Are There (No) Problems with GMOs

[All Natural France]

Now lets be clear, I am not stating that GMOs are the cause of Autism or any sort of conspiracy.

GMOs. Now I must ask, how healthy are these foods? I had never really questioned the healthiness of these foods until now. I had been reading some newspapers of sorts. Now lets be clear. Genetically Modified Foods do not cause health issues.

From the AMA:

"Bioengineered foods have been consumed for close to 20 years, and during that time, no overt consequences on human health have been reported and/or substantiated in the peer-reviewed literature."

From the United States Institute of Medicine and National Research Council (2004):

"In contrast to adverse health effects that have been associated with some traditional food production methods, similar serious health effects have not been identified as a result of genetic engineering techniques used in food production. This may be because developers of bioengineered organisms perform extensive compositional analyses to determine that each phenotype is desirable and to ensure that unintended changes have not occurred in key components of food."

Link


Genetically Modified food allegedly do not move genes from one organism to another without reproduction.


However when it comes to pesticide, which is non bio-degradable, it is said that with the increase of a certain weed comes to the fact that herbicides are, indeed used in GMOs, and in a large amount.

However, the whole point of this is to ask a question. What is your opinion on GMOs, what could be done to make GMOs better, etc. etc.

And before anyone states their opinion. I'd like to point out one thing. GMOs are no worse than conventional food, as per a broad scientific census.
American Association for the Advancement of Science, European Decade-Worth GMO study, Genetics Association of America, Scientific America, World Health Association, etc.

You get the point, but the question remains. What is your opinion on GMOs, and what can be done to GMOs, if anything.

My opinion on the matter remains that I trust GMOs, and able to completely trust the scientific backings of GMOs, and be able to eat in more safe ways rather than worry about such conspiracies or psuedoscientific findings of GMOs.

I was only able to skim rather than read entire sources, so forgive if any of my sources may seem contradictory.

[Dyakovo]

All foods you eat are genetically modified.

[Mark of Chain]

The time frame has been too short to be able to extract any effect on human health. Even in another 50 years, it'll be very hard to disentangle the effect of GMOs from other trends. With smoking it wasn't so bad because they constructed longitudinal surveys in which is was easy to answer ''smoke a pack a day'', ''don't smoke a pack a day''. The same survey for GMOs is difficult because first, do you pay attention to how much GM food you eat, and second, there's an ''intensity'' factor, regarding how much the organism was modified. So short of a randomised controlled panel, it's unlikely we'll know.

That said, do we assume they're bad or good for human health? That I don't know. However, I feel comfortable eating GM food.

[Mark of Chain]

All foods you eat are genetically modified.

I don't think they mean modified by a selection process. I think they specifically mean modified through introducing foreign genes through retrovirals. I can't name any food that has that.

[Zakuvia]

I've been following a Youtuber who works very closely with GMO technologies and has a very approachable way of explaining GMO technology, as well as dispelling a lot of the paranoiac insanity that surrounds it.

Linky

[Pope Joan]

Frankenfoods drive out natural sustainable crops.

Pioneer sued a neighboring farmer for "stealing" its wind-blown pollen.

Farmers commit suicide in India.

Should we not long ago have learned to distrust Monsanto?

Do Europeans have a reputation as ignorant Lollards? No. Yet here is the map of non-GMO regions in Europe: http://gmo.zs-intern.de/?id=1863

[Napkiraly]

No they're rather fine. That doesn't mean every single GMO ever developed will be fine, just like how not every car model is safe, but on the whole they're fine. They have a lot of potential to bring much needed nutrition to certain parts of the world as well as increase crop yields (especially with development of drought resistant crops). Overall, they're a good thing for humanity.

[Salandriagado]

Frankenfoods drive out natural sustainable crops.

GM foods are, in general, more sustainable.

Pioneer sued a neighboring farmer for "stealing" its wind-blown pollen.

A problem with the legal system, not GM foods.

Farmers commit suicide in India.

I can confidently say that the agricultural situation in India is better now than without GM foods.

Should we not long ago have learned to distrust Monsanto?

Apart from Monsanto just being one company, they really aren't all that bad, as large corporations go. I mean, Shell is a fucking awful company, but I don't see you advocating for immediately ceasing using all oil products.

Do Europeans have a reputation as ignorant Lollards? No. Yet here is the map of non-GMO regions in Europe: http://gmo.zs-intern.de/?id=1863[/quote]

[AiliailiA]

I'd like to be able to buy food grown with minimal herbicides and insecticides. Such food is certified as "organic" but generally I can't afford it. I only buy that way for stuff I'm going to eat raw (or with the skin on for fruits).

Here's the thing. GMO crops can be grown with less herbicide and insecticide than traditional crops! The only certification available ("organic") also excludes GMO crops. So effectively I have to subsidize anti-GMO consumers in order to get food that hasn't been sprayed with herbicides and/or insecticides. Well I also have to subsidize consumers who want food grown without artificial fertilizers but I don't care so much about that.

Food grown with herbicides and insecticides would be cheaper if it didn't have to meet a standard of "organic" which includes being non-GM.

[Scandinavian Nations]

Sooner or later, we'll have to start genetically modifying new human generations, to cope with the changes in Earth's environment, not necessarily anthropogenic ones. Other species do so through natural selection, but our refusal to let it apply to our species runs far deeper than our fear of GMO. And I'd much rather we cut our teeth on plants and livestock first.

There is no confirmed harm caused by consuming GM foods. If there is some one in a million chance of some complication decades down the line, so what, anyone here plans to live forever? If you want to take the best possible care of your body, you'll do a much better job adding an hour per week to your workout schedule than spending it looking for "organic" or "GM-free" products.

[Draakonite]

Do Europeans have a reputation as ignorant Lollards? No. Yet here is the map of non-GMO regions in Europe: http://gmo.zs-intern.de/?id=1863

Oh yeah, Europe. Ban GMOs, ban nuclear power, ban caged housing.
At the same time, do absolutely nothing to lower the level of living. Who cares with what you power your 50 inches Flat screen, as long as it isn't nuclear. Who cares where your grain was grown and the impact on the people there, as long as it isn't GMO. Who cares what happens to the meat you eat, as long as it wasn't caged.

[Pope Joan]

Do Europeans have a reputation as ignorant Lollards? No. Yet here is the map of non-GMO regions in Europe: http://gmo.zs-intern.de/?id=1863

Oh yeah, Europe. Ban GMOs, ban nuclear power, ban caged housing.
At the same time, do absolutely nothing to lower the level of living. Who cares with what you power your 50 inches Flat screen, as long as it isn't nuclear. Who cares where your grain was grown and the impact on the people there, as long as it isn't GMO. Who cares what happens to the meat you eat, as long as it wasn't caged.

I would rather allow the public, all citizens, to receive accurate disclosure of food contents, than to put the decision into the hands of elites.

[Napkiraly]

Oh yeah, Europe. Ban GMOs, ban nuclear power, ban caged housing.
At the same time, do absolutely nothing to lower the level of living. Who cares with what you power your 50 inches Flat screen, as long as it isn't nuclear. Who cares where your grain was grown and the impact on the people there, as long as it isn't GMO. Who cares what happens to the meat you eat, as long as it wasn't caged.

I would rather allow the public, all citizens, to receive accurate disclosure of food contents, than to put the decision into the hands of elites.

And pray tell what sort of useful information will you be getting? Will you know which genes have been inserted or removed? What they do? What safety tests they had to go through before it went to market?

[MERIZoC]

Anyone who thinks GMO's are gonna have terrible effects on their health is fooling themselves. That said, I do think there are definite potential environmental consequences associated with them, and it's best to be careful.

[Jute]

All foods you eat are genetically modified.

GMOs usually refer to genetical engineering, not conventional breeding

[Jute]

Anyone who thinks GMO's are gonna have terrible effects on their health is fooling themselves. That said, I do think there are definite potential environmental consequences associated with them, and it's best to be careful.

Not to say social, since (though this is not necessarily limited to GMOs, but especially present there) seed patenting can be a problem. And other similar things.

[Esternial]

Judging from the public forums I've been to on the subject, I'm fairly confident that GMO's are being treated with enough caution as is, especially in Europe.

The only thing that needs more work is education the general public. It's one things to write on packaging that something is genetically modified, but giving more information about why you're being sold that GMO would be helpful for people to understand.

Instead letting people rely on the media for some heavily watered-down info, the manufacturers could put some more effort into informing the consumer.

More often than not, the media takes it upon itself to interpret the news FOR their viewing public, which is a shitfaced tactic. People should interpret it themselves. If they don't stop treating the general public like halfwits that need their opinions offered to them then they'll really create a population of halfwits by doing so.

[Napkiraly]

Anyone who thinks GMO's are gonna have terrible effects on their health is fooling themselves. That said, I do think there are definite potential environmental consequences associated with them, and it's best to be careful.

Not to say social, since (though this is not necessarily limited to GMOs, but especially present there) seed patenting can be a problem. And other similar things.

Seed patenting has existed long before GMO's.

[Esternial]

Not to say social, since (though this is not necessarily limited to GMOs, but especially present there) seed patenting can be a problem. And other similar things.

Seed patenting has existed long before GMO's.

Aye, the problem hasn't gotten worse with GMO's, it has roughly stayed as horrible as it's always been.

[Jute]

Seed patenting has existed long before GMO's.

Aye, the problem hasn't gotten worse with GMO's, it has roughly stayed as horrible as it's always been.

It can have a new dimension, though. Couldn't it be that GMOs make it harder to switch to a different kind of seed?

[Napkiraly]

Aye, the problem hasn't gotten worse with GMO's, it has roughly stayed as horrible as it's always been.

It can have a new dimension, though. Couldn't it be that GMOs make it harder to switch to a different kind of seed?

Not really. There are a number of companies that make them and I reckon there'll be more in the future. They'll each offer different kinds of seeds. Just like how seed companies currently do it.

[Riuchen]

We really should have more research done on this..

[Napkiraly]

Seed patenting has existed long before GMO's.

Aye, the problem hasn't gotten worse with GMO's, it has roughly stayed as horrible as it's always been.

I'm not against seed patenting, just against how's it's generally used. Also just not really a fan in general of patent monopoly and what not.

[Esternial]

Aye, the problem hasn't gotten worse with GMO's, it has roughly stayed as horrible as it's always been.

It can have a new dimension, though. Couldn't it be that GMOs make it harder to switch to a different kind of seed?

There are plenty of alternatives on the market, and plant breeders' rights do not apply to everything, so new variants can always be made.

That said, if you want a specific GMO for it's qualities, you have to buy it from the developer. It's not different from any other product, and I'd say it'd be unfair to deny the developer its due profit as long as it owns the patent, especially since they need money to invest in new projects.

[Napkiraly]

We really should have more research done on this..

We've already had two decades worth of research. They among the most researched things ever iirc.