Question on GMO feed

[Kilsharion]

That just means that yes, that feed contains GMO and that they are not able to tell you how much but they are trying to word it so it sounds happy and healthy anyway -- its just marketing copy with little real information.

Unless what you buy (of any food product) says specifically that is 100% non GMO or 100% organic then it contains GMO. Even "certified organic" could potentially have some GMO because a product only needs to be 95% organic to be USDA certified organic and that 5% could (but does not always) contain GMOs.

If you really want non GMO I would look for a soy-free, organic feed. If it says 100% organic or is labeled non GMO then you are really in the clear. If it doesn't then it is probably has no or very little GMO/

http://gmo-awareness.com/2011/05/05/is-organic-always-gmo-free/

That's exactly the thought that went through my head when I read, "It’s important to remember that all grain is technically genetically-modified, as simple plant breeding is a form of genetic modification."....that's a line of spin-doctoring if I ever heard one.

There are several non-gmo, non-soy feeds out there. They tend to be mashes/dusty. If you find it's not all getting eaten, you can moisten it. I ferment mine, but that's a whole other kettle of fish.

I think Azure is totally GMO free and I know H&H (micobe feeds) is non-gmo, non-soy. There are others.

 

[Summerlove]

Don't worry your government would never lie to you. You are their best interest. They don't care about money or oil. They only want to make sure you and your family are healthy and happy.

 

[colorfield]

FDA approved does not mean FDA tested, safe, good for you, good for the environment, or any such thing.

I find it interesting how upset and emotional those who support the use of GMOs are. As someone who would prefer to avoid them, since there have not yet been long-term studies that show their benefit for human health, all I want is to see that they get labeled, so that I and others can choose whether or not to eat them. Yet biotech companies have spent millions to prevent just that and I am amazed at the number of folks on this forum who seem ready to jump down the throat of anyone who wants to avoid GMOs. This whole thread started with a simple question about what a label means. In this country we are supposed to have freedom. Having the freedom to eat what we want and feed our chickens what we want ought to be one of those freedoms. Those who think that GMOs are wonderful are welcome to eat them. I just wish the GMO crops didn't contaminate the non-GMO crops (pollen can travel a long way), because I and others don't want to eat them. The big issue isn't that some of you think GMOs are great and others think they're awful. It is that those of us who don't want to eat them are prevented from knowing when they are present in food or chicken feed, etc, that cross-contamination is so common, and the way farmers have been treated when contamination has occurred.

 

[Kilsharion]

Don't worry your government would never lie to you. You are their best interest. They don't care about money or oil. They only want to make sure you and your family are healthy and happy.

I choked on my coffee when I read this. Don't make me laugh like that, please!!

 

[Summerlove]

FDA approved does not mean FDA tested, safe, good for you, good for the environment, or any such thing.

I find it interesting how upset and emotional those who support the use of GMOs are. As someone who would prefer to avoid them, since there have not yet been long-term studies that show their benefit for human health, all I want is to see that they get labeled, so that I and others can choose whether or not to eat them. Yet biotech companies have spent millions to prevent just that and I am amazed at the number of folks on this forum who seem ready to jump down the throat of anyone who wants to avoid GMOs. This whole thread started with a simple question about what a label means. In this country we are supposed to have freedom. Having the freedom to eat what we want and feed our chickens what we want ought to be one of those freedoms. Those who think that GMOs are wonderful are welcome to eat them. I just wish the GMO crops didn't contaminate the non-GMO crops (pollen can travel a long way), because I and others don't want to eat them. The big issue isn't that some of you think GMOs are great and others think they're awful. It is that those of us who don't want to eat them are prevented from knowing when they are present in food or chicken feed, etc, that cross-contamination is so common, and the way farmers have been treated when contamination has occurred.

I agree with you. Whether you want to eat them or don't if GMO's are in a product it should be present on the label

 

[Spifflove]

Still waiting to see YOUR evidence

What? This evidence?
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db10.htm

Maybe you mean this evidence?
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/246061.php

Or perhaps you mean this?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/scientists-warn-of-sperm-count-crisis-8382449.html

So... let's hear your coincidence theory.

 

[Bear Foot Farm]

Once again, this source says rates vary globally, and it NEVER mentions GMO usage at all
Quote:

Quote: Yet again, your "proof" fails to even mention GMO's


STILL waiting to see some real evidence they are "harmful"

 

[Bear Foot Farm]

Quote: The biggest issue I see is misinformation
Don't you already know they are most likely in everything NOT organic?

Dont you realize MEANINGFUL labeling would nearly double the costs of some foods?

 

[Spifflove]

Higher "reporting" doesn't necessarily mean a higher "incidence"
It STILL only affects about 4%, while almost everyone consumes GMO's
Why are rates similar in other countries, when they have banned GMO's?
Don't Hispanics eat just as many GMO's?
Does it even mention GMO's anywhere in this report?

Once again, this source says rates vary globally, and it NEVER mentions GMO usage at all


Yet again, your "proof" fails to even mention GMO's


STILL waiting to see some real evidence they are "harmful"

It's not rocket science. If you eat something that is foreign to your body you develop an allergy. Just like GMO is foreign. So Oh allergy rates are skyrocketing, but its still only 4% so don't be an alarmist? Ya, eveyone gets a tumor, its normal. Don't you watch TV? All the characters on TV know someone who died of cancer. It's normal.

So other countries don't also eat gmo? Even though cultivated gmo covers an area roughly the size of the United States. GMO is global. Of course, you just admited that cancer and allergy rates are skyrocketing while fertility is plumiting so you are a consipiracy theorist.

Oh, i see, just wear my underwear looser. Got it.

 

[Bear Foot Farm]

Quote:
That's what YOUR source said, not me
Quote: Not one of your sources even mentioned GMO's as a potential cause
It's not "rocket science" to see they don't prove your claim that GMO's are harmful at all


Quote: Many try to use the ban of GMO's in other countries as "proof" they must be harmful
Are those people giving false information?