> nb
>
>Troll-o-Meter = Full Scale
>
>
>There are two main issues with GMO foods:
>
>1. The make the scientifically challenged population paranoid with
>unsubstantiated "what if" scenarios.
>
>2. For the GMOs that are disease / insect resistant they are a short
>term solution only since diseases and insects have this little thing
>called evolution and they evolve their way back to infecting/infesting
>the GMO crops. This is already happening with some of the earlier GMO
>crops.

The problem is that GMO plants can escape.. There is currently a big
payout for Idaho, Washington and Oregon. It seems that a wheat that
was only 'tested' ten years ago, escaped and is currently found in
fields in those 3 states.
Janet US

On 2014-11-14 9:29 AM, Janet B wrote:

> The problem is that GMO plants can escape.. There is currently a big
> payout for Idaho, Washington and Oregon. It seems that a wheat that
> was only 'tested' ten years ago, escaped and is currently found in
> fields in those 3 states.
>



Funny how that product can be identified in other local fields but some
here are concerned about the cost of labeling GMO foods as a result of
expensive testing. One of my issues about GMO is the way it allows
companies to patent genetic material and the way that they insist on
licensing fees to use their seed. Farmers used to retain a portion of
their crop to use for seed for the next year's crop. It certainly made
more sense for them do that. They saved the cost of trucking the crop to
the buyer and then having to pay more to buy seed and truck it back.
Monsanto does not allow that. If you buy their GMO product and save
seed for replanting, you have to pay them. If your neighbours have GMO
and it starts growing in your fields you owe them money, and I think
that stinks.

Dave Smith wrote:

> If your neighbours have GMO
> and it starts growing in your fields you owe them money, and I think
> that stinks.

I've got to call urban (rural?) legend on this. There is more than
enough (baseless) anti-GMO sentiment that if that was a real issue there
would be a well funded counter suit for "pollen trespass" and claims for
damage to the farmer's non-GMO crops as a result of the contamination.

On 2014-11-14 11:04 AM, Pete C. wrote:
>
> Dave Smith wrote:
>
>> If your neighbours have GMO
>> and it starts growing in your fields you owe them money, and I think
>> that stinks.
>
> I've got to call urban (rural?) legend on this.

Yes. I am well aware that you would rather play the denial game than to
do the research.


>There is more than
> enough (baseless) anti-GMO sentiment that if that was a real issue there
> would be a well funded counter suit for "pollen trespass" and claims for
> damage to the farmer's non-GMO crops as a result of the contamination.
>


That might help to explain Monsanto's case before they US Supreme Court
where the ruling upheld their ability to sue farmers whose fields had
been accidentally contaminated by Monsanto material and it denied
farmers standing in cases against Monsanto for the contamination of
their crops. FWIW. There have been more than 100 suits against farmers
for unauthorized use of the genetically modified seed and 700 settled
without going to court.


















http://rt.com/usa/monsanto-patents-sue-farmers-547/

Bruce wrote:
>
> On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 14:37:05 -0500, "Pete C." >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >notbob wrote:
> >>
> >> I want to know more about GMOs. Seen a lotta documentaries and read a
> >> lotta websites. Looks like a lotta hype/spin/etc from both sides. The
> >> bottom question is: can they hurt me? If so, how. If not, why?
> >>
> >> nb
> >
> >Troll-o-Meter = Full Scale
> >
> >
> >There are two main issues with GMO foods:
> >
> >1. The make the scientifically challenged population paranoid with
> >unsubstantiated "what if" scenarios.
> >
> >2. For the GMOs that are disease / insect resistant they are a short
> >term solution only since diseases and insects have this little thing
> >called evolution and they evolve their way back to infecting/infesting
> >the GMO crops. This is already happening with some of the earlier GMO
> >crops.
>
> 3. GMO products should be labeled as such, so that everybody can make
> up their own mind about using them or not.

Nah, you're too scientifically challenged to make such decisions.

Bruce wrote:
>
> On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 17:49:36 -0500, "Pete C." >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >Bruce wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 14:37:05 -0500, "Pete C." >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >notbob wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> I want to know more about GMOs. Seen a lotta documentaries and read a
> >> >> lotta websites. Looks like a lotta hype/spin/etc from both sides. The
> >> >> bottom question is: can they hurt me? If so, how. If not, why?
> >> >>
> >> >> nb
> >> >
> >> >Troll-o-Meter = Full Scale
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >There are two main issues with GMO foods:
> >> >
> >> >1. The make the scientifically challenged population paranoid with
> >> >unsubstantiated "what if" scenarios.
> >> >
> >> >2. For the GMOs that are disease / insect resistant they are a short
> >> >term solution only since diseases and insects have this little thing
> >> >called evolution and they evolve their way back to infecting/infesting
> >> >the GMO crops. This is already happening with some of the earlier GMO
> >> >crops.
> >>
> >> 3. GMO products should be labeled as such, so that everybody can make
> >> up their own mind about using them or not.
> >
> >Nah, you're too scientifically challenged to make such decisions.
>
> Never trust those who want to withhold information from consumers.

You mean like the cult of climate change clinging to their falsified
data?

On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 16:37:18 +1100, Bruce > wrote:

> Never trust those who want to withhold information from consumers.
>
Agree.



--
Avoid cutting yourself when slicing vegetables by getting someone else to hold them.

On Friday, November 14, 2014 12:19:15 AM UTC-6, The Other Guy wrote:
>
>
> Right, because the average consumer is smart enough to MAKE the right
> choices.
>
> Such as avoiding fattening food, and getting their children vaccinated!!
>
Parents who refuse to get their children vaccinated should be put into
the stocks, where the public should be allowed to urinate (but not
defecate) on them. Dry farts are also OK.
>

--Bryan

"Bruce" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 22:19:08 -0800, The Other Guy
> > wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 16:37:18 +1100, Bruce > wrote:
>>
>>>>> 3. GMO products should be labeled as such, so that everybody can make
>>>>> up their own mind about using them or not.
>>>>
>>>>Nah, you're too scientifically challenged to make such decisions.
>>>
>>>Never trust those who want to withhold information from consumers.
>>
>>Right, because the average consumer is smart enough to MAKE the right
>>choices.
>
> Are you suggesting withholding information from consumers because
> they're too stupid to use it sensibly?

that was the premise behind Obummercare.

On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 05:37:28 -0800, "Pico Rico"
> wrote:

>
> "Bruce" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 22:19:08 -0800, The Other Guy
> > > wrote:
> >
> >>On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 16:37:18 +1100, Bruce > wrote:
> >>
> >>>>> 3. GMO products should be labeled as such, so that everybody can make
> >>>>> up their own mind about using them or not.
> >>>>
> >>>>Nah, you're too scientifically challenged to make such decisions.
> >>>
> >>>Never trust those who want to withhold information from consumers.
> >>
> >>Right, because the average consumer is smart enough to MAKE the right
> >>choices.
> >
> > Are you suggesting withholding information from consumers because
> > they're too stupid to use it sensibly?
>
> that was the premise behind Obummercare.
>
and people are benefiting from finally having affordable healthcare.


--
Avoid cutting yourself when slicing vegetables by getting someone else to hold them.

Bruce wrote:
>
> On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 08:36:19 -0800, sf > wrote:
>
> >On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 05:37:28 -0800, "Pico Rico"
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> "Bruce" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 22:19:08 -0800, The Other Guy
> >> > > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 16:37:18 +1100, Bruce > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>>>> 3. GMO products should be labeled as such, so that everybody can make
> >> >>>>> up their own mind about using them or not.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>Nah, you're too scientifically challenged to make such decisions.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>Never trust those who want to withhold information from consumers.
> >> >>
> >> >>Right, because the average consumer is smart enough to MAKE the right
> >> >>choices.
> >> >
> >> > Are you suggesting withholding information from consumers because
> >> > they're too stupid to use it sensibly?
> >>
> >> that was the premise behind Obummercare.
> >>
> >and people are benefiting from finally having affordable healthcare.
>
> A sign of civilization. Not surprising Republicans are against it.

4% of the population is benefiting. 96% of the population has been
significantly harmed by huge increases in health care costs.

On 13 Nov 2014 17:33:15 GMT, notbob > wrote:

> I want to know more about GMOs. Seen a lotta documentaries and read a
> lotta websites. Looks like a lotta hype/spin/etc from both sides. The
> bottom question is: can they hurt me? If so, how. If not, why?
>
How thick would you like your serving of pesticides?



--
Avoid cutting yourself when slicing vegetables by getting someone else to hold them.

sf wrote:
>
> On 13 Nov 2014 17:33:15 GMT, notbob > wrote:
>
> > I want to know more about GMOs. Seen a lotta documentaries and read a
> > lotta websites. Looks like a lotta hype/spin/etc from both sides. The
> > bottom question is: can they hurt me? If so, how. If not, why?
> >
> How thick would you like your serving of pesticides?

And the GMOs built-in pesticides are so different from the sprayed on
pesticides of non-GMO crops?

Organic is all peachy and lulls people into a false sense of security
just like "herd immunity" with vaccinations, then a blight of whatever
sort comes around and you have massive crop failures and suddenly people
are starving, much like the anti vaccination crowd is bringing back all
manner of nasty diseases that were forgotten and now kids are dying as a
result.

For my little hermit farm as I get it going, I'll do what I can organic,
but I'll have a dammed good supply of fungicide and pesticide on the
shelf as a backup.

Sqwertz wrote:
>
> On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 17:48:32 -0500, Pete C. wrote:
>
> > sf wrote:
> >>
> >> How thick would you like your serving of pesticides?
> >
> > And the GMOs built-in pesticides are so different from the sprayed on
> > pesticides of non-GMO crops?
>
> There's nothing preventing pesticides from being sprayed on GMO crops
> the same as non-GMO crops.

Nothing preventing, other than cost. Much of the premise of the GMO
crops was to reduce or eliminate spraying pesticides. As noted however
it has a short term gain since the pests evolve resistance to the GMO
crops.

"notbob" > wrote in message
...
>I want to know more about GMOs. Seen a lotta documentaries and read a
> lotta websites. Looks like a lotta hype/spin/etc from both sides. The
> bottom question is: can they hurt me? If so, how. If not, why?
>

No. NO! Alright - NO as in NO NO NO!!!!!!!!!

This message brought to you by Monsanto - the company that just wants to
fill every tummy with nourishing food. EVen if it kills you. Got that?
You better or you can talk to our lawyers.



---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

GMO means Genetically Engineered Organisms and it basically involves using scientific methods to tweak the DNA of plants and animals so they become resistant to pesticides and diseases. It is as controversial as it sounds and is not very good as organisms not meant for human consumption are introduced into foods.

On 2014-11-13, Sqwertz > wrote:

> Nice nose, BTW. It must be cold there!

Couldn't be me. He has hair up above his earlobes.

nb