Gmo's

[Year of the Rooster]

You said what RURU posted was the most ignorant think you've ever read so that's not implying she's ignorant?
Lets not assume what the meaning is behind what others say when you have no way of knowing what a person means, especially based on such a general comment.
You were putting words on RURU's mouth and if you can't handle that fact maybe it is you that shouldn't be involved in this discussion.

That's what I said. But if you actually read what I posted, then you would have known I was trying to make you see that the same implication I had about RURU's post, was the same implication you had on mine.

And it was not an assumption. The post started off talking about the cattle being bred for more meat for people to EAT. Then it continued on to question what it would do to people's bodies. Thereby implying she is worried that consuming such meat product would end up with people exactly like the Belgian Blue. It's classical use of the Associative Property (and no, i'm' not talking about mathematics). That being said, the same thing could apply to this entire subject of GMO's. Unless you have the proper credentials to actually criticize what scientific professionals publish/say (and I don't mean a degree from Google), then you don't have the right.

Putting words into her mouth? Really? I would love for you to tell which words I actually put into her mouth. We are, after all, talking about Genetically Modified Organisms. Genetically = DNA.

Quote: It is also wonderful that people resort to downgrading someone else's character off of ONE comment, which reflects badly on yours as well, when they can't handle criticism. So, instead of whining like an infant, you could be an adult, accept the truth, then ask why you are ignorant. I didn't put the negative connotation to the word. I guess to quote Cottage Rose, "Lets not assume what the meaning is behind what others say when you have no way of knowing what a person means, especially based on such a general comment." I accept that I am ignorant all the time, simply because there is a lot I DON'T know. But when I do know something, I share that knowledge.

 

[ChristineR]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think Belgian Blue cattle have been genetically modified. From what I read from a quick Google search, the double muscling is the result of a naturally occurring genetic mutation. They were then line bred to select for that trait. I was curious, because they remind me of an extreme example of a halter Quarter Horse, many of which also have an inherited condition which makes them develop huge muscles and comes with some pretty nasty health problems. The condition, called HYPP, can be traced back to one popular stallion, Impressive. I wonder if these cattle have the same type of health issues. I wouldn't think they'd be at all unhealthy to eat, though. Or at least no more unhealthy than any other beef.

 

[RURU]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think Belgian Blue cattle have been genetically modified. From what I read from a quick Google search, the double muscling is the result of a naturally occurring genetic mutation. They were then line bred to select for that trait. I was curious, because they remind me of an extreme example of a halter Quarter Horse, many of which also have an inherited condition which makes them develop huge muscles and comes with some pretty nasty health problems. The condition, called HYPP, can be traced back to one popular stallion, Impressive. I wonder if these cattle have the same type of health issues. I wouldn't think they'd be at all unhealthy to eat, though. Or at least no more unhealthy than any other beef.

Thank you Christine I understood that very well...

 

[Suzierd]

A company in British Columbia wants to get approval for a genetically engineered apple that won't turn brown. Photo from CMOR.