Red pill me on GMOs Sup Forums

Red pill me on GMOs Sup Forums.
Are they really as bad as most people think?

Other urls found in this thread:

reuters.com/article/us-france-monsanto-court-idUSKCN0RA1UM20150911
globaljusticeecology.org/scientist-who-discovered-that-gmos-cause-tumors-wins-lawsuit/
theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/16/glyphosate-unlikely-to-pose-risk-to-humans-unwho-study-says
google.com/#q=scientist wins lawsuit tumors
google.com/#q=russia france ban gmos
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

no they are not, every food you eat today is a GMO. Breeding animals or plants is "modifing" it. There are no studies that prove they have any negative effect. Even transgenic foods that use genes not existing in the plant but rather are "transplanted" from other plants or animals. Have no effect on you if you eat it.

People are starving to death and we can feed them.

That's all I really need to know.

Both of the ears of corn in that picture are GMO.

GMOs aren't the real problem. It's the pesticides and the fact that these plants are grown in nutrient deficient soils which is the problem.

If you had GMOs grown organically (no pesticides and quality soils) they'd be fine.

You are ignoring the fact that herbicide and pesticide use has gone up with the invention of "round up ready" crops. Glyphosate is taken up by the plants during growth and ends up in the food you eat. It also serves to further the current unsustainable argochem farming model that is ruining soil fertility and will eventually cause a massive collapse of the food supply.

GMO also consolidates control of the food supply into the hands of one company. That is a very dangerous position to be in.

They're fine but companies like Monsanto abuse them, I heard they copyright certain strains of GMO and sue farmers who accidentally have the seeds fly onto their lands.

They also forbid saving of seed which is something farmers have done since the dawn of agriculture and in some cases before as hunter gatherers were known to do some intentional planting.

If it isn't dangerous, why are they trying so hard to remove labeling? Why do they have to shit on people in order to get them to buy their product?

The term is way too broad. No one know is they are talking about stuff that has been tweaked to produce more or stuff that has been tweaked so it can survive pesticides that would melt flesh.
like this

There's really no issues with GMO. The only thing that's the problem because of it is unethical.

and you seem to miss the fact that Glyphosate has no documented negative effect on people. And also Monsanto isnt the only company that produces GMO seeds.

Also see it from the humanitarian side; little negro kids in shitty 5th world countries die every day from vitamin D deficiency and we have the technology to solve it by giving them the "golden rice" seed but little faggots like you keep that from happening just because muh Planet and muh ecosystem.

because idiots like you "think" its bad

yes they forbid that because they hold the right to that seed and in the purchase contract they state you can only sew it once!

GMO? More like BMO amirite?

>5th world countries
Why do you want to help these people that cant help themselves? Will you take responsibility for all the fuckups they'd bring?

most people don't really care. of course, since the stuff is usually invisible, it's usually mentioned in a negative light

this is not how the term is generally understood. bred animals and plants were not genetically engineered (another thing where monsanto shills want to make breeding "genetical engineering" when that is not the common understanding)

if you can donate more, should you?

This

It's an investment. There will always be bleeding hearts that want to use resources helping them. So it's better in the long run to set them up with working farms.

They can all just move to Germany. Problem solved.

It's nothing. Even leftists who argue "b-but they putttin spider DNA in corn! thats bad!" don't really have any visible studies that prove GMOs directly cause negative health effects, so what they usually do is just rely on people's ignorance and the unknown factor, saying things like "we haven't done any major long-term studies on it!"

In fact there's already a couple studies and experiments being performed this minute that will be published sometime around 2030. Hopefully when we get the results they'll finally be able to shut up for good, but I doubt it.

no. i can be for helping them not starve and also dont have to want them in my countrie, plus you get the added benefit of having more cheap labor that can produce shit for the 1st world

do you eat broccoli? none of the stuff you buy at the supermarket actually grows in nature. It's ALL genetically modified.

or maybe they can more to canada your cucked prime minister sure would love then. They arent white afterall.

if you want to help them become self-sufficient, being dependent on a megacorporation is not really a good thing

They are bad for the organic farming industry, good for us because cheap

There are actually scientific studies that say GMO's are perfectly safe.

GMOs are okay, the problem is the corpcucks and lolbertarians think its unreasonable to regulate and label things.

Well that's true, but it's not all Monsanto. There is some rice that the UN has been trying to get out for a long time and green peace is the one blocking it just because it's GMO. That's the stuff that would help.

Nobody is trying to remove labelling, they're trying to prevent labelling, because it's a meaningless way to hurt business.
Cigarettes had to be proven to be harmful before we put a surgeon general warning on them. We're not going to put a warning on food that is in no way harmful.
Organic companies are free to label their food as non GMO, that's all the labelling that there needs to be

and why is the "organic farming industry" a good thing now? its literally people using the lack of knowledge to paddle expensive food that doesnt even have to be grown without pesticides.

>Libertarians
>In favor of regulations and labeling
U wot m8?

what if people are afraid of the novelty proteins that can be inserted? it can't be argued away with saying "we always have influenced the plants". In the past you could only alter the expression of existing traits
rigorous testing is the real reason why GMO is safe

Did I rustle your jimmies, Hans?

Ameribro had a valid point about unintended consequences.

how does that surprise you? "its just to help people make the right choices we dont tell them what to buy or not to buy."

Libertarians are against regulations. They're against labelling because it's needless manipulation of the market. God damn, do some research.

It's the liberals who want to regulate and label, since they know their supporters think with their hearts and not with their brains

You're only describing one kind of libertarian, a paternal libertarian, and there are hardly any of those

libertarians arent a hive mind. Gary Johnson for instand is like the most liberal libertarian you could think of. you also might think liberatians are against gun regulations but then you look at Garys VP pick.

>Not letting resource scarcity control the population
>Not knowing that handing out free food kills local agricultural industry because you can't compete with free

Gary Johnson is by no means a libertarian. He's about as libertarian as Rand Paul is

Also, see You're only describing like 1% of libertarians

my argument was that we give them the seed so that they can produce the food localy also who ever said they get it for free they can pay in other ways than simply in cash.

Shh, he thinks the world is worth saving. Let him have his fantasy. The hard reality can wait.

The correct answer.
+100 internets

It's not genetic modification in general that is the problem.

For the consumers the problem is the way it is being used right now to produce crops that can be drenched in poison but still survive

For the farmer the problem is the strangle hold it gives the GMO seed producers on the industry.

Those types of places have no effect on the worlds markets. They wont be producing enough to suddenly be a massive food exporter. These are places that are getting free stuff already in aid.

>Starving African nations
>Worried about harming the local agricultural industry

They're starving to death because we feed them, dipshit. They get gibs in the form of food then proceed to breed like rabbits until they once again literally fuck themselves out of a place at the dinner table so we send even more food over to address the new starvation levels. Rinse and repeat. This is what happens when you treat the symptom rather the illness - the definition of insanity also comes to mind.

Are you fucking retarded? I am not talking about exports. If you keep giving them free food they will never farm enough to be self-sufficient because farmers won't be able to justify growing more food since no one will pay for food when they can get it for free.

You do realize farming is more than just "hard work," right?
You can't just tell them to try harder and they'll magically be able to grow crops

Also, the agricultural productivity of a nation doesn't only rely on climate, it relies on the health of the population. If everyone is starving, nobody will have the strength to grow anything

>BMO
?

no, libertarians think it's unreasonable to (require) labeling them. They're not in favour of it.

They aren't dangerous by themselves.

But many modifications allow for the use of huge quantities of pesticides - which are dangerous.

i would like to see prove of that kind sir. What pesticide and wheres the study.

Keep telling yourself that.

>reuters.com/article/us-france-monsanto-court-idUSKCN0RA1UM20150911

>globaljusticeecology.org/scientist-who-discovered-that-gmos-cause-tumors-wins-lawsuit/

It was proven that GMO's are carcinogenic. So instead of proving them wrong they "force" the scientist to sign a rectraction. What was discovered was that the scientist refused to sign the retraction so the former chairman of France’s Biomolecular Engineering Commission forged their signatures into the retraction that has been spread all over the internet as "official." The media is still pushing that "official retraction" that they "admitted" they were wrong.

Yes, GMO's are bad. No, GMO's ARE NOT SELECTIVE BREEDING. Cavemen were not fusing Jellyfish DNA into tomatoes back then nor were Genetically engineering glow-in-the-dark pet rabbits.

The GMO's that we are talking about are genetically modified to survive glysophate, the main ingredient of Round-Up. The plant survives the bombardment of glysophate while the weeds and pest die. At the same time the plant absorbs the glysophate from the ground up and you eat it.

>globaljusticeecology.org

>theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/16/glyphosate-unlikely-to-pose-risk-to-humans-unwho-study-says

so whos biased studie is right now?

Also GMO stands for geneticly modified organism. Through breeding you modify their genectics so literally everything is GMO, Youre thinking of transgenics.

Fine pick one

>google.com/#q=scientist wins lawsuit tumors

A broken clock is right twice a day, a thousand broken clocks are right every day.

BTW, even many countries recognize the dangers of GMO's and have already banned them. Of course, the media is silent on this. They keep pushing the rhetoric that they are safe, healthy, and are for poor kids in third world countries. However, GMO's are pushed in RICH countries, not poor ones. They are made for money, not humanitarian reasons.

>google.com/#q=russia france ban gmos

Nobody is doing chimerization.
You really don't understand how DNA on earth works.

All life on earth extends from a common ancestor. You share about 60% of your genetic code with a tomato.

You cannot introduce NEW genetic material into an organism, you can only express existing code. Introducing new code would have a domino effect on everything after it in the gene sequence, resulting in something that cannot grow from a seed.

It's like trying to insert new pages into a book without correcting the table of contents.

You're arguing semantics.

Mine is the right one because they couldn't prove them wrong. They LITERALLY had to forge their signatures on a "retraction" that has been going on around the world today. I didn't check your link but I bet it has a section that claims that the findings by the french studies were "retracted." They weren't. They were FORGED. You KNOW when somebody goes this far into suppressing a study it is because they are hiding something very big.

Eventually, the courts sided with the scientist and agreed that GMO's are carcinogenic. After this, it was banned in many countries. Guess who which country gives the most shit too after banning them? Russia.

>>google.com/#q=russia france ban gmos

so russia a country that care fuck all for its citizens and france a bunch of faggots that are scared for their own shadow ban something that might be good for them but is "scary"

also the broken clock is still wrong 99,9% of the day you wanna take that chance?

A thousand broken clocks are still right twice a day... just at different times.

>transgenic foods

is that like when my food is a boy but wants to be called a girl?

so a court that has no knowledge of the subject made a scientific decision that sound logical

Google "plasmid." What you described is wrong on so many counts I wouldn't even know where to begin.

nah that like if you take a cellcore and shoot a piece of gold with a virus that was modified with a gene strand into it.

You are what you eat.

if liberals say its bad, its good.

the number one cause of shart in mart syndrome

>so russia a country that care fuck all for its citizens and france a bunch of faggots that are scared for their own shadow ban something that might be good for them but is "scary"

Strawman and character assassination.

>also the broken clock is still wrong 99,9% of the day you wanna take that chance?

No, that's why you refer to 24 other broken clocks. Time, OBJECTIVELY, will always be right but any device trying to measure can be wrong.

The truth is the truth. However, you refer to as many different sources to measure the truth. Almost everyone outside the US has confirmed that GMO's are dangerous. That's why so many countries have banned it.

>>google.com/#q=russia france ban gmos

>google
The first page is literally all blog posts, a Leddit post and the Wiki page. Basically more of the same shit you linked the first time.

Come back with some scientific articles not published in MiracleFoods.org magazine

and your argument is a strawman mixed in with some appeal to authority and a good heap of the fallacy fallacy

Because it breeds idiocy and scientific illiteracy.

This
You can tell libtards bananas are literally the product of epigenetics and multiple genocides. Pick the most suitable, let all the rest die then repeat.

commonly known as GMO

no commonly known as transgenics

this my nikka

Plasmids do not exist in plants.
That's a bacteria thing.

Plasmids do not exist in plants.
That's a bacteria thing.

1. Every agricultural product is technicality modified, they have been since the dawn of agriculture. Aurochs are mean, tough critters that taste gamey. Now we have delicious dumb angus beef. Wild natural corn is 2 or three kernals of shitty fibrous stalk, thanks to the native americans we have gorgeous sugar and protein plants that make angus fat and happy. Wheat has come a long way since the first human plucked it out of the ground as a barely edible grass. Humans fuck with the environment because if we didn't we'd starve to death
2. "Organic" is bullshit. The tastiness of a product depends on freshness. Of course a free range bird is going to taste better when the cook gets his cuts of meat from a farmer's market down the street compared to a frozen one from a plant. I drove truck for a Hutterite colony that had a very large and modern turkey plant. They fed them as cheaply as possible in an industrial setting. The fresh turkeys they would smoke and give to their employers was some of the best bird I've ever had. It was the best, because it was the freshest.
3. "Organic," even though the term is bullshit, is going to be the future. The green revolution of the '60s is getting too expensive to go on forever. As energy prices rise, farmers will have to figure out a way to get the yields they currently get. This comes down to 2 choices: Use science to modify crops and be able to grow in soil that, by all rights, shouldn't be able to support the yields the market demands of it, or terra-form the fuck out of lands and destroy the eco-systems in the process. You can't have it both ways.

Now, we have cock suckers like monsanto that are trying to fuck with and corporatize farming (something no one wants) and take part in shadier and shadier practices as the ag sector tries to not crash. We should be wary of GMOs because of the licensing and shitty trade practices behind it, not because "hurr durr they're bad for you."

Golden Rice? Yeah. Increased beta-carotene so we can have more Vitamin A because poor people don't have enough.

But no muh God's natural ways instead

Using plasmid vectors to introduce genetic material is a thing. Not to mention we even have CRISPR now.

Having to pay a US corporation just to plant commercially viable crops would be bad for the world.
Which is why everyone is saying they need to test GMOs and they are unsafe so they can ignore their free trade agreements while they work on their own GMO crops. Neutral, unless the US pulls it off, in which case bad.

GMO just to increase shelf life of foods will decrease nutritional value while increasing profit. Bad.

GMO crops that are more resistant to weedkiller could mean more chemicals on our foods. Bad.

GMO to add nutrients to foods that are otherwise lacking, like golden rice, amazing. Great. Life saving.

It's a tool. Like all tools it can be used or abused. GMO does not automatically mean bad. It must be used carefully and regulated and we can't let the kikes in the US control it.

Yes. We would have starved India and Africa to death by now and taken their clay if it weren't for drought resistant strains of rice that were grown in a lab.

>Breeding organism to streinghten certain phenotypes is the same as iserting genetic material of organisms of compleatly different kingdoms

OP the real redpill is to grow your own food

this

>no they are not, every food you eat today is a GMO. Breeding animals or plants is "modifing" it.
wew, nice false equivalence.

The difference between selectively breeding livestock or agriculture and GMOs is that with GMOs you are actually modifying the genetic makeup of the plant/animal in a way that, in most cases, isn't replicable naturally - i.e. via conventional methods of selective breeding.

This my friend is a belgian blue. No Transgenics just breeding

That's not the problem. Generic modification is not bad. Modifications that produce bad effects, like allowing plants to be drenched in weed killer, are bad.

and this is the Enviropig, a pig that doesnt produce methane. Transgenic. So unnatrual so scary

How did they manage that? I would imagine the methane is down to gut flora rather than the pigs themselves.

Transgenic gut flora?

In the US, its illegal to plant your owns seeds from a previous harvest. You can't even feed your own livestock your own food. It is this highly regulated.

So what you have to do is buy through a company like monsanto, syrgenta, dupont, etc.

You're not just buying a seed, because you have to buy a treated seed (side note, if a treated seed gets into the food supply you are fucked, these things are highly toxic), and you have to sign a licensing agreement with the corporation. Which is fine, because consensual business is the backbone of a strong market system.

But ag is a little tricky, because nature doesn't give a fuck about what two people agreed on. The wind blows some of the seeds into another plot, or a kicks them into the ditch? You're in breech of contract. A few of the plants didn't get tilled up all the way and grow again the next season? You're in breach of contract.

Not only this, countries like China fuck with trade agreements because these corporations get into some sort of bullshit or another. When the chines close off trade, monsanto and syrgenta just deflect that all that bullshit on to the farmers and consumers, because legally, they are the only ones that can sell the seeds.

GMO's aren't bad at all. The issue is not, and never has been, about genetically modified foods. The issue is a contrived one. The issue is an invention created by the leftists for one reason and one reason only, and it has nothing to do with their propaganda against GMO. The only reason the leftists have targeted GMO is because the biggest and most profitable GMO producers are owned and operated by right-wingers.

It really is as simple as that. The moment the left gets connected to highly profitable GMO companies will be the moment you will no longer hear propaganda that suggests there is something bad about GMO. Think back. A mere eight years ago we were being assaulted with propaganda that the Baby Boomers were bad, the wealthiest 1% were bad, and big corporate banks were bad. Notice that we haven't heard a single leftist talk about the big bad evil Baby Boomers, the 1%, or the corporate banks in several years. Why is that? Simple — The left in Washington D.C. is now dominated by Baby Boomers, they are being heavily financed by the wealthiest 1%, and they are doing business directly with the corporate banks. The left always needs to create a boogeyman. GMO are their new boogeyman. There are no bigger hypocrites than the left. Give it time. Soon the left will tell us about how beneficial GMO truly are, because soon the left will be connected financially to profitable GMO.

THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
>THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
>THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
>THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
>THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
>THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
>THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
>THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
>THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
>THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
>THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
>THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
>THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
>THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
>THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
>THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
>THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
>THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
>THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
>THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
>THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
>THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
>THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO
>THIS IS A SHILL THREAD FROM MONSANTO

Only dumb-ass liberal hippie pot smoking retards are anti-GMO.

>You gotta buy organic mannnnn... we just don't know what's IN there!

>Dude, government is trying to control you by putting POISON in your food, you even know what your puttin in your body mannnn? *takes bong rip*

>Monsanto is evil mannnnn, I'll just ignore the fact that they've done more for worldwide crop production in the last century than just about any other company, and they're part of the reason we have food on the table at an affordable price mannnnn. *shoots up*

I fucking hate these degenerate stoners who actually think GMOs are bad for you.

they produce a certain chemical in their saliva that breaks down the methane like most other animals are abled to do.

No, but herbicide resistant corn and soy are a problem because the pesticide they are resistant to is highly carcinogenic to humans.

It would be fine if the farmers sprayed it only 2 times in the year as instructed by monsanto, but they spray that shit like it was water because their crops won't die regardless of how much you dump in them due to the genes that grant them immunity to it.

The genetic engineering of the plant is not the problem, the problem is what it is used for.

>GMO
>carcinogenic

jesus fucking christ the shit you niggers spew

as a phd student in biology, I'm ashamed to be on the same fucking board

there's being redpilled, and then there's being completely fucking retarded

It's not like farming is viable in thr US or European anyway. You are all welfare queens.

If your sugar daddy wants you to buy from a Corp that's the government's business.