Genetically modified food

[Saladfork]

For something that has allowed so much more food availibility in the world, there sure is a lot of resistance to it.

One of the more common arguements I've seen against it is that it isn't 'natural', which I find laughable.
Another common one is that some believe it could cause health problems, which is a more legitimate concern. It is true that there is a possibility that genetic modification experients could result in a food that is dangerous to eat, but that's why it's tested thoroughly before being approved for mass consumption.

What does the escapist think of genetically modified food? Can anyone come up with legitimate arguements against it?

 

[OriginalLadders]

The thing is that none of the stuff that changes the DNA is present in the plant; one seed was changed and then cultivated. It can't pose any risk to your health that eating either of the two sources of DNA don't cause already.

 

[Samus Aran but a man]

Ever since Greenpeace manipulated Zimbabwe into not accepting tonnes of DONATED gm crops ("The food is poisoned!") I have loathed them. Greenpeace can go fuck themselves. It's easy to complain when you're not the one starving to death.

 

[Fieldy409_v1legacy]

It makes my monkey brain uneasy. I feel like I should beat these scientists to death with my club.

 

[TheIronRuler]

For something that has allowed so much more food availibility in the world, there sure is a lot of resistance to it.

One of the more common arguements I've seen against it is that it isn't 'natural', which I find laughable.
Another common one is that some believe it could cause health problems, which is a more legitimate concern. It is true that there is a possibility that genetic modification experients could result in a food that is dangerous to eat, but that's why it's tested thoroughly before being approved for mass consumption.

What does the escapist think of genetically modified food? Can anyone come up with legitimate arguements against it?

.
We've had genetic modification for centuries, we just didn't call it that way. Why do we only see Orange Carrots around? There are many different species of the carrot. The reason? The house of Oranje, a royal bloodline in the Nederland made orange carrots popular. These were the ones that were cultivated most and spread throughout the world to the various colonies. You can't find most of the other types of carrots in shops anymore. Same goes for potatoes - there are literally hundreds of different breeds, yet because of McDonalds (not entirely), only a handful of species are grown (they have their own breed).
So do you have a problem with eating Orange Carrots or McDonalds French Fries? I don't. Neither do I have a problem with genetically modified food.

 

[Esotera]

The thing is that none of the stuff that changes the DNA is present in the plant; one seed was changed and then cultivated. It can't pose any risk to your health that eating either of the two sources of DNA don't cause already.

Typically they don't even use chemicals to create genetic diversity, they use radiation, which is arguably safer.

.
We've had genetic modification for centuries, we just didn't call it that way. Why do we only see Orange Carrots around? There are many different species of the carrot. The reason? The house of Oranje, a royal bloodline in the Nederland made orange carrots popular. These were the ones that were cultivated most and spread throughout the world to the various colonies. You can't find most of the other types of carrots in shops anymore. Same goes for potatoes - there are literally hundreds of different breeds, yet because of McDonalds (not entirely), only a handful of species are grown (they have their own breed).
So do you have a problem with eating Orange Carrots or McDonalds French Fries? I don't. Neither do I have a problem with genetically modified food.

There's a difference between Genetic Modification and Selective Breeding that MovieBob doesn't seem to understand/care about. Selective breeding is taking a natural population of carrots, and selecting for a trait that you find desirable and only letting individuals with that trait survive (such as an orange colour). Genetic modification involves taking a gene from another species & placing it into a plant to give it a function that would never have occurred naturally (such as taking a glow-in-the-dark gene and putting it in a carrot).

OT: There's absolutely no evidence I know of that outweighs the benefits that these crops can bring us, and the stupidity of the general population for demanding natural food really irritates me, when there are millions going hungry every day.

 

[TheIronRuler]

The thing is that none of the stuff that changes the DNA is present in the plant; one seed was changed and then cultivated. It can't pose any risk to your health that eating either of the two sources of DNA don't cause already.

Typically they don't even use chemicals to create genetic diversity, they use radiation, which is arguably safer.

.
We've had genetic modification for centuries, we just didn't call it that way. Why do we only see Orange Carrots around? There are many different species of the carrot. The reason? The house of Oranje, a royal bloodline in the Nederland made orange carrots popular. These were the ones that were cultivated most and spread throughout the world to the various colonies. You can't find most of the other types of carrots in shops anymore. Same goes for potatoes - there are literally hundreds of different breeds, yet because of McDonalds (not entirely), only a handful of species are grown (they have their own breed).
So do you have a problem with eating Orange Carrots or McDonalds French Fries? I don't. Neither do I have a problem with genetically modified food.

There's a difference between Genetic Modification and Selective Breeding that MovieBob doesn't seem to understand/care about. Selective breeding is taking a natural population of carrots, and selecting for a trait that you find desirable and only letting individuals with that trait survive (such as an orange colour). Genetic modification involves taking a gene from another species & placing it into a plant to give it a function that would never have occurred naturally (such as taking a glow-in-the-dark gene and putting it in a carrot).

OT: There's absolutely no evidence I know of that outweighs the benefits that these crops can bring us, and the stupidity of the general population for demanding natural food really irritates me, when there are millions going hungry every day.

.
Oh, I must have misunderstood. Did you mean that you can splice wheat with a gene from a deep sea fish that allows for it to be resistant to cold? If so, then it's not a problem. You're just enhancing your crops.

 

[spartandude]

the was a big picture episode on this

yh the un natural argument is retarded, to praphrase yhatzee anyone who uses that argument should be abandoned in the forest with nothing but a leaf to cover them selves

as for health problems, it ios possible but not as likely as youd think, ive been studying this subject a little (not extensively so i dont know the exact science and such) but its essentially involves going into the genetic coding of and egg/embryo and switiching certain genese on or off, this is the kind of thing that happens naturally but now we can control it. (effects on eco system and what have yet to be seen). so it really isnt all that dangerous, they point where it may do is when we are altering genes which we have no idea what they do (IE most of them) but for the most part it just produces meat which is no different to what you eat otherwise

 

[Esotera]

Oh, I must have misunderstood. Did you mean that you can splice wheat with a gene from a deep sea fish that allows for it to be resistant to cold? If so, then it's not a problem. You're just enhancing your crops.

Yep, the enhancement effect is the same, they're just two slightly different methods. In theory you could splice any gene into a plant...in practice only a select few tend to be useful, mostly boring ones involving growth/ripening so you can transport them around without them squishing everywhere.

 

[theartknife]

The thing that annoys me is that being anti GM seems to be generally lumped in with other concerns that could be described as "green issues", things like climate change, recycling, renewable energy etc.
A lot of people seem to think that if they are concerned about the environment, they must also, by default be against GM crops, without really looking at the benefits and making up their own minds.

 

[Clive Howlitzer]

I have no issue with it and I think anyone who does is crazy. It is usually people who HAVE things that are resistant to it. It is easy for hippies who want us to be natural to ***** about it, while they are having the choice to eat what they want. A lot of people don't have that. If you think we should allow millions of people to starve because you don't like genetically engineered food, then you sir, are an asshole.
Those are my thoughts on that.

 

[manic_depressive13]

I am fine with the idea of genetically modified crops. I find genetically modifying animals to be more disturbing because it usually involves causing them to bloat to adult size within a very short period of time, which is profitable but means that the animal has a tragically short and painful life before it is slaughtered.

I don't believe genetically modified foods are harmful, but even if they were I wouldn't give a crap. The western world is terribly concerned with its own health considering it's an obese, disgusting, over-consuming mass. But no, on top of that it has to be self-obsessed and narcissistic too.

 

[Uzbekistan]

I have an issue when people say they never eat modified food. I just want to know when the last time anyone ate a purple carrot. Or had a first generation cow. People modify food so things become better over time, not so they stay the same.

PS: Genetically modified food can cure hunger.

 

[alandavidson]

I don't see why not. It seems like a good way to end world hunger.

 

[Squirrel1328]

It just bothers me that people link organic food with being healthy, it's not, if anything it's more likely to be unhealthy as it has no protection against pests or diseases, yet people spend 50% extra to buy a product that's apparently healthy because it's not protected from pests. Also Organic food is not going to solve world hunger, there's too much waste when harvested. In my mind GM food, is the better option

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

OT: There's absolutely no evidence I know of that outweighs the benefits that these crops can bring us, and the stupidity of the general population for demanding natural food really irritates me, when there are millions going hungry every day.

Which would be a good argument if we werent already capable of producing far more food than the entire global population needs. First world nations alone only use about 50-75% of their sustainable agricultural capacity (varies by nation). This is mostly done to keep the commodity prices at a level where farming is economically viable.

Those millions aren't starving everyday because there isn't enough food but because the food they need isn't anywhere near them and most of them couldn't afford it even if it was... so if you thought GM crops in the West would help them, think again.

If, however, you were thinking of subsistance farmers in Buttfuckistan being able to use GM crops... the problem still boils down to "who's footing the bill?" Those biocorps still expect to make money off the hundreds of millions of dollars they pour into R&D.

 

[Tanakh]

What does the escapist think of genetically modified food? Can anyone come up with legitimate arguements against it?

Leaving aside the possible health issues. GM crops have very resitrictive legal terms.

To put it on gamer's terms, regular plants are akin to Free Open Source games which you can mod and play as many times as you want, at most the retailer will charge you the storage medium (DVD or whatever, seeds for the analogy); GM then would be akin to a AAA MMO + 1 install scheme, you pay each season, you get the benefits of the new patches but you can't use the seeds for anything but run off the mill farming and you can't reuse the seeds you get out of your crops, also is the farmer responsability to keep their plants GM free, if a company catches you with some of their genetic info in your product they will sue.

BTW, i am all for MMOs and like WoW, even Diablo III shcemes seem fine by me, but I woudln't be so comfortable if my food was dependan't on a publisher's wim. Going GM with the current legislation would be like voting for Electronic Arts to be the main source of the food you buy, actually i would get a good laugh from it
.... but it would be hell for the world.

 

[NightHawk21]

There is no concrete viable evidence collected from any published scientific study to show that GMO crops in any way affect humans in a negative fashion.

Which would be a good argument if we werent already capable of producing far more food than the entire global population needs. First world nations alone only use about 50-75% of their sustainable agricultural capacity (varies by nation). This is mostly done to keep the commodity prices at a level where farming is economically viable.

Those millions aren't starving everyday because there isn't enough food but because the food they need isn't anywhere near them and most of them couldn't afford it even if it was... so if you thought GM crops in the West would help them, think again.

If, however, you were thinking of subsistance farmers in Buttfuckistan being able to use GM crops... the problem still boils down to "who's footing the bill?" Those biocorps still expect to make money off the hundreds of millions of dollars they pour into R&D.

I think you've been a little mislead. While it is possible to produce enough food to feed the world right now, we would have to use a lot more land than we already do (and use it more intensely), and we would have to augment it more with a lot of artificial fertilizers, pesticides and what not. That process while technically feasible right now would kill is in a relatively short while since you would eventually reach the point where growing anything becomes too difficult and yields would drastically fall, occurring simultaneously with the price of the last few remaining barrels of oil sky rockets. The truth of the matter is that we have over 7 billion people on this planet. Ecologists predict that the Earth can sustain a population of either 2.5 or 3.5 billion (maybe slightly more on last count). With our increasing technology we could maybe bump this number up a little, but the only reason we have such high populations now is because of a relatively cheap source of energy, namely oil.

 

[lunavixen]

I have an issue when people say they never eat modified food. I just want to know when the last time anyone ate a purple carrot. Or had a first generation cow. People modify food so things become better over time, not so they stay the same.

PS: Genetically modified food can cure hunger.

I've had purple carrots, you can buy them where i am, they taste a bit more like beetroot than carrots, but it's still good

Which would be a good argument if we werent already capable of producing far more food than the entire global population needs. First world nations alone only use about 50-75% of their sustainable agricultural capacity (varies by nation). This is mostly done to keep the commodity prices at a level where farming is economically viable.

Those millions aren't starving everyday because there isn't enough food but because the food they need isn't anywhere near them and most of them couldn't afford it even if it was... so if you thought GM crops in the West would help them, think again.

If, however, you were thinking of subsistance farmers in Buttfuckistan being able to use GM crops... the problem still boils down to "who's footing the bill?" Those biocorps still expect to make money off the hundreds of millions of dollars they pour into R&D.

you're not seeing the whole picture, you can't just constantly plant crops in the same area, it degrades the soil to the point that there are no nutrients, producing inferior crops and much lower yields, so it would take a lot more area that some countries have, GM foods (if properly tested and deemed okay) could be modified to take less out of the soil, or produce a double yeild on the plants, Genetically modifying foods doesn't change the chemistry of them, only minor changes in the biology of them.

The bolded statements are not quite true, if the researchers in the west get GM foods right, the seeds will likely be introduced into everyday crop farming, thus reducing the price over time, and as the seeds/plants become cheaper, because the more you make something, the more efficient you get at it, R&D costs would likely be subsidised for the first few years, or until GM crops move into large scale and wider introduction into the food chain, then a small percentage of the overall cost of the product would be sent back into R&D for future use.

There is a lot more to this than people see