Death from Malnutrition from eating GMO products.
>deaths from malnutrition
>malnutrition from having Monsanto sue all the family farmers until they lose their land
>monsanto-backed corporate farms then export food to developed countries
Quit trying to make me care about orclets.
>>70185309
Deaths from malnutrition are a good thing. That's 3 million less niggers in the world.
>>70185309
On its own, nothing wrong with them.
The can of worms that any mucking about with genetics bring with it is a cause for concern. Not because I believe they have any negative effect on their own, but because natural evolution will seek to match it, basically increasing the rates at which something bad might evolve to fuck things up.
That all said we need to let africa die on the vine a bit, we are artificially keeping their populations up, if we stopped giving them free food and water a large fraction of them would just die.
>>70185309
>le gmos will save the starving africans maymay
This argument is retarded because it is based on the false assumption that the reason people starve today is because of inadequate farming technology. That is not the case, it is caused by demographic and economic mismanagement in the third world. GMO wont fix that, at "best"(really not an improvement at all) well have even more people in the world producing even more babies in need of food. The problem is that the third world lets their population grow to the supply limit, raising the supply limit wont fix that. Same reason western food aid solves nothing.
>>70185612
It actually causes less niggers in the long run, since a family with more children that survive is incentivized to have less kids over time.
The last thing we should be doing is feeding niggers.
>>70185309
I'm not a scientist. I can only read and trust or keep my eyes closed.
Most imported veggies and fruits have no taste compared to normal we have here so people don't trust anything from modern food engeneering anymore. I heard GMO requires some special pesticides or something and they're pretty evil. Also something-something about endangered kinds that were created my selectionists because GMO like... overtake them? Again, I'm not a scientist.
>>70185965
Some estimates go as far as asserting near 50% of all food produced goes to waste, so obviously it's not a production problem like anon here says
Babu the finance minister needs to siphon that grain and sell it to warlords, etc etc
>>70185965
I'm pretty sure that the total amount of ariable land will fuck them up even if they fix their economic issues.
>>70185729
>The problem is that the third world lets their population grow to the supply limit, raising the supply limit wont fix that.
The third world nations are getting fucked over hard by Western do gooders sending food aid, it destroys the local/national agriculture production base and causes dependency. The end result is famine and poverty.
>>70185612
Fewer
>>70186072
>over time
There is the problem. I am fine with mountains of dead niglets due to starvation. Anything to keep their populations low.
>>70185309
GMO labels are another way for the whole foods Jew to charge you $20 for asparagus water
GMOs are find by themselves, it's all the shady shit from the corporations that is the problem.
>>70186328
No aren't. Fuck off shill. More information always helps the consumer.
GMO is the technology that can feed the world.
>>70185965
It might not help the most screwed people but if it helps the borderline cases that's progress. Your excuse is like saying we can't save everyone so don't save anyone. Fucking retarded.
I have less problems with gmos than I do with Monsanto and the other companies trying to control the food supply with patented seeds and hunting farmers down and harassing them. Not to mention they actually cause environmental damage and ruin biodiversity, also we already produce enough calories to feed the world twice over, four thousand calories are produced for each person on the planet so that argument is false
>>70186410
yay, more africans. just what the world needs
>>70186397
Good goy, pay $20 for your GMO free organic free range carrot.
>>70186198
True, How the fuck is an african farmer supposed to do anything when
>Warlords kill him and steal his produce
>the government kills him and steals his produce
>his isn't killed by the government or the warlords, gets his produce to market only to find that free food from the west has driven the value of his produce down so much that he cannot feed himself and his family. So he either kills himself or becomes a warlord or part of the government.
>>70186104
GMO is just a meme. Look at what you can be sold that is considered non-GMO or organic foods.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutation_breeding
>>70186457
K, so what good would labels do to reform IP law?
>>70185309
I support GMO's going to Africa. It's one step closer to stopping the African baby boom
>>70186209
Actually, it's less.
>>70186410
That's what our communists say. Some of them were RAGED when duma banned GMO import and growth leaving only research fields for scientsts to do further testing. One deputate literally said: "This law will not work because GMO is 100 times more cheap". But it works.
>>70185612
This. Nature finds a way.
>>70186211
>I am fine with mountains of dead niglets due to starvation. Anything to keep their populations low.
That's my point dumb dumb, starvation has the side effect of increasing the birthrate, especially when those countries receive food aid.
If we want to tamp down their population we need: Education, contraception, and stable economies (mainly agriculture).
>>70186457
>they actually cause environmental damage and ruin biodiversity
I'd like to see some proof on this. Because it can be a serious issue if true.
>>70186560
>Radiation breeding
Oh, Jeez. Like my teenage mutant ninja turtles.
Monsanto corn causes cancer and infertility-- but fuck it, who cares.
>>70185309
lol
majority of gmo crop is used for animal feed, ethanol/byproducts, and clothing
even africans wouldnt grow food crops they grow money crops to sell and buy food with
>>70185309
gmo's MIGHT cause cancer
>oooo dangerooooous!
heres what causes cancers
>increased use of petrol
>low quality fast food
>smoking
>toxic waste
heres what also MIGHT cause cencers
>cell phones
>alien beams
>3rd party deities
>closed chakras
>reading horoscope backwards
GMO's is the same old shit just bigger, faster, stronger, and longer lasting
lets put it this way - in following 10 years, would you rather eat GMO or soylent green?
>>70186766
>muh birth rate
That's not really a problem if we allow them to starve to death. I don't want to be see Europe and the rest of the world get blacked during my lifetime. I don't care if they will stop producing so many babies in the future, I want them to start declining now.
>>70186397
>More information always helps the consumer.
So should we put a label on vaccines that says "May cause autism"? Because that's what labeling GMO's is like. People are going to see products that say "GMO free" and think GMO's are harmful, which will harm our entire agricultural system.
>>70186899
Nice straw man shill. If a label that literally just says "this contains GMOs" scares everyone off then maybe you should rethink your PR strategy.
>>70186766
no, you just stop giving them food.
They can keep making as many niglets as they want, without free food their infant mortality rate and childhood deaths due to malnutrition will just rise to match it.
What you propose would be an africa hat can advance itself, which I personally don't give a fuck about, I only want less niggers
>>70185309
Nothing wrong with it but it should be regulated by the government.
>>70186457
>I have less problems with gmos than I do with Monsanto and the other companies trying to control the food supply with patented seeds and hunting farmers down and harassing them
Here we have it folks. Wonderful tech that will get fucked up due to a corporatist monopoly using the levers of US power to distort the entire agricultural market in there favor.
>>70186896
>That's not really a problem if we allow them to starve to death.
If we stop giving them food aid they won't be starving in one generation, so your point is nonsense.
There is nothing structurally wrong with (most) african countries, so they would be able to feed themselves if the food aid was gone.
>>70187020
>without free food their infant mortality rate and childhood deaths due to malnutrition will just rise to match it.
No, their child births would drop and agriculture would increase.
You don't fully understand the dynamics of the situation.
>>70185309
It's fucking great
>>70187105
>in one generation
More like 3 actually. Do you know how many fucking niggers that is?
They make Walmart food cheap, which I like.
t. Monsanto Employee
>>70187266
>comparing fake to fake
>>70185309
GMOs are good. Genetic engineering is a lot more precise. It doesn't rely on random mutations, which I think makes them safer than the other traditional methods.
Look up mutation breeding which is considered to be part of conventional plant breeding methods.
>>70187408
Sure pal. Did you go to a Whole Foods this week yet?
>>70186896
>>70187020
Africa is not a barren desert, that's only around the Sahara. There are incredibly fertile lands that can support a healthy agriculture industry, even using primitive farming tools/methods. There will not be a mass starvation crisis in Africa if we stop giving aid- only certain northern areas. Other guy is right. Educate, provide birth control, have a stable economy. Tried and true.
>>70186766
>Education, contraception
That's not giving them free food. Free food increases poverty and starvation because these people only want more free.
>>70186855
I have no study but based on the logic of evolution, if you introduce a new (modified) plant then you run the risk of
1. Having that plant go rampant, ie you made a form of apple tree that grows super fast and can withstand droughts better than most normal trees. These two advantages (if you don't strictly control the spread of your seeds) would quickly let this new strain of apple trees out compete and smother other natural plants.
or
2. You introduce a new strain of (insert grain plant here) in response a new breed of locust evolves to feed on your new grain. Side effect of this is that these new locusts out compete all other species in the same niche.
It is less of a direct harm and more of an indict potential harm if miss managed.
>>70186855
Not really any different than selective Breeding, the whole mutant thing is just rather than working only with currently existing strains of plant, you are just grabbing shit at random from a hat.
>>70185309
GMOs are not inherently bad, but jews run the companies that make them so, they're quite dangerous.
>>70187672
>Free food increases poverty and starvation because these people only want more free.
Yeah, that was my point.
>>70185309
Mostly dont give a fuck but fuck Monsanto and food should be labeled whatever it is.
>>70186457
very good post
>>70187701
So selectioned plants coexist well but genetically modified are different for some reason?
>>70187573
but one of the major reason for the instability (which fucks up education because no one goes to school when you might be shot on the way to or from) is that we are giving them free food.
Also if we stopped giving them food or money then many of those tear jerker donation scams would end because either all the kids would be dead, or Africa would start getting its own shit in order, I don't care which.
>>70188111
Selection breeding is slow and have very real limits on what you can do with it. GMOs since you are messing directly with the genes have a much much larger range of possibility and it is also much much faster, giving less time for 'nature' to compete
>>70188111
>So selectioned plants coexist well but genetically modified are different for some reason?
They don't but a plant that has been genetically enhanced to be more hardy has greater potential to become an invasive species.
>>70185309
I don't have a problem with genetic modification necessarily, as long as it is properly researched. Gmo corporations and agribusiness however are built on a model of chemical and petroleum intensive large scale mono crop agriculture that exploits the third world and destroys the environment. Regenerative and organic, small, community farms are a much better model for sustainability, the environment, food security, nutrition, and communities.
>>70188546
>organic
AWAY SHILL
Why not test their products out on Africa? If there are no long term complications like needing exorbitant amounts of pesticides,or implanted genes spinning out of control and producing something shitty,we'll use GMO. If there are complications,only niggers get killed,so nobody gives a shit.
>>70188335
>>70188382
Reasonable.
>>70188686
>Farming in Africa while the western world continues doing gibsmedats free food shipments
Not a viable option, we would need to stop feeding them for free so that their agriculture market would stop being completely fucked
WE'VE BEEN DOING THIS SHIT FOR YEARS
THE ONLY DIFFERENCE NOW IS THAT WE TRY TO MAKE IT HAPPEN FASTER
HOLY SHIT
I GET CANCER FASTER FROM THREADS LIKE THESE THAN THESE GMO PLANTS EVER COULD
IF GMO WASN'T POSSIBLE HALF OF YOU FUCKERS PROBABLY WOULDNT EXIST
SHIT
KILL YOURSELVES
>>70185309
I major in genomics, I think it's pretty cool.
Humanity is going to hit a brick wall by 2030 when our petroleum reserves run dry.
Many people are going to die. Millions of those in abject poverty will perish. Even first worlders will have to embrace GMOs as their only means of survival.
Just giving you guys a heads up.
Just a reminder that GMO's are meant to grow faster by eliminating proteins from their gene pool that used to be defenses against ancient viruses and diseases.
Since we don't exactly know how DNA works yet, this is just opening possibilities in bringing back super deadly viruses and diseases.
GMO diseases may take a thousand years but it WILL happen.
Have fun supporting the new dawn of a super black plague of which human kind has never seen before in history.
If you support GMO's in the united states you are just a shill or ignorant.
>>70186198
Yup, their population is going to swell to a point they can't bounce back from. When the west crumbles and can't send aid, the higher population will completely devastate the environment looking for food, and they'll die off nearly completely.
Think of it like putting a bunch of deer on an island and feeding them until their population is too high. If you stop, their population doesn't drop and normalize, it disappears entirely.
We're truly looking at the long extermination game.
>>70188789
Keep in mind I'm not against GMOs, they have a great potential for good; but like all scientific advancements since the fucking wheel it is a double edged sword. If you have lazy or incompetant people creating, managing or using GMOs poorly then you could do a lot of damage to an ecosystem with very few ways to fix it other than burn it all down and start over.
Give your baby child weed then
>>70188686
Seems like a lot of bother just to appeal to some ">muh nature" fools who wouldn't be satisfied with the results anyway.
>>70188927
/rant
Seriously though, who cares if we mess with a gene or two?
You want real reading on this shit? Take a gander at "Guns, Germs, and Steel". Reading it is horrible, but they have an entire chapter dedicated to legumes. I didn't even know you could write 1000 words on these things, let alone 5000 or however many the author used to describe how they changed people from hunter gatherer to settled humans.
tl;dr if you have a problem with GMO's you should take a look at yourself because technically you are a GMO yourself.
>>70188985
>We don't know
>Possibilities
>IT WILL HAPPEN
WEW LAD, in 50 years we would be able to cure any bactrial or viral disease we chose.
>>70185309
if GMOs are so good and aren't dangerous, how come all the elites don't wanna eat it?
check mate
>>70188639
>organic shill
Did you know organic food is the largest growing food sector?
>>70189114
>I don't know about murphys law
>I use assumptions in place of arguments because I don't actually have any
>bu bu but in 50 years we can do so and so
>>70185309
GMO's are why we see so many girls with huge tits. Please don't get rid of them :,(
>>70185309
Remind me why Monsanto forbids GMO food in its own cafeteria?
>>70188985
>this is just opening possibilities
listen idiot
DNA constantly fucks itself over day in day out with mutations. Those cells usually just die, occasionally become cancer, occasionally fucks you over. If you want to talk about crazy mutations, super bacteria / virus is way more likely than anything that could happen from GMO's.
>>70189225
I don't even understand why
>>70189229
> murphys law
Oh you're going to invoke that huh?
Then I say the same about switching over from GMO's to organic foods. Checkmate kid. Eventually you have to decide whether or not if the pros outweigh the cons, and so far, GMO's pros outweigh any conspiracy level cons.
>>70185309
The problem is that Monsanto is sueing farmers that use their seeds even if those seeds blew over from another farmers field or were planted there by provocateurs. Monsanto claims they only have the rights to sell and distribute their seeds. Farmers are not allowed to use the seeds they grow each year. I can see a scenario where Monsanto would own all the farming industry and control its value to consumers. They are evil beyond compare.
>>70189229
An argument without any evidence can be dismissed without any.
If you seriously think that by the time your 'super black death' rolls around we wouldn't be able to come up with a vaccine you are a top level retard.
>Letting corporations and government decide what you eat.
How cucked can one get.
>>70189229
>I use assumptions in place of arguments because I don't actually have any
Post a pic of the time machine you used to witness these super plagues of the next millennium.
>>70189225
Literally meme food, it is like people you complain about chemicals in their food, leave aside that they have absolutely zero understanding about any chemistry, literally everything they eat is 100% chemicals.
>>70189494
>>70189387
>>70189350
>I don't know what an immune system is.
>I don't know what T-cells are.
>I don't understand why some viruses hurt humans and some don't yet at the same time hurt specific plants
Keep showing everyone how biologically ignorant you are.
>>70189749
so tell me how an organic plant can stop some magic disease from exactly what you are saying?
Holy shit all these volunteer shills.
Most anti GMO stuff is a meme, but there is one argument that seems plausible to me as a doctor. Creating new DNA means creating new proteins that have never existed and our bodies have never been exposed to. We don't know if these proteins are processed exactly the same as natural ones or not. It is possible that they could mess with our immune systems and lead to cancer or auto immune diseases.
>>70189841
So tell me the research monsanto is doing to stop it from happening?
Oh right they don't give a shit on what proteins they're taking out, just that it grows faster and better and cheaper.
Fuck off.
>>70189916
Yes that's correct.
The problem is non of these GMO companies are doing anything to prevent it from happening.
>>70189916
wat
>>70189916
show me a scientific journal on this. DNA mutation is a common occurrence in nature, and humans have slowly selected for genes that give larger fruits, more fruits, more taste, less poison, etc. for thousands of years. All that they are doing now is expediting the process.
Also, these scientists aren't trying to fuck everyone by going "oh man let's blow up this gene and try to kill people".
Multiple trials, multiple tests, and see what happens. If there is no noticeable change from BASE A to NEW B then they go back to BASE A, it's not as if they just keep experimenting on multiple genes at once, that is bad experimentation procedure, unless it is known that modifying one gene will lead to the modification of another.
>>70189916
There is 0 difference between a synthetic compound (protein or othwise) and a natural compound.
That said they are making effectively new DNA, but we do not use food Proteins to regulate cellular reproduction, it is just a raw material for us to make our own, so the chances of you getting cancer for GMO corn is about the same as if you feed normal Corn to someone from Russia who had never eaten corn in his life.
>>70185309
The cancers. You know why they have no reported deaths? Because they don't have to put it on a label, because the food industry don't want the dots to be connected.
>>70189992
read
>>70190231
Also, they aren't just willynilly modifying certain sections of the genome for shits and giggles. They have years of publications, and all of this is documented to the fucking T.
Also, the words "better" and "cheaper" need to be more defined.
When you say better, they are aiming for certain characteristics, such as having the plant produce some chemical that deters plants but is completely harmless to humans. If you think you can't test that, you can, it's called throwing the chemical into a couple human cells and seeing what happens.
Cheaper entails either more fruits or larger fruits.
There's nothing inherently wrong with genetically modified crops.
The way I see it, the controversy stems (no pun intended) from two main factors: the business practices of major agribusinesses and the potential health hazards from human exposure to herbicides.
You can genetically modify plants for a whole range of traits. Greater yield, faster growth/maturity, frost/heat tolerance, drought tolerance, salinity tolerance, heavy metal tolerance, pest resistance, production of industrial materials, etc. Whether you agree with anthropogenic climate change or not, the climate is changing and marginal lands (lands which have limited agricultural potential) are becoming much harder to cultivate. Genetic modification can help improve yields in these areas.
In the case of herbicides, some crops have been genetically modified to resist herbicides, so farmers can just spray the entire field, killing all plants but the crop. There is some concern that these herbicides could cause health problems in humans, and conflicting results have been found in studies. The problem is that people believe it's the GM crop which is itself a health hazard, not the herbicide, and therefore all GMO must be bad for you. It's like getting sick from pesticide exposure, and saying strawberries cause cancer.
There are also some other potential issues regarding GMO, such as horizontal gene transfer, but the general population doesn't care about that.
t. [spoiler]unemployed biologist[/spoiler]
>>70185309
I don't know enough either way, but instinctively I don't have a problem with the concept. Which is probably why I haven't looked further.
Modifying crops is fine.
Genetic modification on the surface doesn't sound "wrong".
So anyone wanna post a tl;dr for me, good or bad?
>>70190466
>They have years of publications, and all of this is documented to the fucking T.
No it's not and now you're lying because it's impossible to do so without knowing what DNA is and how it works.
You can't just put "human cells" on it and see if it works.
I can tell you don't quite understand how natural defenses against viruses work too.
GMO companies just want things like "juicer" "last longer" "grows faster" "grows with less of some rare protein".
They can't and are not testing every known disease and virus that could and can spread from plant to human or even to live stock.
>all these pro GMO shills
>>70190469
can you quickly explain horizontal gene transfer to someone who at most took basic biology.
http://www.iflscience.com/plants-and-animals/all-our-food-genetically-modified-some-way-where-do-you-draw-line
:^)
>>70185309
i feel unhealthy and my brain isnt getting enough natural foods
The problem is GMO food could have unknown consequences.
Even if you are pro GMO you have to admit this. Nutrition is the wild west of science.
>>70190660
>No it's not
so you're saying that they are going to be repeating trials because they forgot to try what happens when you modify x part of the genome in y way?
>GMO companies just want things like "juicer" "last longer" "grows faster" "grows with less of some rare protein".
exactly
>You can't just put "human cells" on it and see if it works.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/232410.php
>They can't and are not testing every known disease and virus that could and can spread from plant to human or even to live stock.
There is no way to feasibly do that even when you have organic plants.
>I can tell you don't quite understand how natural defenses against viruses work too.
You mean shit like your epidermis?
wew lad
>>70190739
read guns, germs, and steel.
>>70190660
Well, there's only one way to find out...
>>70191023
Cool argument.
>>70191058
Please don't. The book is straight pseudo-scientific garbage. In part.
>pol on philsophy
intelligent discussion with varying perspectives
>pol on GMOs
durr they're evil.
they're "find" but the corporations are bad
and just like that, you dipshits sound just like bottom feeding mouth breathing libtards. good work
>>70185309
>mfw they didn't include the cancer deaths
I swear, in 20-30 years digestive cancers will be pandemic.
>>70191131
Not for the overarching themes, but some of the stuff related to the spread of agriculture.
>>70191122
So now you have nothing to say?
>>70187006
Gluten free argument. I'll take it.
People fear gmo like they fear gluten.
>>70191316
to be fair, the people who actually are allergic to gluten are having a field day.
>>70191292
You didn't acknowledge anything I said.
You tried to disassemble it but you really didn't.
I can tell your argument is falling apart now.
You wrote down words but it doesn't mean anything in favor of your argument.
>>70185309
the only peopel who die for amalnutirtion are niggers so fuck them
The health concerns, if any, are not known to a full extent.
If there are health concerns, and they are known, it is not worth it to steer the public away from a source of food that can be scaled as the population grows.
Whether it is harmful or not doesn't matter at this point. There would be mass famine without genetically modified food.
>>70191392
Exactly shit got labeled gluten free because a small part of the population can't have it.
People see no gluten and think that gluten must be bad.
The same thing would happen with non gmo labeling.
>>70185309
Many GMO are not a bad thing..
Also they are a way way better than what we did and used in the past like blasting food with radiation, poison and other crap in a non controlled environment out of the public's eye then use the most interesting looking mutations to breed new kinds off food that we eat today (corn is one example).
>>70186104
>Most imported veggies and fruits have no taste compared to normal we have here so people don't trust anything from modern food engeneering anymore.
Because it's unripe when harvested and uses crops bred for volume. GMO could alleviate this by adding genes that prolong shelflife of the ripe product and improves taste. There's virtually no GMO crops availible as human food because muh GMO boogeyman.
>I heard GMO requires some special pesticides or something and they're pretty evil.
GMO is simply the addition of new genes through biotech procedures. This can be a gene that tolerates what otherwise is a herbicide(roundup), but it could simply by the removal or addition of genes that causes unregulated growth of its fruits.
There's GMO-like food on the market that's produced by growing it in a gamma garden. Essentially a strong gamma source are near the growing plants, most of them will gain negative mutations but occasionally something good appears and can be removed and bred as a normal cropline, this is far less precise and a much more clunky approach than GMO, but somehow no one raises eyebrows about it.
>>70191555
If the GMO shills could actually acknowledge that then I wouldn't even be talking in here.
>>70190670
Broadly, horizontal gene transfer is the transfer of genes between two different organisms outside of reproduction or genetic engineering.
A common example is how bacteria can transfer plasmids (small bits of circular DNA separate from the chromosomal DNA) to each other.
With GM plants, there is some concern that the genes could transfer out to other species, but the risk is extremely low. I think I remember reading about bacteria in ruminant guts having some of the transgenes from genetically modified livestock feed a few years ago.
The patenting is just crazy.
>>70185612
Amén burgiebro
>>70191495
>You didn't acknowledge anything I said.
What are you talking about? It is completely untrue to claim that while they are testing these crops and modifying the genomes, they are not recording what they have changed and what the effects were of the changes. Saying anything else is just conspiracy. No creditable scientist comes up with a conclusion that "hey guyz we should do this" without actually building up a massive amount of tests, then checking for accuracy, then retesting to make sure you didn't have any strange data, or anything else. It's not CS where when I type in a program a couple minutes later if that's the computation time I get an output.
You can totally test whether or not some boogyman chemical will be bad to a human cell. I gave an article that's a simple description, and there are a lot of more in depth articles on the subject if you want.
I still think that the chances of some organic crop and some GMO'd crop have the same change of some super bacteria being able to destroy massive swathes of crop, or be able to host it and then pass it on to humans.
Of course GMO companies want things that make crops better, so they have to test the shit. You think that they wouldn't write this stuff down in case of a massive lawsuit when something does go horribly wrong?
No, they don't test every disease, and as I said before, neither can organic farmer people.
Shit now I think you're just trolling at this point.
>>70188986
You're either naive or exaggerating.
While it does seem plausible that a collapse in free food imports would cause widespread famine and death in Africa, it won't wipe them out. It might kill as much as 80-90% of the population, but that remaining population will stabilize. In three or four generations, or 150 years, they will have been able to bounce back to their previous population size. The same has been witnessed in nature, and in human populations prehistory according to geneticists.
Famine would kill a lot of people, but it won't exterminate a population entirely.
>>70185309
What os GMO?
>>70191316
>>70191392
there's no such thing as gluten allergy it's 90's whim
>on camping tour
>gluten free friend could not clean fish because she said it's disgusting
>hunger mode on
>my pre-prepared pasta perished in seconds
guess what, nothing
About GMO, I think it's okay that to spice the genome a little with our ideas. Nature is doing that since beginning of ages but in larger timespan. And don't forget to put your tinfoil hat on, vaccines give autism etc. Search for whooping cough outbreaks in US
>>70191562
No, I'm saying that because the public wanted random crap to be gluten free for no reason, it helps the people who are actually allergic to gluten.
This organic push has helped me myself because I am allergic to certain chemicals and it used to be that the only product I could use was a baby version since no chemicals = baby, but now with the "down with the chemicals and up with the organic" rhetoric, I now have options that don't say "for babies" and rather " 100% organic" and things like that.
>>70192498
Oh wow.
You are a GMO shill.
>muh allergies
>>70185309
before -60 no one had died because of tobacco. GMO´s are new invention and no one has researched their long term effects on human body or on soil.
It would be better if GMO´s were only tested on for Africans who are malnutrition rather than selling them in western countries particularly in USA as safe foods.
>>70192614
fuck you, I'm allergic to shit so I need organic stuff on one product, and I'm slightly happy about the switch from chemical to organic in that certain sector.
Also, you refused to answer my post, so I'm going to just assume you are trolling by this point.
>>70185309
Show the next slide. I want to see the harm it could do.
>>70185309
GMOs are fine... people who are against GMOs are fucking retards that don't know anything about history.
>>70192376
>allergy
It's intolerance usually, actual allergy to it is probably possible too but magnitudes more rare.
Even if properly gluten intolerant you're not going to explosive diarrhea or vomiting the second you eat gluten. It causes degeneration of the intenstinal villi over time so you have problems absorbing food properly. It's usually not diagnosed very easily because the symptoms aren't rapid and overt.
That said, 99% of the no gluten faggots are just being special snowflake health faddists, which is insulting as fuck to the 1% that actually have a real problem with it.
>>70192738
You're only arguing based on personal reasons.
You refuse to acknowledge it's messing with the unknown.
You just want your allergen-free peanuts.
Fuck off.
You are by definition a shill.
You only care for personal reasons.
>>70192804
I don't. Teach me that they're safe.
>>70185729
>Not because I believe they have any negative effect on their own, but because natural evolution will seek to match it, basically increasing the rates at which something bad might evolve to fuck things up.
Shut up faggot. Youre not a scientist
>>70192498
>I am allergic to certain chemicals
I am allergic to special snowflakes and I had to use both my epipens when I saw your post.
>>70192933
Holy shit, I'm allergic to fucking sunscreen nigger, are you surprised yet? Nothing to do with food, just the fact that people want to see organic.
>You refuse to acknowledge it's messing with the unknown.
I acknowledge that it is messing with the unknown. But guess what? Nobody learns if they can find a path to India unless they try to test the unknown.
>You only care for personal reasons.
How does me wanting GMOs while at the same time happy that there is a slight push for organic shit make me only care for personal reasons? I think GMOs are cool, because it gives us an understanding with modding genomes, which we can then put to the test with humans.
There is already enough food in the world to feed all humans, a lot is thrown away (enough to feed all the starving people). Lack of food is not the issue. The issue is unwillingness to transport that food to the people that are starving.
If you really want to be efficient with food production, GMOs don't accomplish much. However, moving away from meat-based diets will help a lot, considering that animals raised for meat/dairy/eggs have to be fed. The corn, soy, etc fed to the animals could be eaten by humans. It takes many pounds of plant-based food to produce one pound of meat.
>>70192498
Everything is chemicals. When you get down to it all things are made of chemicals. So you saying I'm allergic to chemicals is true because all people that are allergic are allergic to some chemical.
Also reminder that organic does not mean pesticide free. Just synthetic pesticide free, so you are free to use arsenic on your crops and call it organic.
>>70193126
>I'm allergic to fucking sunscreen
Why do you want organic food? Do they rub sun screen on the regular apples?
Sunscreen is about as specific as "muh chemicals" specify what particular shit you're allergic to, or get yourself tested to find out.
>>70193126
You are deluded with bad logic, personal opinions, and a poor understanding of scientific uncertainties.
You sit there and bitch and moan yet you have no real grasp on how stupid it is to assume it's safe because you ASSUME they're running tests on potential disease, which is actually impossible.
>>70185309
they made me skinny fat.
im /fit/ now tho.
>>70192957
lol... GMOs are nothing new... people always come up with GMOs to help farmers. Like in the 1930s for instance, they created crops that would grow in colder weather, which caused birth booms.
If you want proof they are safe, just take a look at a jack Lelain interview.... Jack was a fitness guru into his 90s, he worked out every day. And he even said he never worried if foods were GMOs or not, he said it doesn't matter... he just ate vegetables all the time, and said he never got organic food.
Anti-GMO is just another word for anti-corporation. And most people are just regurgitating propaganda.
>>70192987
ok fine, allergic to oxybenzone, an active chemical in most sunscreens, but not zinc oxide. I found this out after getting extreme hives one day when I was in middle school around 12 years ago during summer break. Put on same sunscreen, got hives again. Was very careful for several years to not go near any type of multiple active chemical sunscreens. Exactly 6 years ago I go kayaking, borrow a life jacket. Within 3 hours I got extreme hives, because at some point some nigger transferred sunscreen to that life jacket, which later said hi to me. I have medication to control any outbreak of hives, and have had to be extremely careful with this since, because it takes days for the hives to go away.
Any more questions about my fake allergy?
I
>>70193149
Wrong. Food does get transported... but it gets stolen from rebels who want to feed their armies. The reason people are starving in places like Africa, are due to civil wars and governments not allowing farmers to grow more than a certain amount of crops.
>>70193149
You're massively simplifying very significant logistic and economic barriers.
anti-gmo = anti-science
British government is supporting C-4 Rice project.
http://c4rice.irri.org
The c-4 photosynthesis pathway is a lot more efficient than the C-3 that normal rice uses.
C-4 is efficient enough that once it's developed you have rice that can grow in arid conditions.
>>70193149
If Rice with the C-4 pathway is made it opens up the road to modify other crops so they can use the C-4 pathway too.
It would drastically reduce the need for water.
>>70185309
It's actually the pesticide that's causing health problems, not the GMO itself.
The GMO just happens to be made more resistant to over-use of pesticides, rather than being made more nutritious/healthy
The even bigger problem is monsanto copyrighting genetic code and saying they own a plant or animal's DNA and can decide who can use that DNA and when/where.
>>70193244
holy shit
I want GMOs
but since people decided some organic things are good, they then transferred into thinking everything organic is good, and it randomly helped me.
I still want GMO's at the end of the day, fuck, read my previous posts of me defending it.
>>70193262
oh dear
> assume it's safe
I don't assume it is safe, but I'd rather have them learn and risk the consequences of something going horribly wrong. How's that for an answer?
>they're running tests on potential disease
I said they can check for it if they want to, not necessarily that they will check for anything.
I put scientific progress in front of human safety. You do not. So, let us agree to disagree.
>>70189606
>all chemicals are harmless in any amount
>YOU have no concept of chemistry
Shiggery diggery doo
>>70193650
>C-4 rice
Does it have EXPLOSIVE growth?
i swear this, vaccine and fluoride threads are training for new shills
>>70193789
I knew it wouldn't take long for those jokes.
Probably an explosive population growth if it ever gets introduced to Africa
>>70193696
You are right dose makes the poison too much water will kill you. Too much salt will kill you.
Too much of anything kills you.
Besides everything is chemicals.
>>70185729
>but because natural evolution will seek to match it
What in the holy fuck does that mean?
Hamsters fet GMO potatoes developed hair inside their mouthes (and other maladies) within three generations.
We won't see the full affects of GMO foods until 2050
http://responsibletechnology.org/genetically-modified-soy-linked-to-sterility-infant-mortality-in-hamsters/
>>70193899
Enjoy your fried testes, burgers
>>70185729
>but because natural evolution will seek to match it
No it won't.
Evolution isn't deterministic. Mutations are random.
Unless you believe in Lamarckian inheritance
>>70188999
It's really refreshing to come on /pol/ and see views like this rather than the more common "THEY FUCKED WITH THE GENES WHAT IF IT FUCKS UP MY GENES TOO OR GIVES ME CANCER BAN IT" you get from a lot of people.
>>70193899
>>70193971
>Rats
They may be close to human but not 100% genetically.
Besides, by 2050 no one knows where science will be, if Deus Ex anything to go by then we'll all be filled with nano-technology.
>>70194048
What's the difference?
>>70193899
>>70193971
I couldn't find their paper online. I found news articles discussing it, but not a single one linked to the actual research paper.
HITLER KILLED 6 GORILLION JEWS THEREFORE GMOS ARE GOOD FOR YOU
>>70188999
>>70194048
I totally agree. I also don't see certain improvemens (size for example) as dangerous. With proper control GMO can do good things.
>>70194554
>proper control
which doesn't exist as of the current year of twenty sixteen.
>>70185309
Read Nicholas Talebs paper on GMOs, fat tail distributions and risk of "ruin".
From a statistical point of view GMOs are the biggest threat to the planet manvgas ever created.
>>70194322
Probably never published.
These studies are explicitly made with agenda so editors refuse to touch them because everyone knows they can't be replicated and will inevitably end up as revoked papers which harm the journals reputation.
>>70194943
>From a statistical point of view GMOs are the biggest threat to the planet manvgas ever created.
no.
>Nicholas Talebs paper on GMOs, fat tail distributions and risk of "ruin".
He's a moron that chases headlines and base everything wrongful assumptions.
>>70194554
GMO does not refer to all gmo, it specifically means seven tobacco-based pesticide-built-in products by Monsanto, especially corn/maize and soy, which are in nearly everything and which Monsanto fights to keep unlabeled because they have nothing to hide.
>>70195129
Taleb's a moron?
I am extremely interested in GMO products and would like to beta test the weed, please.
>>70194727
As I said above, here all GMO food is banned, only scientists do their science shit on it. Maybe they will make up something smart soon. If it's BAD AND PEOPLE ARE GONNA GET PURPLE TESTICLES AND HAIR INSIDE MOUTHS, there will be a way back or some cool scientifical strategy to fix the thing. Lol.
Food science bro here. Don't give in to the poo brain muhh gmo free. It's all a scam. the vast majority of gmos are due to have crops in certain proximities and they naturally breed. The concerning part of GMOs is making the plants herbicide resistant then using round up ready in massive amounts. This is controversial but I'm not a big fan of certain pesticides.
>>70194322
>I couldn't find their paper online.
>>70195006
Wasn't that hard to find
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20506849
>>70195337
>food science bro here
Oh good, someone who knows --
>are due to certain proximities
...
>and they naturally breed
[Dennis From Always Sunny Face]
HEY
HEY /POL/
I KNOW ALL OF YOU TOOK HIGH SCHOOL SCIENCE COURSES, IF YOU WEREN'T IN A THIRD WORLD COUNTRY
BUT UNLESS YOU HAVE A DEGREE SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT THE "EFFECTS OF GMOs"
Thank you
>>70195673
yeah and meanwhile anyone without a degree shouldnt discuss history too. youre an idiot, nice caps autist.
