Monsanto gmos found to be killing babies in the womb

[Luveria]

Reminds me of the early Flintsones cartoons which promoted smoking.

"Winston tastes good like a cigarette should!"

Even better. I believe one of their ads consisted of a mother lording over her ashamed daughter telling her daughter she just wasn't mature enough to smoke. Delightful.

That's very clever.

[Imperializt Russia]

If people smoke, they have only themselves to blame.

I was just pointing out that killing your customers can be a workable business model.

"This way we have the drugs and the money!"

[Des-Bal]

Yes they do mislead but ultimately isn't it a person's choice to not only smoke but also continue smoking regardless of what pressured them into it?

Sorry that's misled not mislead. They flat out lied about the effect their product had and prevented people from making informed decisions. If people make an informed decision to smoke then anything that comes of that is on them.

But we're getting off topic, the source is horrible and it's citations aren't the best. I can't even access the first link.

[Luveria]

I was just pointing out that killing your customers can be a workable business model.

"This way we have the drugs and the money!"

The typical bad drug deal.

[Vorkova]

I was just pointing out that killing your customers can be a workable business model.

Absolutely. Suicide booths accepting Bitcoins, for example.

Tobacco companies mislead if they hadn't done that I'd agree with you.

Yes they do mislead but ultimately isn't it a person's choice to not only smoke but also continue smoking regardless of what pressured them into it?

They don't mislead any more, at least not here (Ireland). It's mandatory for all cigarette packs to have "Smoking kills" in large letters now regardless of the brand.

[Luveria]

Yes they do mislead but ultimately isn't it a person's choice to not only smoke but also continue smoking regardless of what pressured them into it?

Sorry that's misled not mislead. They flat out lied about the effect their product had and prevented people from making informed decisions. If people make an informed decision to smoke then anything that comes of that is on them.

You're right about that. However, there is plenty of information available online about the effects of cigarette smoking like a 20% chance of developing erectile dysfunction from it. I'm of the opinion ED warnings should be standard on cigarette packaging since cancer has lost its scary touch, if it ever had one to begin with.

[Hochste Kaiserreich]

So a radical Anti-GMO website throwing around claims which have yet to be recognized by the scientific community can be claimed as fact? I would like to at least see this from an unbiased source before I even consider it to be possibly true.

[Luveria]

So a radical Anti-GMO website throwing around claims which have yet to be recognized by the scientific community can be claimed as fact? I would like to at least see this from an unbiased source before I even consider it to be possibly true.

I'd like to see something actually linking Monsanto to it.

[Seangoli]

There are many good reasons to despise Monsanto as a company. They are incredibly predatory in developing countries (To the point of out-right lying about how their GMOs work), and abuse legal loop-holes in the US to the detriment of farmers. Their approach to GMOs is also nothing short of predatory and disingenuous in nature, as well.

This, however, is just out-right paranoia. Further, the problems with Monsanto are in no way related to GMOs in general.

[Des-Bal]

I'd like to see something actually linking Monsanto to it.

The link that actually works is talking about GMO-specific pesticide residues. So it's not really GMO's killing anything so much as it is the dangers of unwashed fruit and vegetables at the very most (I'm not in the mood to do any type of math). They're also talking about the BT toxin ,which is a poison usually created by bacteria in the soil, that some GMO's produce. That particular study is inaccessible because science direct is down.

[Hochste Kaiserreich]

So a radical Anti-GMO website throwing around claims which have yet to be recognized by the scientific community can be claimed as fact? I would like to at least see this from an unbiased source before I even consider it to be possibly true.

I'd like to see something actually linking Monsanto to it.

Agreed. I do not take anything that the whole radical environmentalist crowd, the whole site is basically like "GMO KILLS EVERYTHING THEY'RE EBIL!!!!111!!. I can't respect or heed a site that's sole purpose is to bash something, as all their reports will be biased and manipulated to make that one thing look bad, no matter the actual data.

[The Liberated Territories]

I am outraged yes, but not at all at the corporations. My frustration is with a government that has no interested in preventing those things from happening

Mostly because that government is in the corporations' pockets.

Other way around.

[Bottle]

There are many good reasons to despise Monsanto as a company. They are incredibly predatory in developing countries (To the point of out-right lying about how their GMOs work), and abuse legal loop-holes in the US to the detriment of farmers. Their approach to GMOs is also nothing short of predatory and disingenuous in nature, as well.

This, however, is just out-right paranoia. Further, the problems with Monsanto are in no way related to GMOs in general.

Indeed. There are tons of valid political, ecological, and socioeconomic arguments to be made against the use of GMOs. It's a shame that anti-science shriekers are drowning out any useful conversation on the subject.

[Luveria]

Mostly because that government is in the corporations' pockets.

Other way around.

Sometimes.

[The Equal Peoples State of Steelia]

Do you have any peer reviewed studies, not glorified blogs by witch doctors and snake oil salesmen.
No?

Well fuck then, I guess we're done here.
Sorry, but you people don't get to wear a white coat and be taken seriously. That isn't how this works.

Unfortunately it's hard to find "peer reviewed" "studies" that haven't been deliberately manipulated by the monsanto-funded establishment to suppress dissenting views and the false consensus propped up by their flimsy house of cards.

There is this study though which exposes the truth. http://www.organic-systems.org/journal/81/8106.pdf

Oh lord
Even I don't think buisness is that evil

[Herskerstad]

To An All-Natural Nation:
Do you know what radio waves do to humans? Because that's what cell phones emit.
Worry about anything stronger than violet light, like ultraviolet, X-ray and gamma. That's what kills you from the inside, radio waves just boil you in excess, focused, high-frequency amounts. See Tactical Denial System on Wikipedia.

If you admit that x rays cause cancer why should x rays in "medicine" be allowed?

Quantity, my boy.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... y_Xkcd.png

X rays can cause cancer depending on two factors. Freak accidents 'acts of God' and quantity. Taking an Xray does technically increase chances of getting cancer, but the factors for it is so low it is painful to even calculate, but I will do that for you, just because I am entertained.

To get radiation damage which would be guaranteed fatal even with treatment, you would have to take around 360000 xrays of the chest.

Homopathy that.

[Trollgaard]

GMO foods give mice and rats tumors after a while, and the a mouse fed GMO food won't have great grandchildren...as its grandchildren are sterile.

Monsanto and GMO foods are a danger to the human race.

[Saruhan]

GMO foods give mice and rats tumors after a while, and the a mouse fed GMO food won't have great grandchildren...as its grandchildren are sterile.

Monsanto and GMO foods are a danger to the human race.

You mean the genetically modified rats that were designed to grow tumours so humans could test treatment? Cause those are the rats they used

[Trollgaard]

GMO foods give mice and rats tumors after a while, and the a mouse fed GMO food won't have great grandchildren...as its grandchildren are sterile.

Monsanto and GMO foods are a danger to the human race.

You mean the genetically modified rats that were designed to grow tumours so humans could test treatment? Cause those are the rats they used

Not sure, but I would guess not. The tumor/cancer part is actually the minor issue. The major issue is that 3 generations later the mice/rats are sterile. That's fucking scary, and dangerous.

[Des-Bal]

GMO foods give mice and rats tumors after a while, and the a mouse fed GMO food won't have great grandchildren...as its grandchildren are sterile.

Monsanto and GMO foods are a danger to the human race.

Source.

[Saruhan]

You mean the genetically modified rats that were designed to grow tumours so humans could test treatment? Cause those are the rats they used

Not sure, but I would guess not. The tumor/cancer part is actually the minor issue. The major issue is that 3 generations later the mice/rats are sterile. That's fucking scary, and dangerous.

But they were. You only have to read the fine print of the source. To my knowledge most GMO mice are designed to go sterile after a few generations, helps with population

[Neighbor]

Unfortunately it's hard to find "peer reviewed" "studies" that haven't been deliberately manipulated by the monsanto-funded establishment to suppress dissenting views and the false consensus propped up by their flimsy house of cards.

There is this study though which exposes the truth. http://www.organic-systems.org/journal/81/8106.pdf

Your disdain for peer review pretty clearly shows you have absolutely no scientific literacy.
Your opinion on these matters is worthless as a result, as is the opinion of the people who run these websites. I'm sure they are butthurt over their "Science" not getting through peer review, but that doesn't make it a conspiracy. It makes it bad science. Please, don't clutter up the forum with more of these hoax stories.

Although the OP cannot provide any credible sources, I imagine that even you would be concerned about studies that seem to be published with a conflict of interest.

I think the most worrying part about the Monsanto stories is not whether or not Monsanto's GMO's are actually dangerous or not. The most worrying part is that we don't know, and don't seem to have a way to find out.

[Rio Cana]

That explains all the strange new illnesses of these modern times. Combined that with the microwaves from those cellular phones which are hitting us everyday and we have a big problem.

A company for profit main goal is making profit. They might know that a product is not 100% safe but who cares. They know they will make for example $10 Billion on this new unsafe product. If there product is pulled off the shelves in the future they already made $10 Billion in profit. And even if they get sued and have to pay damages of $3 billion, they still made $7 Billion in profit.

Now if they were sued and had to pay $20 Billion in damages then chances are they would not have let that product which was not 100% safe on the market. They would do more research to make sure it was safe. Of course, this could delay certain things like essential medicines which are needed right now no matter if they are 100% safe. But when it comes to food, it should be 100% safe.

Edit - This Mon. company is not a really nice company. They have played heavy handed against farmers over there special modified seeds. If a neighboring farm suddenly has plants growing from some of those seeds, wind most likely blew the seeds into there farm, then this Mon. company will do what it takes to make sure they pay for patent rights. This has bankrupted many small farmers. Even farmers who use the modified seeds legally cannot even resuse the seeds they can get from the plants without repaying. Some would consider this a racket.

[Sociobiology]

Your disdain for peer review pretty clearly shows you have absolutely no scientific literacy.
Your opinion on these matters is worthless as a result, as is the opinion of the people who run these websites. I'm sure they are butthurt over their "Science" not getting through peer review, but that doesn't make it a conspiracy. It makes it bad science. Please, don't clutter up the forum with more of these hoax stories.

Although the OP cannot provide any credible sources, I imagine that even you would be concerned about studies that seem to be published with a conflict of interest.

I think the most worrying part about the Monsanto stories is not whether or not Monsanto's GMO's are actually dangerous or not. The most worrying part is that we don't know, and don't seem to have a way to find out.

you do realize GMO crops are the most heavily regulated and tested crops in existence, right?

[Sociobiology]

GMO foods give mice and rats tumors after a while, and the a mouse fed GMO food won't have great grandchildren...as its grandchildren are sterile.

source?