| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Xapti
Canada2473 Posts
Additionally, I found it hard to find/notice the bad effects of the GMO-only group compared to the GMO+pesticide groups, pesticide only groups, or control groups. In my opinion the most important information is only with regards to the safety of the GMO, because it's quite obvious a pesticide would be harmful. | ||
|
darkscream
Canada2310 Posts
Monsanto genetically modifies many crops (eg: corn, soy, etc) so that they are resistant to the pesticide, Roundup. Hence the term, "roundup-ready seeds". There's been questions for a long time about how the poison or the crops effect people, there had not been many studies done. This lead to a lot of tinfoil-hatting about GMO crops. Well, this study means it might not be so crazy. Maybe. | ||
|
Goozen
Israel701 Posts
Also this is why you always wash your food and encourage natural pesticide instead of chem ones. On September 20 2012 08:29 darkscream wrote: For those not in the know, here's how it works: Monsanto genetically modifies many crops (eg: corn, soy, etc) so that they are resistant to the pesticide, Roundup. Hence the term, "roundup-ready seeds". There's been questions for a long time about how the poison or the crops effect people, there had not been many studies done. This lead to a lot of tinfoil-hatting about GMO crops. Well, this study means it might not be so crazy. Maybe. You mean resistant to pests no? | ||
|
MisterFred
United States2033 Posts
Anytime farmers over use pesticides on the plants they grow, some of that is going to get into the food supplies and our bodies. The study only reveals that Monsanto's GMO corn allows an unhealthy farming practice - smothering the GMO coin with pesticide. Meaning Roundup. Of course Roundup is toxic to humans (and rats), it's supposed to be. | ||
|
Xapti
Canada2473 Posts
On September 20 2012 08:29 Goozen wrote: You mean resistant to pests no? That can also happen with GMOs, but in this case I think it's corn that's more tolerant/resistant to herbicides. On September 20 2012 08:34 MisterFred wrote: This is NOT new, and it has nothing to do with genetic modifications THEMSELVES being toxic. Anytime farmers over use pesticides on the plants they grow, some of that is going to get into the food supplies and our bodies. The study only reveals that Monsanto's GMO corn allows an unhealthy farming practice - smothering the GMO coin with pesticide. Meaning Roundup. Of course Roundup is toxic to humans (and rats), it's supposed to be. Well the study has a small percentage (maybe 25%) where it's supposedly/apparently testing rats which are eating only the GMO, and no pesticides. I was talking about this in my first post (which is the first post on this page) | ||
|
MisterFred
United States2033 Posts
On September 20 2012 08:29 Goozen wrote: One of the main problems is that the rats are given a constant of permitted levels whereas you will rarely even hit that much and never consistently. Also this is why you always wash your food and encourage natural pesticide instead of chem ones. You mean resistant to pests no? No, emphatically NOT. They modify the plants to be resistant to the pesticide. The GMO plants have zero extra resistance to pests. But farmers can spray them with far more poison than they used to be able to without damaging the plant itself. This reduces the pests, but adds the problem of trace amounts of the pesticide getting into the food chain. Oddly enough, regularly eating small amounts of poison is bad for your health. This is what the study confirms. | ||
|
AUGcodon
Canada536 Posts
On September 20 2012 08:34 MisterFred wrote: This is NOT new, and it has nothing to do with genetic modifications THEMSELVES being toxic. Anytime farmers over use pesticides on the plants they grow, some of that is going to get into the food supplies and our bodies. The study only reveals that Monsanto's GMO corn allows an unhealthy farming practice - smothering the GMO coin with pesticide. Meaning Roundup. Of course Roundup is toxic to humans (and rats), it's supposed to be. Read the study itself, or look at my previous post. even without pesticide, the GMO increase the number of tumors. | ||
|
ZeaL.
United States5955 Posts
... Given that the lead researcher on this topic has written a number of books on why GMO's are bad for you I would take this study with a grain of salt. | ||
|
MisterFred
United States2033 Posts
On September 20 2012 08:36 AUGcodon wrote: Read the study itself, or look at my previous post. even without pesticide, the GMO increase the number of tumors. I didn't see a mention that they grew their own organic crop of NK603, thus I assumed that the researchers acquired commercially grown NK603 maize for the rats that had NK603 maize in their diet but no additional roundup. In that case, trace amounts of roundup should have been present in the maize fed to the rats itself, basically in every group but the control group not fed NK603 maize. However, if I was wrong about that, I apologize. | ||
|
Kukaracha
France1954 Posts
On September 20 2012 08:19 Eatme wrote: Well one should assume that all agricultural chemicals in general should be harmful since they are designed to kill things. I'd like to see studies that whatever herbicide used on non GM crops is totally safe. I'm pretty sure they are at the same level or worse than Roundup. GM crops are awesome and are actually just a shortcut in what we have been doing "manually" breeding certain strains ect. And dont get me started on the anti famine part (since it's so complex in itself with factors that are clearly off topic) where there are huge possiblities in this area. On September 20 2012 08:17 Zealotdriver wrote: They fed rats high doses of glyphosate, aka RoundUp, and unsurprisingly the rats had health problems. This article is just more theatrics from the anti-GM crowd. On September 20 2012 08:24 Xapti wrote: Additionally, I found it hard to find/notice the bad effects of the GMO-only group compared to the GMO+pesticide groups, pesticide only groups, or control groups. ![[image loading]](http://imageshack.us/a/img716/7863/gmomaize.png) On September 20 2012 08:18 Roflhaxx wrote: I don't fully understand, what brand of food is this? Or is it just pesticide? It's a genetically modified corn owned by Monsanto, and a pesticide owned by Monsanto too. Both were tested, both simultaneously and seperately. On September 20 2012 08:19 Zooper31 wrote: So you knowingly made a thread without providing information that you knew and had on hand that would've hugely affected the discussion? Anyway I don't think anyone could dis-agree that eating/drinking chemicals that are in Roundup is bad, or eating Genetically Muniplulated corn could be bad for your health in the longterm. Both are horrible ideas imo. No, it was there, I simply didn't bold it (shame on me). On September 20 2012 08:21 Xiphos wrote: Hey can someone link me up the french link to this study, want to brush up on some my High School learned skills. lol I believe scientific papers are originally released in english, no? On September 20 2012 08:38 ZeaL. wrote: Given that the lead researcher on this topic has written a number of books on why GMO's are bad for you I would take this study with a grain of salt. True, only time will tell. But it is the first long-term study on the matter, which is a good thing anyway. | ||
|
Heh_
Singapore2712 Posts
On September 20 2012 08:15 Kukaracha wrote: It's not really that it's dubvious, any study calls for criticism that researchers need to answer to. The main reason is that it's new, so it reached French newspapers first; a second reason is that it still has to go through the process of peer review (which will give a new dimension to the study). Edit : hey you're that pro-GMO guy from the last thread! :p Yup, I strongly believe that most GM foods are not harmful. This one is a bit tricky, because it involves pesticides that ought to work on insects only, but might have unintended effects on humans. The scientists quoted in the BBC article used some very harsh words for the paper. Like the choice of rat and the deliberate hiding of results from the control rats; if you do research you better show all your controls, otherwise it's really dubious. This article was edited, but in a previous version that I read another scientist called the article "statistical fishing", in other words using dubious statistical methods to show "statistical significance". I can actually do the same thing and using very sketchy statistics, say there's no significant difference between black and white. Also the type of tumors that the rats had is even more dubious. Mammary tumors (aka breast cancer). If the pesticide was so carcinogenic, why don't we see liver tumors, leukemia and other types of cancer? Why only mammary tumors? Also, there was no mention about kidney and liver function. A foreign chemical has the potential to cause kindey and/or liver failure.. that was the conclusion I expected, not some mammary tumors that this strain of rat is susceptible to. I would like to read the paper, but I don't have access to the paper. Maybe when I go back to my Uni tomorrow, or someone uploads the pdf for free: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691512005637 Edit: Ok I see you uploaded some images from the paper. Figure legends please. I have no idea what the heck those lines correspond to. | ||
|
RavenLoud
Canada1100 Posts
Traditional selective crossbreeding can still work without the need to go for dangerous shortcuts. | ||
|
AUGcodon
Canada536 Posts
On September 20 2012 08:43 Heh_ wrote: Yup, I strongly believe that most GM foods are not harmful. This one is a bit tricky, because it involves pesticides that ought to work on insects only, but might have unintended effects on humans. The scientists quoted in the BBC article used some very harsh words for the paper. Like the choice of rat and the deliberate hiding of results from the control rats; if you do research you better show all your controls, otherwise it's really dubious. This article was edited, but in a previous version that I read another scientist called the article "statistical fishing", in other words using dubious statistical methods to show "statistical significance". I can actually do the same thing and using very sketchy statistics, say there's no significant difference between black and white. Also the type of tumors that the rats had is even more dubious. Mammary tumors (aka breast cancer). If the pesticide was so carcinogenic, why don't we see liver tumors, leukemia and other types of cancer? Why only mammary tumors? Also, there was no mention about kidney and liver function. A foreign chemical has the potential to cause kindey and/or liver failure.. that was the conclusion I expected, not some mammary tumors that this strain of rat is susceptible to. I would like to read the paper, but I don't have access to the paper. Maybe when I go back to my Uni tomorrow, or someone uploads the pdf for free: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691512005637 Edit: Ok I see you uploaded some images from the paper. Figure legends please. I have no idea what the heck those lines correspond to. my post on the previous page contain the 2 most relevant figures and their legend | ||
|
Green Sun s Zenith
Canada85 Posts
| ||
|
AUGcodon
Canada536 Posts
| ||
|
MisterFred
United States2033 Posts
On September 20 2012 08:43 Heh_ wrote: Yup, I strongly believe that most GM foods are not harmful. This one is a bit tricky, because it involves pesticides that ought to work on insects only, but might have unintended effects on humans. The scientists quoted in the BBC article used some very harsh words for the paper. Like the choice of rat and the deliberate hiding of results from the control rats; if you do research you better show all your controls, otherwise it's really dubious. This article was edited, but in a previous version that I read another scientist called the article "statistical fishing", in other words using dubious statistical methods to show "statistical significance". I can actually do the same thing and using very sketchy statistics, say there's no significant difference between black and white. Also the type of tumors that the rats had is even more dubious. Mammary tumors (aka breast cancer). If the pesticide was so carcinogenic, why don't we see liver tumors, leukemia and other types of cancer? Why only mammary tumors? Also, there was no mention about kidney and liver function. A foreign chemical has the potential to cause kindey and/or liver failure.. that was the conclusion I expected, not some mammary tumors that this strain of rat is susceptible to. I would like to read the paper, but I don't have access to the paper. Maybe when I go back to my Uni tomorrow, or someone uploads the pdf for free: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691512005637 Edit: Ok I see you uploaded some images from the paper. Figure legends please. I have no idea what the heck those lines correspond to. Most pesticides (including roundup?) are neuro-toxins. They are intended to work only on insects purely because of the intended dosages. Not because they have 'unintended' effects on humans. They're SUPPOSED to be harmful to humans. In sufficiently large amounts they will cripple or kill people. Most of those pesticides that aren't neuro-toxins are hormones sufficiently similar to estrogen to screw with an insect's internal chemistry. Again, they supposedly don't affect humans only because of the dosages. (BTW, if Roundup is one of these, it'd be a good reason mammary tumors were more likely than other types.) Both types of pesticide are present in the body of every single person reading this forum, in varying amounts (through food, water supplies, even wind-blown and other environmental contaminants). The long-term health effects of these chemicals are unknown. On a personal note, I have nothing against GMO crops per se, but the VAST majority of GMO crops are designed merely to increase agriculture's dependence on the chemical industry (who do you think MAKES Roundup? Monsanto). Now, perhaps the high yields permitted are necessary. I am opposed to most GMO crops because they lead to more chemical contaminants in the environment (meaning: my body and your body), and thus I tend to be opposed to them. | ||
|
archonOOid
1983 Posts
I've seen GMO at first hand and it's really safe. The agro-chemical industry isn't like tobacco companies. | ||
|
MisterFred
United States2033 Posts
On September 20 2012 08:53 Green Sun s Zenith wrote: I wonder why they don't want to label foods that are genetically modified. They know its terrible for human consumption yet they put mass GMO out in the market, unlabeled. So people can not choose whether or not to eat genetically modified foods. GMO corn is included, one way or another, in almost every non-organic food in the supermarket (United States). Everything with High Fructose Corn Syrup (including virtually all bread, for pete's sake) likely comes at least partially from Roundup-ready corn (that strain is a huge percentage of the U.S. harvest). Every Dorito, every corn tortilla, every Coke (except Mexican Coke, lol, yay sucrose), plus virtually every steak and hot dog and sausage contains elements of GMO corn (animal feed). Getting to the point the labeling is meaningless, you just have to assume it's in everything processed that's non-organic. Which means it's pretty much unavoidable. | ||
|
MisterFred
United States2033 Posts
On September 20 2012 09:00 archonOOid wrote: Seems like another leftist attack on corporate engineering and wealth. I've seen GMO at first hand and it's really safe. The agro-chemical industry isn't like tobacco companies. Yes, leftists have a deep desire for everyone to be poor. *rolls eyes* | ||
|
SnipedSoul
Canada2158 Posts
| ||
| ||
The PiG Daily
Best Games of SC
Reynor vs Krystianer
herO vs Rogue
ByuN vs TriGGeR
Maru vs Solar
[ Submit Event ] |
|
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Other Games gofns15492 tarik_tv14459 FrodaN6907 summit1g3987 Grubby3412 Beastyqt930 shahzam332 KnowMe304 Pyrionflax301 Liquid`Hasu295 mouzStarbuck238 ToD93 Livibee71 PPMD29 ZombieGrub25 |
|
Korean StarCraft League
HomeStory Cup
Replay Cast
HomeStory Cup
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
WardiTV Invitational
The PondCast
WardiTV Invitational
|
|
|
EPT
