GMO soy and corn in chicken feed? Discussion

[3KillerBs]

You are incorrect. That is exactly what this is. I suggest you read some of the 438 and warning letters from the FDA to bad actors and see for yourself.
https://www.fda.gov/inspections-com...liance-actions-and-activities/warning-letters
https://www.fda.gov/inspections-com...inspection-references/inspection-observations

You realize that the same sort of "have the government force people to do what I think is good for them" thinking is why so many places forbid backyard chickens, right?

 

[lesliedow]

I have to agree gene splicing is different than selective breeding

Which GMO does not. Try as I might, I will never make a bt cotton in the greenhouse. Selective breeding is not genetic modification.

It is a matter of degrees and I agree that the speed by which you can force modifications via selection is different from that done via cloning of traits in most cases--but actually not all. Some selection is very fast. However, the direct exchange of genetic material happens all the time in nature and the selection for traits does as well. Where do you think the molecular biologists who do these exchanges get the tools to do so? They find them in existing organisms. From the first enzymes that clipped out bits of genes and were used to create the clones that Genetech and Eli Lily used to produce the first human insulin in yeast in to the starkly unethical changes in human embryos made by the Chinese using CRISPR. All these molecular tools exist in nature. All of it is natural and all of it uses the same processes. My point is that you cannot just yell GMO and say it is all bad, it is not. It is a mixed bag and the vast majority of modifications are either neutral or good. And we all have to accept that humans have been doing this since we became able to do so.

Now if you do not want to feed your chickens soy or corn because those things are not good for chickens that has nothing to do with GMOs or organic. It's the output of those processes not the processes themselves.

 

[lesliedow]

You realize that the same sort of "have the government force people to do what I think is good for them" thinking is why so many places forbid backyard chickens, right?

You are completely off the point here. We are talking about food safety.

 

[Brooks_]

You are incorrect. That is exactly what this is. I suggest you read some of the 438 and warning letters from the FDA to bad actors and see for yourself.
https://www.fda.gov/inspections-com...liance-actions-and-activities/warning-letters
https://www.fda.gov/inspections-com...inspection-references/inspection-observations

Ooh, this could be fun. How much has the FDA fined Big Pharma?

 

[Brooks_]

Warning letters < fines.

 

[3KillerBs]

You are completely off the point here. We are talking about food safety.

No, we're talking about how several people have advocated that the government force farmers to do what those people want done instead of what the farmers themselves judge to be in their best interests.

 

[lesliedow]

Warning letters < fines.

No don't let the name fool you, actually the warning letters could and often do end up with the company being shut down. 438s result in a lot of work and expense and you still may end up with the company being shut down. These are potentially millions of dollars in fines and expenses. It's very bad.

 

[lesliedow]

No, we're talking about how several people have advocated that the government force farmers to do what those people want done instead of what the farmers themselves judge to be in their best interests.

Farmers do not represent consumers, the FDA does.

 

[lesliedow]

Farmers do not represent consumers, the FDA does.

And the FDA is pretty good about working with the industry to find good ways. They tend do not do things that the industry does not support.

 

[lesliedow]

And the FDA is pretty good about working with the industry to find good ways. They tend do not do things that the industry does not support.

One more thing. They do tend to lag behind the bleeding edge of technology however.