Real News. Real Funny.

Comments

  • Any crop that is produced for mass consumption is genetically modified. We have been selectively breeding crops for eons. Get over it
  • I only buy high quality, organic produce grown in the scenic hamlet of Pripyat, so I know I'm safe.
  • I wonder what percentage of anti-vaxxers are anti-GMO?
  • Klivian: Any crop that is produced for mass consumption is genetically modified. We have been selectively breeding crops for eons. Get over it


    I'd sit and argue how wrong you are, but I'm going to take my castrated wolf out of his cage in my apartment and walk over to the Sea World protest.
  • Klivian: Any crop that is produced for mass consumption is genetically modified. We have been selectively breeding crops for eons. Get over it


    That's knee-jerk ignorant bleating just like the anti-GMO hysterics.

    GMO is not selective breeding, and the possibilities from genetic modification are orders of magnitude greater than selective breeding.

    You can insert genes from other species into a plant. You can precisely alter the genome within a single generation. Nothing like that is possible with selective breeding.

    GMO crops have to be carefully managed, because you can instantly introduce unintended bad consequences, for your yield and the surrounding ecosystem. With selective breeding, it's slower and there is a lot more opportunity to observe the results over time.

    I'm not anti-GMO. They're coming to our store shelves. The benefits make it commercially inevitable. But they are not a simple flawless solution. There are trade-offs.
  • David Friedman, ND, doctor of naturopathy, board certified in alternative medicine and integrative medicine

    I know one person who uses the word "naturopathy". She also is a fan of "integrative medicine", homeopathy, and Scientology.

    She just about killed her dad after he had a stroke and she took the lead in managing his care. It turns out going gluten free and drinking homeopathic water are not the sufficient treatment.

    Thank goodness after a couple of weeks her siblings intervened.
  • Klivian: Any crop that is produced for mass consumption is genetically modified. We have been selectively breeding crops for eons. Get over it


    There is an article from awhile back which showed how small things like peaches and watermelon were.

    https://www.businessinsider.com/foods​-​before-genetic-modification-2015-8
  • I would hardly call the sticker I must remove from my food as "hidden".
  • CFitzsimmons: I would hardly call the sticker I must remove from my food as "hidden".


    That's exactly what they want you to believe!
  • olrasputin: I only buy high quality, organic produce grown in the scenic hamlet of Pripyat, so I know I'm safe.


    Do your food choice theory would be called Pripyat-ism?
  • I don't need to know cause I don't care. I'm not paying a dollar more for a green pepper because they "claim" they're organic.
  • Drunky Smurf: olrasputin: I only buy high quality, organic produce grown in the scenic hamlet of Pripyat, so I know I'm safe.

    Do your food choice theory would be called Pripyat-ism?


    So, not do.
    I'm not really as dumb as I look.
  • David Friedman, ND, doctor of naturopathy, board certified in alternative medicine and integrative medicinebullshiat.

    I'm tired of mincing words with quacks.
  • img.fark.netView Full Size

    Was partially funded by the Stark family.  Tony Stark not known to be involved.
  • bullsh*t article.  I worked in a grocery store 30 years ago and we had the four-digit produce lookup codes.
  • jaytkay: Klivian: Any crop that is produced for mass consumption is genetically modified. We have been selectively breeding crops for eons. Get over it

    That's knee-jerk ignorant bleating just like the anti-GMO hysterics.

    GMO is not selective breeding, and the possibilities from genetic modification are orders of magnitude greater than selective breeding.

    You can insert genes from other species into a plant. You can precisely alter the genome within a single generation. Nothing like that is possible with selective breeding.

    GMO crops have to be carefully managed, because you can instantly introduce unintended bad consequences, for your yield and the surrounding ecosystem. With selective breeding, it's slower and there is a lot more opportunity to observe the results over time.

    I'm not anti-GMO. They're coming to our store shelves. The benefits make it commercially inevitable. But they are not a simple flawless solution. There are trade-offs.


    Please cite some credible sources, how is adding or replacing specific genes to a genome going to "instantly" add unintended consequences?  You realize chemical or radiation mutagenesis is even worse for scrambling genomes to get results? even line breeding can have unintended consequences when breeding various varieties for traits. Using resistant traits in crops cuts pesticide use drastically and that is good for the environment.
  • Labrat407: jaytkay: Klivian: Any crop that is produced for mass consumption is genetically modified. We have been selectively breeding crops for eons. Get over it

    That's knee-jerk ignorant bleating just like the anti-GMO hysterics.

    GMO is not selective breeding, and the possibilities from genetic modification are orders of magnitude greater than selective breeding.

    You can insert genes from other species into a plant. You can precisely alter the genome within a single generation. Nothing like that is possible with selective breeding.

    GMO crops have to be carefully managed, because you can instantly introduce unintended bad consequences, for your yield and the surrounding ecosystem. With selective breeding, it's slower and there is a lot more opportunity to observe the results over time.

    I'm not anti-GMO. They're coming to our store shelves. The benefits make it commercially inevitable. But they are not a simple flawless solution. There are trade-offs.

    Please cite some credible sources, how is adding or replacing specific genes to a genome going to "instantly" add unintended consequences?  You realize chemical or radiation mutagenesis is even worse for scrambling genomes to get results? even line breeding can have unintended consequences when breeding various varieties for traits. Using resistant traits in crops cuts pesticide use drastically and that is good for the environment.


    *checks username*
    Sure, you've been trained to say that. Which is actually pretty impressive. Okay, I'm in. Go science!
  • jaytkay: David Friedman, ND, doctor of naturopathy, board certified in alternative medicine and integrative medicine

    I know one person who uses the word "naturopathy". She also is a fan of "integrative medicine", homeopathy, and Scientology.

    She just about killed her dad after he had a stroke and she took the lead in managing his care. It turns out going gluten free and drinking homeopathic water are not the sufficient treatment.

    Thank goodness after a couple of weeks her siblings intervened.


    Crap.  beat me to the point.  Cheers!
  • Labrat407: jaytkay: Klivian: Any crop that is produced for mass consumption is genetically modified. We have been selectively breeding crops for eons. Get over it

    That's knee-jerk ignorant bleating just like the anti-GMO hysterics.

    GMO is not selective breeding, and the possibilities from genetic modification are orders of magnitude greater than selective breeding.

    You can insert genes from other species into a plant. You can precisely alter the genome within a single generation. Nothing like that is possible with selective breeding.

    GMO crops have to be carefully managed, because you can instantly introduce unintended bad consequences, for your yield and the surrounding ecosystem. With selective breeding, it's slower and there is a lot more opportunity to observe the results over time.

    I'm not anti-GMO. They're coming to our store shelves. The benefits make it commercially inevitable. But they are not a simple flawless solution. There are trade-offs.

    Please cite some credible sources, how is adding or replacing specific genes to a genome going to "instantly" add unintended consequences?  You realize chemical or radiation mutagenesis is even worse for scrambling genomes to get results? even line breeding can have unintended consequences when breeding various varieties for traits. Using resistant traits in crops cuts pesticide use drastically and that is good for the environment.


    It's not that hard to imagine a hypothetical where GMO can have drastic consequences. For example, say you develop a generous that leads to exceptional insect resistance, that horizontally transfers to milk weed, and now all the Monarch butterflies are dead.

    I agree that GMO seems like an arbitrary line to draw on human actions given everything else we do, but let's not pretend that it has zero chance of externalities.
  • jaytkay: Klivian: Any crop that is produced for mass consumption is genetically modified. We have been selectively breeding crops for eons. Get over it

    That's knee-jerk ignorant bleating just like the anti-GMO hysterics.

    GMO is not selective breeding, and the possibilities from genetic modification are orders of magnitude greater than selective breeding.

    You can insert genes from other species into a plant. You can precisely alter the genome within a single generation. Nothing like that is possible with selective breeding.

    GMO crops have to be carefully managed, because you can instantly introduce unintended bad consequences, for your yield and the surrounding ecosystem. With selective breeding, it's slower and there is a lot more opportunity to observe the results over time.

    I'm not anti-GMO. They're coming to our store shelves. The benefits make it commercially inevitable. But they are not a simple flawless solution. There are trade-offs.


    Then they should come up with a better term for it, selective breeding is genetic modification. This shiat is just scare mongering
  • Labrat407: Please cite some credible sources, how is adding or replacing specific genes to a genome going to "instantly" add unintended consequences?


    If you're asking how genes are replaced, here you go: Gene Splicing Overview & Techniques
  • chitownmike: Then they should come up with a better term for it, selective breeding is genetic modification.


    GMO does not mean traditional selective breeding. To pretend you don't know that is being deliberately obtuse.
  • Load 16 of 16 newer comments
  •  

This thread is closed to new comments.