The Big Picture: Feeding Edge

Recommended Videos

Impluse_101

New member
Jun 25, 2009
1,415
0
0
Yay! Movie Bob Carrot!

*On nom nom nom nom nom nom nom nom nom.....
5 min later
....nom nom nom nom nom nom* *Burp* Ah... GOOD!
I love me a good carrot.

What I didnt know about them, is that they were purple. That is interestingly awesome.
 

De Ronneman

New member
Dec 30, 2009
623
0
0
The house of Orange still rules the throne btw.

Nice to think that there's people out there who are happy about genetically engineering too. If we can make drops more effective to make food cheaper and more widely available, why wouldn't we? It's our moral duty to feed the poor, right? Then why be angry over the solution?
 

Edith The Hutt

Flying Monkey
Oct 16, 2010
134
0
0
I'm afraid I found this a patronising and unhelpful video.

Enough people on this thread have already have articulated the difference between selective breeding and more modern transgenic techniques. While the anti-science brigade are often offensive, unthinking and wrong they should not be used as a straw man to justify a lack of concern on novel foods created in this manner.

I believe that genetic engineering (using the more conventional definition which does not include traditional practices of selective breeding or mutagenesis) has the potential to deliver extraordinary benefit to mankind. I also believe that new transgenic food products require regulation and study to ensure that they do not cause harmful side effects, perhaps not to the same rigour or paranoia as that of pharmaceuticals but certainly beyond that required of traditionally-derived products.

There are additional legal issues both regarding intellectual property and public health liability which others have covered far better in this thread than I could. These too are legitimate causes for concern and do not deserve being dismissed as narrow-minded scaremongering.

Bob's video appears to argue for a total lack of concern on GM food and wrongly equates GM-derived products to products created through completely different processes. Moreover he is pointedly questioning the rationality and intelligence of those who raise concerns which he has in no way disproven or adequately addressed.

I don't much mind being told that I'm wrong, I do mind being told that I'm an unthinking idiot by someone who gives a oversimplified and fallacious argument to dismiss legitimate concern on a matter of public health.
 

iTYeti

New member
Dec 14, 2010
1
0
0
Bob,
In principle, I agree wholeheartedly with you. The nature of humans is to fear the unknown and anything dealing with food is going to ruffle some feathers. My only issue with genetically engineered food isn't so much with the biology as it is with the legal issues arising from it. companies patenting the genes. Monsanto is the stereotypical villain in this story and for good reason. They swing the blunt instrument of lawyers at farms and drive them out of business using laws that they sponsored, and in some cases, even wrote the original bills. Do a little bit of research on the topic and perhaps watch the documentary Food Inc. I think you'll find it quite illuminating.
 

LadyRhian

New member
May 13, 2010
1,246
0
0
Bananas have problems, too. Due to the fact that all the Bananas on the shelf today are montypic, if they get wiped out by disease (as is actually happening, just as it has happened before), we will no longer have those sweet golden fruits in the market.

See here: http://www.naturalnews.com/023339_banana_bananas_disease.html
 

Jake the Snake

New member
Mar 25, 2009
1,141
0
0
Thank you bob for adding to my plethora of useless knowledge. Carrots used to be purple. Awesome.

In return I offer this piece of info: Kangaroos lick their forearms to keep cool, because they don't have sweat glands.
 

JUMBO PALACE

Elite Member
Legacy
Jun 17, 2009
3,552
7
43
Country
USA
Very interesting and educational Bob! I loved the comparison between defibrillators and Frankenstein.

I had no idea carrots used to be purple!!!
 

Talvrae

The Purple Fairy
Dec 8, 2009
896
0
0
Good video Bob i have been trying to explain that to some poeples around me for years
 

Baldr

The Noble
Jan 6, 2010
1,739
0
0
The whole panic started in early 1990s when it came down to wanting to take the amount of chemicals out out of foods. Organic farming had been going on since the 1970s, then came along a couple scientist that were looking at making vegetables resistant to glyphosate. This chemical was thought to be harmless to humans, but almost killed any plant, which could make it a good herbicide and less dangerous than most herbicides that were used in commercial farming.

This threatened the organic movement although not new, was picking up steam from a new wave of healthy movements taking over the country at the time. That is when the mud started flinging. The sad part is that organic food has the potential to be a lot worse than anything GM foods. It has lead to several documented breakouts of salmonella. The problem is that if the animal dropping contain the salmonella are used as fertilizer, if they are not pasteurized to a high enough temperature, the bacteria can transfer to the food and machinery used to process the food. Peer-reviewed study after study has shown there is no health benefit to organic food, just an increased price, and worst of all it requires more land to generate the same yield of crops for organic vs non-organic.

GM-Foods are no saints either. New studies find glyphosate is not as harmless as once thought, and weeds growing next to these crops are starting to become resistant, making the herbicide useless.

Oh the actual way they make GM foods is they take the genetic material from a plant they want, and smear in on tungsten and shoot it into a seed and grow the plant and test it, no chemicals added, no viruses, no other things that people made up to scare other people.
 

Addendum_Forthcoming

Queen of the Edit
Feb 4, 2009
3,647
0
0
Well actually bob ... GM Foods are somewhat scary due to researchers and produces of certain GMF Co's (Such as Santos) has tried to control their use by creating seeds that lose their fertility in the time it takes to develop a good harvest.

See in the olden times fafrmers could reduce their dependane on buying seed by refraining from the complete sale of their harvest and just use the harvested grain to create the seeds necessary for the next harvest.

Not so with GM Foods co's like Santos.

The scary thing is that cross pollination of some plants means that if your nextdoor neighbour has GM food seeds for something like, grain (corn, wheat, etc), and you don't? Well kiss the viability of your own seeds right there bucko.

So with GM foods alot of the time you aren't given a choice bob ... one farmer caves and decides to use "transgenic maize" and the entire community is completely fucked.

The company then controls your future harvests ... forever ... without hope for change. There's a reason why people are scared of GM food ... and not all of those reasons are idiotic.

Oh ... and other point .. .defibrillation doesn't work on a non-beating heart ... that why they use epinephrine before hand in order to chemically induce heart muscle movement.

'Defib' only works on a patient going into intensive, life threatening tachy/brady/cardia. But once the person is quite literally dead nothing can bring them back. This is why they don't keep shocking them over and over for 5 minutes after the patient doesn't respond to chemical stimulants.
 

Ashoten

New member
Aug 29, 2010
251
0
0
I see a lot of people saying that the guys in lab coats manipulating genes is not the same as selective breeding. Im gonna disagree with them. Just because the techniques are far more advanced then they were 1000 years ago doesnt mean its not the same thing.

Example: I think guns are an offense to nature cause they aren't made of natural materials like bows were. Bows are made of wood, stone, and animal sinew. Those are all naturally occurring ingredients and the bows are forged by hand. Guns are made of unnaturally obtained metals that are dredged up from the ground and manipulated in a furnace.

See how ludicrous that example was? A gun is essentially a better much more sophisticated and powerful bow. Now if someone was purposefully engineering animals and vegetables to cause harm to the public then that would be analogous to gun makers selling firearms to criminals who plan to use them for evil. But the techniques of manufacturing a produce is morally separate from how they are used.
 

thethingthatlurks

New member
Feb 16, 2010
2,102
0
0
Excellent video mate, truly excellent! Few things are more retarded than fear of GMOs, and most of them consist of dietary choices like raw-food vegan. But one thing I would like to add: there are mad scientists, and I am one of them!
MWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Igor, more lightning! And bring me another corpse. And some tea.
 

Negatempest

New member
May 10, 2008
1,004
0
0
Geek_DR said:
Hello escapist and Movie Bob,

Long time watcher/reader, first time commenter.

While I do find the fear tactics about GMOs annoying and eat them all the time without concern for myself, I think you addressed the argument very poorly. There are actual concerns about GMOs and you didn't address any of them, sticking to the "science = good" argument.

For example, health concerns aside, GMOs do damage the diversity of the ecosystem and the plant species in particular. This means that all of the crops can be wiped out by a single disease. (see Irish potato famine.) Secondly as a crop, GMOs mean that a corporation can claim ownership of a species of food (like trademarking carrots).
Wait, this is the potato famine of 1840's right? Where the irish grew dependent on a specific crop and once it was nearly wiped out alot of people starved? Doesn't that have less to do with GMO and more to do with NOT depending on one specific crop and having more diversity?

As for the trade marketing of foods....we have trade marks on nearly every noun and that has more to do with economics that GMO. They are similar but completely different. Heck we as people pay for everything that would keep us alive except air.
 

Addendum_Forthcoming

Queen of the Edit
Feb 4, 2009
3,647
0
0
Negatempest said:
Geek_DR said:
Hello escapist and Movie Bob,

Long time watcher/reader, first time commenter.

While I do find the fear tactics about GMOs annoying and eat them all the time without concern for myself, I think you addressed the argument very poorly. There are actual concerns about GMOs and you didn't address any of them, sticking to the "science = good" argument.

For example, health concerns aside, GMOs do damage the diversity of the ecosystem and the plant species in particular. This means that all of the crops can be wiped out by a single disease. (see Irish potato famine.) Secondly as a crop, GMOs mean that a corporation can claim ownership of a species of food (like trademarking carrots).

Wait, this is the potato famine of 1840's right? Where the irish grew dependent on a specific crop and once it was nearly wiped out alot of people starved? Doesn't that have less to do with GMO and more to do with NOT depending on one specific crop and having more diversity?

As for the trade marketing of foods....we have trade marks on nearly every noun and that has more to do with economics that GMO. They are similar but completely different. Heck we as people pay for everything that would keep us alive except air.
How about the fact that GMF Co's are now making it impossible for farmer's gm crops to be reused in their next hjarvest? Traditionally farmers wouldn't need to buy seeds for their harvests ... with GM foods they have to keep buying from Santos each and every year ... and due to patents there is no cheap alternative.

Not only this but if your farmer uses gm foods and you don't? Well the cross pollination process will take care of that! So instead of one farmer with gm crops in an entire community, within one harvest all farmers downwind of the bastard will have to start using them too, or sell up their land.

Tell me again how this is a good thing?

Bob does a pisspoor way of presenting the problem by not even addressing the problem ... As well as not understanding the basics of medicine, yet conveniently talks about defibrillation despite the fact that no amount of joules from a defib is going to help a non-beating heart beat once more ....

But w/e ... people can make mistakes ... but GM foods are noot like animal husbandry ... afterall animal husbandry was about fertility ultimately, GMF co's are about infertility ... making it necessary to buy only the company's seeds.

This will drive up prices, not reduce them ... and frankly nothing good can come from it.
 

jamhammer

New member
May 13, 2009
11
0
0
you sold have mentioned corn. corn use to be small, with kernals smaler then peas, then they keepedselectively breeding them to the size we have today.
 

darthzew

New member
Jun 19, 2008
1,813
0
0
As the guy with the House avatar, I have to make the following comment:

Defibrillators can't actually bring someone back from the dead. In fact, once a patient has flat-lined (or no heart rhythm at all), there's nothing left to do. And once a patient is pronounced dead, a defibrillator can't do anything. What a defibrillator CAN do, however, is give the heart a boost. Say, if the heart has slowed and is on the brink of death, a defibrillator can give the heart the necessary jump to get back to normal.

You see defibrillators are these miracle Lazarus devices on TV and movies, but they really quite that potent.