Question on GMO feed

[colorfield]

Oh, by the way, Kaiser Permanente, a huge health insurance provider on the West Coast has recommended that those it insures don't eat GMOs. I think that says something.

 

[Spifflove]

While it's true some life expectancies in this country have fallen by one or two decimal points, the life expectancy of Blacks in the country has RISEN.
The main causes given for the drops are smoking and obesity, not GMO's

If it were from the food alone, ALL would have dropped, unless you have evidence Blacks only eat organic

Yes if we throw 75 thousand dollars a household per year at a particular group through Earn Income credit, Section 8 housing, Welfare, and Medicaid then we might get a slight uptic in life expectancy.

So much for that factoid. That dog won't hunt.

 

[Bear Foot Farm]

Quote: They are safe, because they have been TESTED and APPROVED prior to being allowed on the market
Testing has not been done "only by manufacturers" as is so often claimed
They have been approved by Govts all over the world

As to "suggested" harmful effects, all I ever see offered as "proof" is the SAME old debunked studies, from the SAME sloppy scientists.
There has never been any CREDIBLE data to conclusively prove they cause harm to humans

I don't "like" nor "dislike" GMO's.
I LIKE dealing with facts instead of emotion, and TRUTH instead of just repeating the latest buzzwords, without bothering to try and learn just what is real
How often have you heard this lie repeated?:

Quote: Common sense will tell you that you cannot stop research from being done if someone really wants to do it.
They same ones who make this claim will offer up "studies" done that "prove" negative points,
If the first statement is factual, then their second has to be false.

The anti GMO Organic crowd relies on emotion and ignorance to promote THEIR products by demonizing everything else, because they can be relatively certain few will bother to do any real research on their own, but rather will simply repeat the hype as if it's fact

If you don't want to eat GMO foods, then don't
I really don't care,

But don't PRETEND it's because you have proof it's harmful, because none exists that I've ever seen

 

[fowlsessed]

Well, got you. But you have no more "proof" for it, than I do against it. That's unarguable fact.

 

[Bear Foot Farm]

Oh, by the way, Kaiser Permanente, a huge health insurance provider on the West Coast has recommended that those it insures don't eat GMOs.
I think that says something.

Less then 10 seconds of "Googling" shows your claim to be a hoax
KP never made any such statement
It's truly sad that so many don't take the time to LEARN THE FACTS before repeating the fantasy
http://metabunk.org/threads/962-Deb...-Against-Consuming-Genetically-Modified-Foods

Here is what they REALLY said:



Quote: Nowhere does it make ANY "recommendations"
https://healthy.kaiserpermanente.or...-9M83Jdfvlmtsw!!/dl3/d3/L2dBISEvZ0FBIS9nQSEh/

I think THAT says even more

 

[RoseMarie1]

Could you tell us the name of the feed please that is not GMO-ed? ;-)

 

[colorfield]

First of all, let's not insult people about whether or not they have done research. I have spent hours and hours reading about GMOs from a variety of sources. A few minutes of googling will find you whatever point of view you want on GMOs (and many other subjects).

GMOs have not been tested by our government. The FDA has relied solely on what the biotech companies have told them.

Countryside Organics mills their own grains, so you can order from them, but you can't get their grains from another retail source.

If you keep funding from research, you essentially prevent the research, and that is what has happened.

Read Genetic Roulette by Jeffery Smith. It's quite the eye opener. I know that there are those who would discredit him. There are those who will discredit anyone.

I have no interest in the emotionalism about GMOs, but the technology is far from precise.

Don't tell me I haven't done the research. If you don't like what I have to say, actually follow the link and read the book I suggested. I am not suggesting the movie as it doesn't have all of the sources listed and is too sensational. Just read the book, and if you need to, check the sources.

 

[pbjls]

most of the time sicence, money, and power come together science is the loser. There are many things that science has been forced to change the majority opinion because of new information. asbestos, dtd, lead in paint. there are lots of things that were once thought to be safe that were not. why are the crops not made to taste better or be more nutritious instead of to produce there own toxins or to tollerate more toxins being sprayed on them? why does the fda rely on the companies data instead of independent studies? why is it not contamination when gmo pollen drifts onto a neighbors crop? some weeds have developed resistance to herbicides as a result of gmo crops, why can't the same thing happen to pests as well? what hapens as these gmo enhanced crops mutate in ways theat are unavoidable and unpredictable? why do many countries not allow gmo crops?

some of the answers to these quetions are motiviated by money, politics, and power. some by science. but there are enough questions not ansered in a satisfactory manor that it is reasonable someone would be leary of this technology and the companies that produce the products. It seems unreaslonable that someone who does not stand to gain personally would attack the individual who ellects not to use gmo products and does not want them in the food stream without being clearly labeled.

 

[Chicks Galore3]

Could you tell us the name of the feed please that is not GMO-ed? ;-)

I haven't got it yet. We just heard something about non GMO. We are looking into it.

 

[Bear Foot Farm]

Well, got you. But you have no more "proof" for it, than I do against it. That's unarguable fact.

It's been tested and approved.
If you want to "argue" with that fact, you can.
What you can NOT (and haven't tried to) do is show any proof it's really harmful