Monsanto gmos found to be killing babies in the womb

[Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro]

I think we should diversify our food sources for stronger species rather than genetically manipulate them or use strong pollutants, but anyway, I don't disagree with people who say the natural movement is in large part Luddite and causes more trouble than it helps.'

[United Marxist Nations]

I think we should diversify our food sources for stronger species rather than genetically manipulate them or use strong pollutants, but anyway, I don't disagree with people who say the natural movement is in large part Luddite and causes more trouble than it helps.'

We've been genetically manipulating them since our species existed, it seems to be working.

[Galloism]

All of them. Come on. You want better sources, and now you don't want to even read the abstracts? They all deal with glyphosate, which is Roundup.

uh huh and what about creating resistant crops that will need less roundup, makes GMO crops bad.
do you know what a red herring is?

That largely depends on what kinds of resistance you're talking about.

If its insect resistance, that does tend to reduce pesticide use. If its herbicide resistant (specifically "round-up ready" crops), that is shown to increase herbicide use, particularly round-up.

[Warped Aggression]

Normally I'd at least partically agree with you OP but you definatly have some paranoia issues you need to deal with and are far to "tree huggy."

[Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro]

I think we should diversify our food sources for stronger species rather than genetically manipulate them or use strong pollutants, but anyway, I don't disagree with people who say the natural movement is in large part Luddite and causes more trouble than it helps.'

We've been genetically manipulating them since our species existed, it seems to be working.

Not in a way that releases DNA inside our intestines that might be absorbed by our gut flora that then might cause health conditions.

I support the minimum period of tests for it being 1 year rather than banning it, as it is in my country. 3 months is a clear product of neoliberalism.

[Norstal]

hey guys did you know liberals want to MURDER BABIES by ripping them out of the womb of their loving mum??? aren't they all hitler??? p.s. justin bieber is great LOL YOLO

Omg have all my this xD xD xD XD

*Tips fedora*

[Norstal]

We've been genetically manipulating them since our species existed, it seems to be working.

Not in a way that releases DNA inside our intestines that might be absorbed by our gut flora that then might cause health conditions.

I support the minimum period of tests for it being 1 year rather than banning it, as it is in my country. 3 months is a clear product of neoliberalism.

Release DNA inside our intestines?

What the fuck does that mean?

[The Emerald Legion]

We've been genetically manipulating them since our species existed, it seems to be working.

Not in a way that releases DNA inside our intestines that might be absorbed by our gut flora that then might cause health conditions.

I support the minimum period of tests for it being 1 years rather than banning it, as it is in my country.

... We eat junk with DNA in it all the time. And have for a very long time.

[United Marxist Nations]

We've been genetically manipulating them since our species existed, it seems to be working.

Not in a way that releases DNA inside our intestines that might be absorbed by our gut flora that then might cause health conditions.

I support the minimum period of tests for it being 1 year rather than banning it, as it is in my country. 3 months is a clear product of neoliberalism.

Source (that it does that)?

[Galloism]

Not in a way that releases DNA inside our intestines that might be absorbed by our gut flora that then might cause health conditions.

I support the minimum period of tests for it being 1 year rather than banning it, as it is in my country. 3 months is a clear product of neoliberalism.

Release DNA inside our intestines?

What the fuck does that mean?

It's rogue DNA. Goes around beating up your DNA and taking its lunch money.

[Luveria]

Not in a way that releases DNA inside our intestines that might be absorbed by our gut flora that then might cause health conditions.

I support the minimum period of tests for it being 1 year rather than banning it, as it is in my country. 3 months is a clear product of neoliberalism.

Release DNA inside our intestines?

What the fuck does that mean?

It means we're going to need to perform an operation to extract the released DNA inside your intestines.

[Umbra Ac Silentium]

Not in a way that releases DNA inside our intestines that might be absorbed by our gut flora that then might cause health conditions.

I support the minimum period of tests for it being 1 years rather than banning it, as it is in my country.

... We eat junk with DNA in it all the time. And have for a very long time.

Deoxyribonucleic acid is clearly just made up! How could we be made of acid? Wouldn't we just melt? Lol, silly slientists.

[United Marxist Nations]

We've been genetically manipulating them since our species existed, it seems to be working.

Not in a way that releases DNA inside our intestines that might be absorbed by our gut flora that then might cause health conditions.

I support the minimum period of tests for it being 1 year rather than banning it, as it is in my country. 3 months is a clear product of neoliberalism.

I should also point out that most of what we eat only has eukaryotic DNA, while most of out gut flora is prokaryotic. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think our gut flora has all the enzymes and shit to replicate that DNA, even if it was released.

[Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro]

Not in a way that releases DNA inside our intestines that might be absorbed by our gut flora that then might cause health conditions.

I support the minimum period of tests for it being 1 year rather than banning it, as it is in my country. 3 months is a clear product of neoliberalism.

Source (that it does that)?

I've read in my science schoolbook back in 2007.

This seems to be about it: http://128.197.26.35/law/central/jd/organizations/journals/scitech/volume152/documents/VanTassel_WEB.pdf

[Napkiraly]

Release DNA inside our intestines?

What the fuck does that mean?

It's rogue DNA. Goes around beating up your DNA and taking its lunch money.

Lead by Darth Pentose. *nod*

[Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro]

Not in a way that releases DNA inside our intestines that might be absorbed by our gut flora that then might cause health conditions.

I support the minimum period of tests for it being 1 year rather than banning it, as it is in my country. 3 months is a clear product of neoliberalism.

I should also point out that most of what we eat only has eukaryotic DNA, while most of out gut flora is prokaryotic. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think our gut flora has all the enzymes and shit to replicate that DNA, even if it was released.

GMOs often mix prokaryotic DNA into eukaryotic.

That is the way sugarcane in Brazil gets a resistance against soil parasites, through a bacterian toxin.

[United Marxist Nations]

I should also point out that most of what we eat only has eukaryotic DNA, while most of out gut flora is prokaryotic. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think our gut flora has all the enzymes and shit to replicate that DNA, even if it was released.

GMOs often mix prokaryotic DNA into eukaryotic.

That is the way sugarcane in Brazil gets a resistance against soil parasites, through a bacterian toxin.

Yeah, but I don't think it works the other way around, because the structure of DNA in eukaryotic chromosomes is a lot more complex.

[Nervium]

Yuck. That's horrible. But I don't eat their food anyway. Still, a baby that causes human embryo cells to be killed from the toxins in their products should be talked to. And then possibly bankrupted.

How do you bankrupt a baby?
Steal his diapers?

[Aggicificicerous]

All of them. Come on. You want better sources, and now you don't want to even read the abstracts? They all deal with glyphosate, which is Roundup.

uh huh and what about creating resistant crops that will need less roundup, makes GMO crops bad.
do you know what a red herring is?

Do you know what changing the goalposts is? The questions of whether there is peer-reviewed alternative evidence to Natural News on herbicides (especially Monsanto herbicides) causing fetal damage. I provided those sources.

[Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro]

GMOs often mix prokaryotic DNA into eukaryotic.

That is the way sugarcane in Brazil gets a resistance against soil parasites, through a bacterian toxin.

Yeah, but I don't think it works the other way around, because the structure of DNA in eukaryotic chromosomes is a lot more complex.

I'm not saying it's all a big venom as the Luddite OP.

But what will be the impacts of us eating this on a large scale over the course of decades? We don't know the answers yet.

I'm skeptical of various things, including these certainties over how a novel science field works and is entirely safe.

[Napkiraly]

Yuck. That's horrible. But I don't eat their food anyway. Still, a baby that causes human embryo cells to be killed from the toxins in their products should be talked to. And then possibly bankrupted.

How do you bankrupt a baby?
Steal his diapers?

Don't forget the bottle and Tonka trucks.

[Norstal]

Source (that it does that)?

I've read in my science schoolbook back in 2007.

This seems to be about it: http://128.197.26.35/law/central/jd/organizations/journals/scitech/volume152/documents/VanTassel_WEB.pdf

It doesn't say that. It says that, under risks, it has more to do with pesticides being used. GM are resistant to pests so farmers may use more pesticides because of that (when pests hit). Even more, the allergic reactions induced by GM food has only been tested on mice. Which as you know, are not humans. Finally, the risk GM contaminating non-GM plants have not been fully thought out.

[Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro]

I've read in my science schoolbook back in 2007.

This seems to be about it: http://128.197.26.35/law/central/jd/organizations/journals/scitech/volume152/documents/VanTassel_WEB.pdf

It doesn't say that. It says that, under risks, it has more to do with pesticides being used. Even more, the allergic reactions induced by GM food has only been tested on mice. Which as you know, are not humans. Finally, the risk GM contaminating non-GM plants have not been fully thought out.

Well, I just went tl;dr. (I knew in the case I were wrong, someone would immediately point out and give a resume, so thanks.)

She said something about the untested products needing more scrutiny than they need now, so I thought "yeah, even if I'm wrong, there is evidence for something".

[Sri Tschow]

GM food is safe because I've eaten it for most of my life and I am still here. I have no diseases, I'm not sterile, my immune system is healthy, and my brain is perfectly functional.

[Luveria]

GM food is safe because I've eaten it for most of my life and I am still here. I have no diseases, I'm not sterile, my immune system is healthy, and my brain is perfectly functional.

How do we know you're not a really tough little fellow who is highly resistant to GMO foods?