Don't understand the importance of "non GMO"

[HeritageGoose13]

I'm jealous. I haven't seen a Monarch in at least 4 years. Before that we would see at least a few to many in some years. I let the milkweed go crazy in parts of the yard, but still no Monarchs. The pollinators (my honeybees included) are happy though.

You can buy Monarch caterpillar kits, grow them and release them- I think.

 

[Shellz]

This is not true. Soy has been shown to make its way mostly unchanged into the egg from a hen that eats it. Gluten, possibly too. Soy and wheat are both almost always genetically modified in the United States. Everything that happens to the chicken happens to the egg in some way. GMO feed is the same as hormones or antibiotics, if the hen gets it, so does her egg.

Look up the Monsanto company, the one behind all of this. They create GMOs, pesticides, everything from DDT to Agent Orange to hormones given to cows. Every time you buy GMOs you support them. Monsanto is also involved in all kinds of political lobbying. A lot of people are convinced the USDA is practically run by Monsanto.

GMOs are given more pesticides than traditional crops. For example, Monsanto makes a weed-killer called Round-Up. The problem with Round-Up is it is so toxic is doesn't just kill weeds, it kills crops too. Monsanto genetically modified an alfalfa crop, calling it "Roundup Ready" alfalfa so that it can be sprayed with pesticides over and over again without dying.

Also, GMOs are legally owned by Monsanto (there are other companies, but Monsanto is the big one here in the US). Let's say there are two cornfields by two farmers. One is GMO, the other is not. The GMO pollinates the other corn. What happens? Monsanto sues the other farmer for "stealing" their GMOs. It has happened before.

Some GMOs have their nutritional value tampered with. For instance, GMO wheat has higher levels of gluten than any other wheat, which makes it damaging for some people's digestive systems.

You need to look for independent studies. Independent studies have shown rats fed GMO corn developed cancers while rats fed regular corn did not. Most countries have banned GMOs completely for health reasons.

I am happy to provide more info and sources if you would like. This is just a quick overview of reasons people choose to be GMO-free.

Not sure where to start, virtually every statement above is completely false. Do you have any concept of how digestion works? Proteins are entirely broken down into their component amino acids when eaten, they do not "pass on" to eggs or anywhere else, they are used by the body to provide energy and build other proteins.

The demonization of Monsanto is a tired trope that is endlessly recycled regardless how many times the inflammatory statements have been disproven. GMO crops do not get more herbicides or pesticides than conventional or even organic crops. This has been proven repeatedly, yet like an unsinkable rubber duck, these dumb myths keep popping up because people are more interested in perpetuating fear than understanding what is actually happening. I'm no fan of some of Monsanto's business practices, and there is a need for string regulation to keep the food supply safe, but the regulation needs to be based on evidence, not fear and doubt.

The tumor study mentioned above us another pile of nonsense. Seralini's study was poorly designed, poorly controlled and focused on rats with a well known propensity to develop tumors regardless of their diet. There was no substance to the study at all, and it was subsequently withdrawn by the publisher. GM corn has been fed to people and animals for years, with no detrimental effects.

The countries that have banned GMOs have done so in the absence of any scientific evidence that there are any safety issues. They are pandering to mob mentality, spurred on by a public that is far too willing to listen to scare tactics and not interested in any evidence that doesn't reinforce their superstitions.

The GMOs currently approved all have an extensive proven track record of safety. Some have failed, not because of inherent dangers of the technology, but just because they fell short of market demands for flavour, shelf life, etc. Some revolutionary product, such as Golden Rice, have the potential to spare millions from malnutrition, but are stonewalled due to fearmongering.

GM technology needs to be treated carefully, like anything impacting food supply and people's health, but decisions need to be based on real science. The only statement I agree with is that studies should be independent, but they also need to be properly designed with adequate controls, proper sample sizes and good peer review.

 

[enola]

I think people want their chickens to eat healthy food, because you are what you eat and if the chicken is eating genetically modified plants it may not be getting as good nutrition. Almost everything is better for you in its more natural state (not suggesting anyone eat raw meat or anything)  in my opinion.

Just as an interesting side note, do you know they have genetically modified goats to produce spider web in their milk? That is called the weirdest thing in the whole world! It is really neat, but also scary. I mean, a goat-spider? That is like something from a 60s TV show (LOL). Changing a healthy animal or healthy plants usually leads to problems, as we've seen time and time again in the past.
They are also genetically modifying dogs with a mutation to make them run faster, which is kind if silly, as breeding a dog to have a detrimental mutation to make you happy is kind of selfish. And then there are pigs being genetically modified to produce less environmentally damaging droppings for commercial system.s


Not sure if this answers your question, just thought I'd put my thoughts out there.

Where did you get these facts from????

 

[GitaBooks]

Where did you get these facts from????

I study breeds of animals, and that is where I got the information on the dogs. The goats were on the science channel (NOVA I think) and the pigs are mentioned on the news and multiple other sites.

If I said something wrong, please let me know. I don't want to tell anyone anything that isn't true.

 

[Mutt Farm]

I crave facts, abhor scare tactics and untruths. This is a passionate topic that I refuse to debate, yet seek answers and facts. I spent days. I'm not easily bluffed or shamed. I'll offer this link as the most factual scientific information I found. It will take several hours if not more for you to read through to understand the panic, the hype, the truths, the lies and follow each link to prove or disprove facts. I found it to be very enlightening. I have my truth.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/05/us/on-hawaii-a-lonely-quest-for-facts-about-gmos.html?_r=0

 

[HeritageGoose13]

Proteins are entirely broken down into their component amino acids when eaten, they do not "pass on" to eggs or anywhere else, they are used by the body to provide energy and build other proteins.

If that is true why do people with soy allergies get sick from eating eggs from that chickens ate soy?

GMOs are a threat to biodiversity. They are an unnecessary risk. They destroy environments... just look at GM eucalyptus. There's even GM mosquitos they want to release in Florida and GM chestnuts they want in the wild!

No one has the right to release these GMOs into the environment without the consent of everyone living there.

The demonization of Monsanto is a tired trope that is endlessly recycled regardless how many times the inflammatory statements have been disproven. GMO crops do not get more herbicides or pesticides than conventional or even organic crops.

So Round-Up Ready alfalfa was created... just for the heck of it?

 

[Dusty Chicken]

One of the challenges with this debate is that there is very little scientific research that has been conducted by a non industry funded group. The study in which the rats had huge tumor growth was one of the few that was not sponsored by the GMO industry. The study did have flaws that were called into question & that only bolstered the industry mantra that GMOs are just fine. The problem seems to lie in the fact that these companies hold patent rights to these crops. They get to choose who has access & who does not when it comes to scientific research on their crops. When you have this type of control you can dictate the conversation about the dangers & risks of GMOs quit easily.

 

[MeepBeep]

People have been modifying organisms since the dawn of farming... Very few crops that we farm today resemble their wild ancestors, they have been selectively bred and when a natural or even unnatural mutation happened or was force and that mutation resulted is something we found favorable it was exploited and bred into the food line... Same applies to most of the animals raised for food...

I hate using wikipedia as a source but sometimes it's a nice overview...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutation_breeding

Read the section near the bottom 'Comparison to other agronomic techniques'

No one is going to be able to ever convince me that bombarding a seed with radiation or chemicals and mutating numerous random genes and hoping to get lucky is somehow safe while pin point accurate gene splicing is not, it's simply beyond illogical to make that type of claim...

Yet riddle me this, these seeds and varieties of plants that have been pumped full of radiation or chemicals over the years resulting in mutation are still deemed 'organic' by every nation and even promoted and sold as organic organizations for human consumption, while GMO is demonized as pure evil? Sorry just can't see any logic in this...

Do some real research on mutation breeding, you might be surprised at how many Genetically Modified Organisms you are eating and likely didn't even know about even if it had a GMO-free or organic label on it...

Fact is a sizable portion of the worlds crops grown for human consumption are in fact genetically modified organisms, that is the blunt truth even if you choose to ignore it...

 

[Shellz]

There's so much trash journalism associated with this topic. One way to get around it, is to follow the science/scientists who actually have credentials in this field. There are plenty of people with an anti-GMO agenda with 'credentials', but usually turns out they have a degree(s) in anything but biology. Their sloppy science & opinions are often put to the test against qualified scientists who can debunk their claims. I've had a few discussions with anti-GMO people on other forums & it appears impossible to reason with them. They often cite articles from Mother Earth News, Natural News, etc,...but these are not based in any scientific facts. They only regurgitate the same old dogma, which certainly proves to the anti-GMO people, that they are right. In reality, nothing could be further from the truth. So, while the anti-GMO crowd is busy chasing their tails, it would behoove the rest of us who haven't fallen for their dogma, to look at the real facts. If you want to know about GMOs, then you need to do some reading & educate yourself. There are some good sites that have articles by scientists, who have explained things in a manner we can all understand.

http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/gmos-and-making-up-your-own-science/#more-8156


http://www.geneticliteracyproject.o...anti-gmo-doc-seeding-fear-is-confessed-thief/
Lots of other articles there besides the one I posted above. *You can check their credentials at the home tab, under the team.* These professionals sift through the crappy journalism, so you don't have to.

http://kfolta.blogspot.ca/2015/07/gmo-formaldehyde-challenge.html

 

[Emma Miriam]

Just dropping in to say that I'm following this thread. I too was wondering about GMOs, and find everyone's info fascinating. Civil debates are wonderful for getting at the heart of issues. Thank you all for sharing your research!