GMO soy and GMO corn

[ChickenLeg]

Im with @FnWeirdo I worked at an Agricultural Research facility ran by the state. At the same time all the money pouring into this University ran research facility was from large corporations. They paid the scientists to do specific research for them, the scientists also did their own research and studies too.

That being said all the farmers who worked the crops swore up and down GMO feeds were safe but they didnt study in that field. They were experts in the aspect of raising and harvesting the crops, running the machines and spraying chemicals, identifying insects plant diseases, ect... Smart people! Just not scientists when it comes to injesting GMOs, thats a whole different field of expertise.

All the crops raised were GMOs and if you asked any questions everyone had the mob mentality, they assumed you were some looney extremists free spirited nut. Why question a crop that creates higher yields and needs less sprays?

I myself think GMOs can be great because they reduce the amount of pesticides that seep into our soils and funnel into our water ways. Could they be harmful to us?? Yes, but no one knows enough yet because their isnt much money being poured into unbiased large scale studies on the matter. It doesnt benefit, the american agricultural industry state federal and private sector, to question such things.

We might find out in the decades to come the harm in GMOs, that being said there are plenty of things that are harmful. I try to eat healthy at times, drink more water and less soda, and work manually in life to keep my body fit. I'm more afraid of the crazy drivers on the road killing me than GMOs

 

[FnWeirdo]

@ChickenLeg
i think the biggest danger of gmos comes in the form of cross pollination. farmers recycling seed got sued by monsanto because there seeds were copywrite gmo seeds. but the farmers never planted gmo. the gmo's took over there crops and farmers lost there farms over this.
anything that invasive should not be used as it can destroy strains of crop.

 

[sylviethecochin]

very little credible research has been done with gmos, the answer is maybe. an older study was done with gmos and mice. a huge number of them ended with tumors, cancers, and other other things.

I'm pretty sure the study of which you are speaking is actually a study in which rats ate GMO potatoes—and I looked at it for a paper I was writing in college, in which I argued against GMOs. In short, that experiment was so badly done that the results have been discarded several times, by several different panels. I couldn't use it.

The main problems with the study are outlined here: http://academicsreview.org/reviewed-content/genetic-roulette/section-1/1-1-pusztais-flawed-claims/

There have been a lot of studies done about GMOs, as I found when I was writing that paper. It's a hot topic in a huge industry. Of course there have been multiple experiments. Nearly all of them have shown GMOs to have no noticeable short-term effects. The study above is the leading study that shows evidence against GMOs...and it's kind of a joke in the main scientific community.

It should be noted that I was playing Devil's advocate in writing a paper against GMOs. I'm a farm kid. My grandparents and several of my uncles and aunts farm, all with GMOs.

 

[Mosey2003]

@ChickenLeg
i think the biggest danger of gmos comes in the form of cross pollination. farmers recycling seed got sued by monsanto because there seeds were copywrite gmo seeds. but the farmers never planted gmo. the gmo's took over there crops and farmers lost there farms over this.
anything that invasive should not be used as it can destroy strains of crop.

That's not why they were sued, they were sued because they saved back seed after agreeing in their contract not to.

Editing to add further information:
https://geneticliteracyproject.org/...to-sue-farmers-inadvertent-gmo-contamination/

 

[FnWeirdo]

some... there were a lot cases lol and yes some lost there farm because they couldn't afford the bill. crop got ran over with gmos. others yes they were contracted with monsanto and tried to save seeds to save money which of course is not legal.

we would love to boil things down to one view but the fact is life is never that simple....
@ mosey2003 stop hijacking posts just to try and get a point over someone. i disagree with you as do many others. many will also agree with you. live with it

 

[Mosey2003]

some... there were a lot cases lol and yes some lost there farm because they couldn't afford the bill. crop got ran over with gmos. others yes they were contracted with monsanto and tried to save seeds to save money which of course is not legal.

we would love to boil things down to one view but the fact is life is never that simple....
@ mosey2003 stop hijacking posts just to try and get a point over someone. i disagree with you as do many others. many will also agree with you. live with it

How is it hijacking a post? The post is asking about GMO grain, I am talking about GMO grain. That's absolutely on-topic. Just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean it's a hijack.

You're the one being aggressive here.

 

[ChickenLeg]

@ChickenLeg
i think the biggest danger of gmos comes in the form of cross pollination. farmers recycling seed got sued by monsanto because there seeds were copywrite gmo seeds. but the farmers never planted gmo. the gmo's took over there crops and farmers lost there farms over this.
anything that invasive should not be used as it can destroy strains of crop.

Yes Ive read about that and other horrors with monsanto. I think only GMOs copyrights should hold up if the crops harvested by farmers are a high % of the copyrighted seeds. like 90% or higher, or have some other form of way proving the farmer intentionally used their genetics on purpose. The current system is severely flawed.

**90% is a random number I would have to have better knowledge on the crops genetics and how the % of genetics carries over to the offspring to give an actual %. That was just a random % to illustrate my point.

 

[Mosey2003]

Yes Ive read about that and other horrors with monsanto. I think only GMOs copyrights should hold up if the crops harvested by farmers are a high % of the copyrighted seeds. like 90% or higher, or have some other form of way proving the farmer intentionally used their genetics on purpose. The current system is severely flawed.

**90% is a random number I would have to have better knowledge on the crops genetics and how the % of genetics carries over to the offspring to give an actual %. That was just a random % to illustrate my point.

To date, no farmers have been sued by Monsanto for cross-pollination.

 

[Mosey2003]

I'm not saying anyone has to use GMO seed or like it or approve of it. But spreading wrong information doesn't help anyone form an accurate opinion.

 

[PirateGirl]

Well... the fact of the matter is that the debate is still out and no one really knows the long term effects as this is relatively new. Also, GMO is not one specific thing, it is a modification to an existing food. Some may be safe while others may not be. Some countries ban certain GMO crops while other countries develop them. Only you can decide what is right for you and your flock.