Poll: What is your stance?
Poll Options
View poll results: What is your stance?
GMO Foods are good
49 53%
GMO Foods are Bad
19 20%
I don't know for sure
10 11%
Put Icy Hot on it
15 16%
Voters: 93.
Page 1 of 4
#2
lol i judged three like 25 minute debates on this saturday

still no idea what it really is or what my opinion is
#3
So far there are 2 votes for GMO are bad and none for GMO are good, despite the fact that most of the scientific community has proven they are safe, and in many cases, even preferable. Hmm.
#4
humans have been scientifically confident and certain many many times over the course of their existence, but theres this subjective nature to all that shit that makes me go with my gut on this one and say genetically modified anything is going to create some kind of abnormality at least evventually. you can dig on yo science but theres some primal shit in my brain that tells me which berries are gonna kill me and which arent
#5
Quote by Thomasoman
humans have been scientifically confident and certain many many times over the course of their existence, but theres this subjective nature to all that shit that makes me go with my gut on this one and say genetically modified anything is going to create some kind of abnormality at least evventually. you can dig on yo science but theres some primal shit in my brain that tells me which berries are gonna kill me and which arent



Have you ever taken a Tylenol? Does a cherry tomato scare you?
Last edited by JustRooster at Nov 18, 2014,
#6
the best anti-gmo points i can remember were that it won't actually help anyone that needs food because it's about the distribution of food that's the issue, "superweeds" will develop and make it useless (which i'm sure isn't actually a huge issue) and that people should know what exactly is in their food and this won't be provided and can lead to danger in the long run; they're still untested in many areas and the long-term isn't shown positively. not to mention certain vegetarian and religious groups not liking it but do they actually place animal cells in these things? that sounded wonky. and it wouldn't actually be hurting any animals. but that's basically all i can remember that was worthwhile about potential harms
#7
I dont usually take shit like that no. I mean dude whatever, eat your GMOs. enjoy the **** out of your space food and whatnot. I will forever maintain that the most organic, anient and simple methods possible will always be the most beneficial to the well being of the mind and the body.
#8
Quote by JustRooster
So far there are 2 votes for GMO are bad and none for GMO are good, despite the fact that most of the scientific community has proven they are safe, and in many cases, even preferable. Hmm.

I don't wanna talk to a scientist. Those mother****ers lying and making me pissed.
#9
Quote by Thomasoman
I dont usually take shit like that no. I mean dude whatever, eat your GMOs. enjoy the **** out of your space food and whatnot. I will forever maintain that the most organic, anient and simple methods possible will always be the most beneficial to the well being of the mind and the body.



This message has been approved by Dr. Oz.
#12
I don't think GMO foods are necessarily bad, I just think they need to be labeled as different from the naturally grown foods.
#13
Quote by ehbacon
I don't think GMO foods are necessarily bad, I just think they need to be labeled as different from the naturally grown foods.



Why?
#15
Quote by ehbacon
I don't think GMO foods are necessarily bad, I just think they need to be labeled as different from the naturally grown foods.

agree on this, i'm not scientifically educated on the matter but i think we should definitely keep the original untainted versions available as much as possible.
#16
Quote by Thomasoman
you can dig on yo science but theres some primal shit in my brain that tells me which berries are gonna kill me and which arent

I would like to see you survive even one day in nature.
Quote by JustRooster
So far there are 2 votes for GMO are bad and none for GMO are good, despite the fact that most of the scientific community has proven they are safe, and in many cases, even preferable. Hmm.

Well, there would be at least one more post for "good" if you hadn't added "put icy hot on it" to the poll. It's not my fault I can't resist forced memes from a dead era.
#17
Quote by archangels

Well, there would be at least one more post for "good" if you hadn't added "put icy hot on it" to the poll. It's not my fault I can't resist forced memes from a dead era.



That's fair.
#18
Quote by JustRooster
Why?

if people for whatever reason are against GMOs they should be able to know what not to eat. Kinda like a vegetarian would like to know if what they're eating has meat in it.
#19
GMO is bad. For example, I can eat non GMO soy, but GMO soy makes me sick.

So I say NO to GMO!
Last edited by songbird64 at Nov 18, 2014,
#21
Quote by songbird64
soy

Well there's your problem right there. Soy makes me vomit too!
#22
Quote by archangels
Well there's your problem right there. Soy makes me vomit too!

Finally, someone feels my pain
#23
Isn't any kind of artificial genetic altering considered GMO? So like when we purposefully breed plants for certain characteristics. We're purposefully altering their genetics. Or hybrid plants we've made.
#24
Shhh! Don't remind the peasants that their entire lives depend upon the scientific advancements of the last 200 years! They need to believe that their lives are natural, the way God intended!
#25
I used to be anti-GMO, but I have come across a lot of good arguments that have debunked a lot of the commonly cited studies against GMOs. Like this recent one: http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2014/08/05/10-studies-proving-gmos-are-harmful-not-if-science-matters/

But I still feel a little torn about it. Part of me wonders about what sorts of financial backers or affiliations scientists who do studies that find nothing wrong with GMOs might have. I also find it a little suspicious how much our regulatory industries have ties to biotech companies.

But really, I think people should ultimately have a right to choose and know what foods they are eating, so I support labeling. I think my main gripe with GMOs are the business practices of some biotech companies more than anything else. I lean toward the view that they're safe to eat, but remain a little cautious.
#26
Quote by BladeSlinger
Isn't any kind of artificial genetic altering considered GMO? So like when we purposefully breed plants for certain characteristics. We're purposefully altering their genetics. Or hybrid plants we've made.

Yeah but that's still natural in a sense, we don't change the entire structure of the plant's genes (or whatever it is we do lol) but just personally evolve it to our advantage.
#27
Quote by Bob_Sacamano
Yeah but that's still natural in a sense, we don't change the entire structure of the plant's genes (or whatever it is we do lol) but just personally evolve it to our advantage.

if nature didnt intend for us to change the entire structure of a plant's genes then nature wouldnt have evolved us to be smart enough to do it
#28
Quote by Bob_Sacamano
Yeah but that's still natural in a sense, we don't change the entire structure of the plant's genes (or whatever it is we do lol) but just personally evolve it to our advantage.

What exactly do you define as "natural?"
#29
Quote by GuitarGod_92
if nature didnt intend for us to change the entire structure of a plant's genes then nature wouldnt have evolved us to be smart enough to do it

lol that sounds like the tagline for a great movie

idc what nature intended, it's just that i think there's a clear difference between what is technically genetic modification (us breeding things selectively) and this new crazy science stuff.

Quote by archangels
What exactly do you define as "natural?"

i'm just saying it's a different category because everything about it is different apart from the words "genetic modification". obviously we've been genetically modifying stuff for decades but this is separate

edit: meant centuries lol
Last edited by Bob_Sacamano at Nov 18, 2014,
#30
Fair enough. I just hate when people start using the word natural in arguments like this.
#31
Quote by Bob_Sacamano
the best anti-gmo points i can remember were that it won't actually help anyone that needs food because it's about the distribution of food that's the issue
That doesn't mean an increased food supply won't help though, even privileged westerns eat most of that increased supply - and that the dynamics are complicated and I can't guarantee what will happen. And GMOs does mean that when distribution-issues are fixed (which will happen any day now ), a larger human population can be sustained - which may or may not be a good thing depending on whether the world becomes able to sustainably sustain them in other sectors.
However, what is unarguably a positive effect of gmos it that it can increase the nutritional value of the food that poor people do eat. GMOs don't just increase crop-yield, they can also increase nutritional value, so even if the poor people end up eating as much food, at least now they can not suffer and die from malnutrition - only starvation. And increased crop-yield would probably also be beneficial for communities dependent on local farmers, who don't have the infrastructure to export stuff anyways.

Anyhows, the argument that maldistribution is the main cause of starvation today would dispel the point in increasing food-efficiency by any measure the way you presented it, which is just silly.

"superweeds" will develop and make it useless (which i'm sure isn't actually a huge issue) and that people should know what exactly is in their food and this won't be provided and can lead to danger in the long run
A valid point, but not all gmos are related to superweeds, though, and the term "superweed" is really vague. Depending on the traits of the superweed, it's development might just necessitate switching to another brand of gmos locally for a while. Or doom the world as we know it, who knows - gmos require a lot of caution to be responsibly used, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be at all.
they're still untested in many areas and the long-term isn't shown positively.
True, and a very important point.
not to mention certain vegetarian and religious groups not liking it but do they actually place animal cells in these things?
Then keep those consumers informed so they can choose not to eat it?
Quote by JustRooster
Why?
Because consumers should have the right to make informed decisions in their purchases? Even if you find the issue unproblematic, doesn't mean everyone else.
Quote by Bob_Sacamano
agree on this, i'm not scientifically educated on the matter but i think we should definitely keep the original untainted versions available as much as possible.
Well, that's not a loaded phrasing

I have a proper post coming in later, just wanted to take part in the current discussion :3 Well, "current".
#32
People like to believe that nature is beautiful and sacred when really it's full of brutality and death.
#34
Quote by T00DEEPBLUE
People like to believe that nature is beautiful and sacred when really it's full of brutality and death.

People like to believe that humans are separate from nature when really we were spawned from it and by extension are nature fucking itself up.
#36
Quote by BladeSlinger
Isn't any kind of artificial genetic altering considered GMO? So like when we purposefully breed plants for certain characteristics. We're purposefully altering their genetics. Or hybrid plants we've made.




Quote by Bob_Sacamano
for the record, i don't even have an opinion here yet

the debaters i saw were not good

or maybe they were too good


personally i have no strong feelings either way
#37
Quote by archangels
People like to believe that humans are separate from nature when really we were spawned from it and by extension are nature fucking itself up.

Fucking exactly. We're not the only way nature fucks itself up too.
#38
Quote by archangels
People like to believe that humans are separate from nature when really we were spawned from it and by extension are nature fucking itself up.

Preaching to the choir.
#39
Good, but I feel they need to be grown in isolation from wild-type crops so we can maintain the biodiversity of our environment.
#40
if your anti gmo you should be anti medicine too and die at 30 like some medieval peasant or something. and avoid buying most supermarket food where they've been selectively bred to far bigger extremes than current gmo tinkering. this is my opinion and if you are some kind of scared dipstick hippy misinformed middle class parent, you should go find a nice fertiliser free open field, make some genitals out of the dirt and hump your dumb mother earth.

also eating organic is more sinful to me than eating meat. i hate that the best welfare meat often is grown on organic feed cause they figure why not throw as much "premiums" in as possible at that price range, when just a good diet would suffice.

(only my last sentence is srs dummies)
Page 1 of 4