The Health dangers of Genetically Modified Foods
Posted on: June 20, 2009 - 5:22am
Offline
The Health dangers of Genetically Modified Foods
Last month I had a post about GMO's and the AMA's concerns,and most of the replys were on the side of GMO's (Monsanto) but as I had posted before the one in May,I was very skeptical about consuming these GMO's and just today I came across this little known fact : " Food related illnesses in the U.S. has Doubled between 1994-2001 - www.brasschecktv.com/page/647.html - " They knew and did'nt tell " 
Signature ? How ?
- Login to post comments
KG, selective breeding is a genetic manipulation.
You won't find a shread of commercially available food which has not undergone that process.
I take it you are concerned with directly manipulating and splicing the genes of a pig with a tomato (as an example)?
Yeah, I don't think there's any such thing as "untampered" food now. Even commercial seeds are altered (for those who want to grow their own food). I THINK bananas are the least altered because they're imported, but they've been under a process of selective breeding for a long time. They've been saying for a while that bananas are going to disappear because they can no longer defend themselves from disease. Basically, the banana we eat is a product of taking seedless bananas and mutating it with the vines of wild bananas. Ray Comfort's entire argument of bananas being God's perfect design is actually a really bad example of God's so-called work.
So yeah, I think this is definitely a topic of interest for everyone but there's not a lot we can do besides avoid some foods and eating less of others.
The poblem is when they change the plants to create their own pesticides.
Eating pesticides, last I heard, was not that healthy for you.
Theism is why we can't have nice things.
Well, I don't think that it is strictly accurate to say that there are no non tampered foods left. There are several companies that sell “heirloom seeds” which will produce the plants that our great grand parents knew. Although to some extent the process of seed selection is still a process and the first people to arrive in a new land would bias future agriculture by selecting the seeds for the most tasty fruits and vegetables. However, heirloom seeds at least take us back to before the day of the huge corporations that make all the farming decisions.
As far as bananas go, yes the modern variety will be no longer commercially viable in a few more years. The main problem being that modern bananas are essentially clones of one plant that produces no seeds. However, the modern banana has only been with us since the mid 60's. Prior to that, there was another variety of banana that underwent the same process.
When we lose the current banana, we will have to start the process all over again. The thing being that someone is going to have to explore in the jungle until they find a new seedless banana plant that is resistant to the current diseases. Then the process will start all over again.
=
Yeah true, they're not genetically altered as far as adding anything to them and they're not treated with fertilizers, pesticides, or herbicides. However, like bananas, they are selectively bred and new varieties have to be cross pollinated because the plants don't always grow. I think you accidentally notioned my concern when you typed "Companies." They're the ones who are going to have the most influence on changing the original parent line. Smaller "Mom and Pop" type barter communities should have a less altered seed lineage. But you're right, this is definitely as close to natural as you can get and the only problem I can see (for this to become a viable option on the large scale) is varieties not stabilizing correctly which would cause a constraint on production. Although, this will never be a solution ON the large scale because it would be too hard or expensive to mass produce heirloom seeds without commerical influence (i.e. fertilizers, pesticides, or herbicides).
I really wasn't arguing the technicalities of this situation as much as the reality that directly faces consumers. The vast majority, in fact, almost everybody, buys groceries at a mainstream grocery store. While there are SOME alternatives, most people are victim to a genetically altered world.
-ato.Actually they're splicing genes from a flounder with tomato's (in case the weather hits a cold snap)genes from the flounder will protect the tomato's. But Yes,that's what I'm concerned about. Did you watch the video"Seeds of Deception"
Signature ? How ?
-some foods and eat less of others. Wrong,we can write in to our state reps. write into the food manufactures.We can organize and protest (like they did in many European countries). We can demand that labeling of GMO's be a must in order to raise our children GMO free.
Signature ? How ?
Exactly,cause with these terminator seeds , pesticides runs thru the whole plant.
Yeah, and you could also be president. Good luck with wishful thinking.
Ken, I think that you are not looking at the big picture here. Companies create bad products all the time. Consider the recent story about a Chinese company that made chocolate with melanin in it and the stuff got sold at lots of American stores around Halloween. That was pretty much fucked. However, it is very little different from Bt corn getting into the food supply. Someone fucked up and it happened.
This does not mean that GM foods are automatically bad any more than the basic idea that chocolate is automatically bad. The fact is that there are some GM products that are either good or at least neutral. If people would stop getting their panties twisted over GM foods, we could start giving golden rice to impoverished nations. If that happened, at least a half a million cases of preventable blindness a year would not happen.
So yah, GM foods could be bad but not if they are handled according to a set of rules that, in all honesty, we still need to work out. Honestly though, we have government agencies to deal with this stuff because of companies that fuck up. The US FDA was formed largely in response to a company that sold a cough medicine that had a fake cherry flavoring that turned out to be poisonous in doses that were only a little bit larger than normal.
=
Here's the problem Ken, if those who are able to buy organic products stop buying GMO's, the shift in demand will cause the prices of organic products to jump and the prices of GMO's to plummet resulting in an inability for those who don't have the money to buy organic products being forced to buy GMO's. Since 60% of the world's wealth is held by 5% of the population (or some equally rediculous number; I could look it up but its rather irrelevant), most of the world's population falls into the categorie that is forced to consume GMO's. Solution? Produce GMO's safe for consumption. Not a solution? Stop buying GMO's.
Besides, hunger is more dangerous than GMO's. Afica is proof of that.
's Africa is proof of that. I fully understand your point and solution to this problem.but I do see it quite differently,GMO's is nothing more than an American Corporation (Monsanto) trying to control the agricultural faction of food production. They have replaced hundreds of farmer's in India (over three hundred have committed suicide) They 're controlling the seed market,making it impossible for the average farmer to compete with this U.S. Conglomerate.And you have missed the point in the original post "food borne illness has doubled in the last 5 yrs. in the U.S.A.
Hence,GMO's are dangerous to your health,scientist think that these crops are also killing butterflies,a very important pollinator.
Signature ? How ?
- with this stuff.The U.S. FDA. Yes I know that they're supposed to monitor this stuff,but the FDA could have been payed off ( I heard Monsanto payed 20 Billion) in order to get a stamp of approval .
PS. I do get the big picture here,and that slip up with the Chinese choclate with melanin was no mistake from what I have read on the subject,instead it was a polictical decision,The US war's in Afghanistan and Iraq was being funded by large loans that China was giving the US.
Signature ? How ?
Good, let's thin the herd.
p.s. Is that the same butterfly flapping its wings in [wherever] that causes a tornado in [wherever]? If so it deserves to die.
How can not believing in something that is backed up with no empirical evidence be less scientific than believing in something that not only has no empirical evidence but actually goes against the laws of the universe and in many cases actually contradicts itself? - Ricky Gervais
Wild speculation. I don't believe this. Perhaps there is some other factor leading to increased rates of food borne illness. Seeing as most food born illness is caused mainly by bacterial contamination, I doubt that GM foods are source of the problem. Unless you claiming that GM foods are more likely to be tainted with animal feces and salmonella. So Ken, explain to us how GM foods cause bacteria to contaminate the crops and make people sick.
"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."
British General Charles Napier while in India
I have to second Jorm here; arguing that an increase in food borne illness in the past 5 years implicates GM food as the cause is applying negative evidence to support your theory.
Why do you insist on this particular problem with GM crops, Ken? They have lots of other problems (namely, they are not increasing yields as their proponents oce claimed they would) and are controlled largely by a very nasty entity. Isn't that enough? Or do they have to be completely toxic to ingest on top of everything else before you feel there's a discussion worth having on the matter?
They're (probably) safe to eat. They are certainly safer than starvation. The overall practice of agriculture is much less safe, though not so much because you'll likely be poisoned by what you eat as it will inevitably cause massive starvation down the road.
- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940
before you feel there's a discussion worth having on the matter ?
I thought that by posting this topic it would generate a discussion,and it has ! But I don't think that they're safe to eat. And massive starvation won't be caused by not eating GMO's,instead it will be caused by controlling the farmers resources,and buying large swath's of land.It's the rich stealing from the poor. 
Signature ? How ?
OK Ken, you are still creating a category distinction that is not valid.
From what I can google, there are three subcategories of GMO that have the potential to enter the food supply.
Category 1 foods produce some form of toxin naturally to act as an insecticide.
OK, you may not want to eat them but that does not make them automatically a problem. From what I can find, the issue here is that they may trigger an allergic reaction in some people. Past that, the risk would be no different from taking small amounts of poison each day for many years. Eventually, that which fails to kill you makes you stronger.
Category 2 foods are resistant to modern herbicides.
Great idea there. Then each farmer can use strong products to rid their fields of weeds. As others have noted, it doesn't seem to improve crop yields. Even if it did, you would still be able to wash your produce easily enough.
Category 3 foods produce some essential nutrient that they would not normally.
Golden rice would be the example. Every year, at least a half a million children are permanently blinded due to a vitamin E deficiency. Most of them live in areas where rice is a staple crop. So making GMO rice that can produce vitamin E should be a good thing, right?
However, because people are afraid of GMO foods, no golden rice has made it to the very people who should be getting it.
Now if you want to eat only certain kinds of food, I am not interested in stopping you. Personally, I tend to prefer stuff like organic eggs, free range chicken and grass fed beef myself. They are, in my estimation, superior products. I also prefer home cooking to eating out.
On the other hand, if I was given the choice between starvation and GMO foods, I would go with the GMO stuff. Honestly, it is people like you that are the reason why half a million children a year are blinded permanently.
=
-foods,no golden rice has made it to the very people who should be getting it. reply- I really get your point,about golden rice saving many children from blindness,but I disagree with your answer,instead of counting on a GMO rice to save the children from blindness (not to mentions that you would also have to count on Monsanto) ,I believe that mankind as a whole could do the job,by providing them with food from Partners in Health run by Dr.Paul Farmer, who has saved many children in Haiti and has spread out to the most needed countries,along with the UN and other Humanitarian organizations,blindness and starvation could be eliminated.Did you ever hear of the non-profit group "Feed The World" who distributes "Plumpynut" to the most needed communities around the World,now I don't believe in miracles,but this Plumpynut comes close,Plumbynut is a peanut based food ,a cheap source of balanced nutrition and vitamins,that doesn't need refrigeration or cooking,and it doesn't spoil easily,can be produced inexpensively,almost anywhere,and children love to eat it.
Signature ? How ?