Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
Show ALL Forums  > Health Wellness  >      Home login  
Joined: 5/21/2008
Msg: 54
view profile
Question about genetically modified foods (gmo's)Page 3 of 6    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6)
That is quite gnarly satx.

Similar study on rats...

The actual study...

As usual, the scientists behind this are "imposters", with "ulterior motives".

Just like Andrew Wakefield was when he was struck off by the GMC for saying the MMR triple jab was responsible for the rise in autism.

Or all those barmy lot who said bad things about Vioxx
Joined: 10/21/2012
Msg: 55
Question about genetically modified foods (gmo's)
Posted: 2/3/2013 7:55:32 AM

All animals and plants have built in herbicides, and are resistant to 'fungus and other things' to a greater or lesser extent. If you didn't, you'd die fairly quickly. What do you think neutrophils and lymphocytes do? Antibodies?

Whats interesting as the new strains of seeds evolve, new bacterial and virus's also do.

Thousands of years of agriculture has resulted in our food being higher in protein and more readily available, which has made humans bigger and taller than ever.

And as science,medicine & technology progressed which has made us live longer,but now face a new obstacle. The Western diet!
As here in the US, obesity, heart des, HBP and diabetes have taken control of living the good life of over indulgence & lack of exercise.

Now with GMO technology, we can even keep people alive who should be dead (Type 1 Diabetics for instance)

Yes, it hurts me to see when folks like the Christian Science and others out there, deny themselves and their children any medical help because of their religious, social, and extreme alternative medicine beliefs.
Joined: 10/30/2009
Msg: 56
view profile
Question about genetically modified foods (gmo's)
Posted: 3/3/2013 2:18:49 PM
It gets worse as rats fed GM were infertile within 3 generations!
Joined: 9/19/2009
Msg: 57
Question about genetically modified foods (gmo's)
Posted: 3/3/2013 5:38:18 PM
I think I lost track of the definition of GMO. What is a GMO?

People have been farmers for thousands of years - yes I'm aware it's a relatively recent development in our history - and have selectively bred plants to be more productive/taste better/handle different weather conditions/etc.

So, does selective breeding constitute a GMO? Or, do the genes have to be fvcked with in the laboratory of a "corporate food giant?"
Joined: 10/30/2009
Msg: 58
view profile
Question about genetically modified foods (gmo's)
Posted: 3/27/2013 1:24:35 PM
Rats fed on Genetically Modified foods were sterile within three generations is that the way the human race is going to meet its demise? All in the name of profit by the big chemical companies!
Joined: 9/23/2007
Msg: 59
view profile
Question about genetically modified foods (gmo's)
Posted: 6/7/2013 10:15:45 AM
The thing that concerns me about GMO is the choice of intended outcome for the genetic modification.
I think we are a very ingenious people, and we can choose a goal and invent something to accomplish it.
But what was the actual goal here? Did the goal include safety?

Roundup is very toxic to living things. So if you modify a plant to produce its own "roundup" chemical, the chemical is inside the plant tissue, not just on the outside, as when you used to just spray the chemical on a field to kill all living plant life before planting what you want to grow.
They used to think Roundup would degrade quickly and become less toxic over time, but this happens much slower than originally thought.

When you eat a plant that has roundup inside it, you are eating roundup. You cannot wash it off.
This stuff isn't a nutrient, it isn't necessary for people to have in their diet, yet we are adding it to the composition of our food, just to make it cheaper to make the food.

But farmer's can grow food without it. So it isn't necessary for nutrition, or for farming.

Any consequences of this toxic process are just for convenience, profit and for volume of food.

However, our society now has access to too much food, and we are all overweight, so why risk eating toxins when we can just farm the way we used to for thousands of years, and eat slightly less?

If the goal is to reduce starvation, I question the method here, too. If you produce so much food in a wealthy country that you can ship it to anywhere in the world and still have it be cheaper than their local farmers can produce it, then the people who are starving are the local farmers. If you put them out of business, then you are making entire groups of people MORE dependent on others than before. The goal should be to make them food independent. That would work if you were willing to help them without trying to control what seeds they buy. If you make farming more about competition than about nutrition, then what you get is one winner and a lot of loosers. And the loosers starve. In this case, competition isn't a game. Yet corporations only operate on the terms of competition. As a non-human entity, they have no way of quantifying human wellbeing, fairness, and justice. We make a mistake to think that the drive for profit only motivates for the good of everyone. We have to add goals that are difficult to put under that umbrella to be really safe from serious consequences.

The other thing I am concerned with is the method of modifying the genes. I read that this is done using viruses. Viruses are notoriously hard to contain in one place. Viruses are extremely small, and are way smaller than bacteria. They aren't even technically alive. They are just a package of code. What if the viruses that modify the plant genes become loose in the environment and causes genetic modification to other organisms (bees, food animals and us) that they weren't intended to modify? How can you completely, indefinitely, control this process?

Before GMO, for all of history, when we were selecting plants and animals for good characteristics and then breeding them, we were influencing their genetics but not in a way that was so toxic and uncontrollable. We had time and generations to decide if a plant was healthy to eat as well as whatever quality we were breeding for.

Look at how we breed dogs, for instance. Now we have dogs that have hip problems, sinus problems from having no long nose anymore, and hair that blocks their vision, and all kinds of other problems. This happened because we used the criteria of "cuteness," or unusual appearance, color of fur and other things that don't really help the dog at all. When we select for big tomatoes, we then have to support the vines with trellises. And we select for all kinds of stuff that has nothing to do with the health and wellness of the people eating the plants.

In fact, the only thing we can do is measure certain vitamins and minerals, that we know are essential to health, but we don't know all the factors that lead to good health and survivability. So we can't really predict the out come if we are modifying genes to produce the elusive quality of "health" in people, and so the people who do GMO modify for things that companies measure and care about; profitability. That usually means, simply volume, by weight, fast growth, ease of transport, and lack of spoilage. NOTHING to do with health of the consumer.

We don't need super large tomatoes for health. We don't need crops that grow really fast for our health. We don't need food that doesn't spoil for our health. We can eat small tomatoes, we can wait for the end of season for our food, we can buy things and then freeze them so they don't spoil.

All of the genetic modifications allow the producers to make more money selling us the same amount of nutrition as before.

What good is a super large tomato if it is low in nutrients because it was designed to grow really fast and then there was less uptake of minerals?
You have to eat twice as much to get the same amount of nutrition.
So now we have a population that is always hungry, craving things they can't see, and they have to eat more to feel satisfied.
So more profits for the producers, and less health for us, as we gain weight and feel worse.

We live in a country where food has been plentiful, and even before factory farming and GMOs.
Why do we need to do this to ourselves?

The companies that make GMO's aren't waiting even one generation to find out the long term effects on humans of their products.
And they have products that almost everyone in the country is exposed to.
So if they make a big mistake in some area, we only have one generation to fix it.
Is the science good enough to reverse this problem?
How would we even begin to remove something that has been spread across many hundreds of thousands of acres?

I have a son with Autism. Autism is now present in 1 out of 50 school children.
I think his genes have been altered through epigenetics. I do think it is reversable.
However, we might have lost an entire generation of children before this gets figured out enough to prevent the next generation from having an even higher rate of Autism.
Joined: 10/30/2007
Msg: 60
view profile
Question about genetically modified foods (gmo's)
Posted: 4/25/2014 2:52:44 PM
GMO Crops in Iowa Fail as Rootworms Develop Resistance

Nature is a powerful force to be reckoned with. All the Monsanto scientists in the world can’t outsmart countless years of evolution (or even thousands of years of micro-evolution, depending on your views). Nature evolves in an effort of self-preservation. So it should be no surprise that GMO crops are failing because the very pests they are designed to withstand are developing resistance to the toxins within.

We are seeing the same sort of evolutionary phenomenon in humans with antibiotic-resistant superbugs, illnesses that are able to thrive despite being bombarded with modern drugs, precisely because of modern bugs.

In the case of Iowa corn crops, the Western Corn Rootworms have made it their business to survive and thrive no matter what Monsanto throws at them. To that end, they’ve grown resistant to two strains of Bt Corn, beginning with Cry3Bb1, which researchers found them defending themselves against in 2009. In 2011, it was mCry3A, according to Gizmodo.

When these strains of corn are not “managed correctly”, they don’t produce enough of the Bt toxin to kill the rootworms (a beetle larvae). Instead, the toxin only kills the weak and small. Through the process of natural selection, those larger and stronger larvae survive and create additional larger and stronger larvae. As a result, Iowa has larger, stronger, and more destructive rootworms.

Report: Nature may Prevail as Super Rootworms Destroy Crops

As NaturalNews reports, though we are seeing this in Iowa now, it could certainly be a sign of things to come on farms everywhere. About 85 percent of American corn is genetically modified. Ninety-one percent of soybeans and 88 percent of cotton is as well. If insects are able to develop resistance to the very poisons designed to control them, these industries could be the death of themselves.

But it’s not only the GMO crops that stand to suffer. If problem pests get bigger, stronger, and more resistant to controls, they won’t stick with GMO crops out of preference, they’ll likely move onto organic and non-GMO fields as well—just another way the GMO industry could take down agriculture as we know it.

also read that about 85% of GMO field are now infested with Monsanto-resistant super weeds.
Joined: 10/30/2007
Msg: 61
view profile
Question about genetically modified foods (gmo's)
Posted: 4/29/2014 8:23:02 AM
Farmer Says GM Feed Causes Pigs Diarrhea, Deformations, and Loss of Appetite
Joined: 10/30/2007
Msg: 62
view profile
Question about genetically modified foods (gmo's)
Posted: 5/1/2014 12:29:51 PM
The GMO Hits Keep Coming

‘Extreme Levels’ of Monsanto’s Roundup Herbicide Found in Soy Plant

A new study led by scientists from the Arctic University of Norway has detected “extreme levels” of Roundup, the agricultural herbicide manufactured by Monsanto, in genetically engineered (GE) soy.

The herbicide has triggered a cycle of super weeds resistant to Roundup, which then means more Roundup is needed to try to kill the hardy weeds. Photo credit: Shutterstock
The herbicide has triggered a cycle of super weeds resistant to Roundup, which then means more Roundup is needed to try to kill the hardy weeds. Photo credit: Shutterstock
The study, coming out in June’s issue of Food Chemistry and available online, looked at 31 different soybean plants on Iowa farms and compared the accumulation of pesticides and herbicides on plants in three categories: GE “Roundup Ready” soy, conventionally produced (not GE) soy, and soy cultivated using organic practices. They found high levels of Roundup on 70 percent of GE soy plants.

Crop scientists have genetically engineered soy to survive blasts of Roundup so farmers can spray this chemical near crops to get rid of weeds. But some so-called “super weeds” resistant to Roundup have developed. In turn, some farmers use yet more Roundup to try to kill those hardy weeds. This leads to more Roundup chemicals being found on soybeans and ultimately in the food supply.

Who says when Roundup contamination can be considered “extreme?”

Monsanto itself. In 1999, the chemical giant defined an “extreme level” of the herbicide as 5.6 milligrams per kilogram of plant weight.

Astonishingly, the

Norwegian scientists found a whopping nine milligrams of Roundup per kilogram, on average.

What it boils down to is this: every time we eat GE soy we are taking a dose of Roundup with it. This is alarming, because Roundup has been found to be hazardous to human health and sometimes kills human cells. The authors conclude:

This study demonstrated that Roundup Ready [GE]-soy may have high residue levels of glyphosate […] and also that different agricultural practices may result in a markedly different nutritional composition of soybeans […] Lack of data on pesticide residues in major crop plants is a serious gap of knowledge with potential consequences for human and animal health.

Other research has detected Roundup residues in animals and people.

A study led by German researchers found high concentrations of glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, in the urine of dairy cows and humans. This study, published in January in the journal Environmental & Analytical Toxicology, concluded that “the presence of glyphosate residues in both humans and animals could haul the entire population towards numerous health hazards.”

Big Ag wants us to believe that there is no difference between GE and conventional crops, but mounting research tells us that just isn’t true.
Joined: 10/30/2007
Msg: 63
view profile
Question about genetically modified foods (gmo's)
Posted: 5/2/2014 9:48:35 AM
Monsanto’s RoundUp Chemicals Found to Damage Enzyme Pathways

The killer of weeds, RoundUp causes absolute havoc on the enzymes in the body. The chemical brew meant to boost GMO crop production is exceedingly dangerous to animals in some of their most sensitive life stages.

Glyphosate has been linked to several other health problems, as well, but in this particular study, scientists found that specific enzyme pathways necessary for proper functioning were inhibited. In this case, the enzymes in the gut which allow the body to detoxify itself were adversely affected. While the study looked at the guts of animals dining on GMO, glyphosate-ridden soy, the results can be translated to the human form just as easily.

it was found that glyphosate disrupted the life cycle of good bacteria in the gastrointestinal tract, depleting the animals’ immunity and making them more prone to disease. There was an increased incidence, for example, of an infection called Clostridium botulinum in cattle. These infections have increased significantly in Germany, but it is not the only type of infection that the livestock were subject to on a GMO diet. Salmonella and clostridium were also found to be highly resistant to glyphosate.

What’s worse is that good bacteria like Enterococcus, Bacillus, and Lactobacillus were found to be the most susceptible, and destroyed in the presence of glyphosate. Without enough good bacteria, the gut of the livestock becomes a breeding ground for diseases to replicate.

The Denmark study also found that glyphosate inhibits an enzyme called cytochrome P450 in humans which helps the body detoxify harmful chemicals. This means that the very toxic brew that causes chemical overload in the body also causes the body to be congested with more chemicals – whether they are glyphosate or aluminum, lead, arsenic, or any other toxic substance in the body. This is yet another study showing the uncanny level of harm that glyphosate can assert on the mammalian system.

yum, yum, eat up everybody, esp when you're trying to get or are pregnant.
Joined: 10/30/2007
Msg: 64
view profile
Question about genetically modified foods (gmo's)
Posted: 5/5/2014 7:52:12 AM
YOU think about it:

Approximately 1 billion pounds of pesticides are sprayed on crops in the United States alone every single year. Thanks to pesticide/herbicide-resistant GMO crops, that number is growing every year. Much of this pesticide spraying contains a toxic ingredient known as glyphosate – the primary poisonous active ingredient in Monsanto’s best-selling herbicide RoundUp.

1. Glyphosate Found in People’s Urine

It has been revealed by numerous scientists that herbicides and pesticides bioaccumulate in the body, eventually leading to a toxic overload of sorts. One study conducted by a German university found very high concentrations of glyphosate in all urine samples tested. The amount of glyphosate found in the urine was staggering, with each sample containing concentrations at 5 to 20-fold the limit established for drinking water. But this is just a single piece of evidence that pesticides are out of control.

Another more recent study found that animals and humans who consume pesticide-laden GMO foods have extremely high levels of glyphosate in their urine. What’s more, chronically sick people have higher levels than healthy people. Conversely, people who eat primarily organic foods, and animals that are given feed from non-GMO plants, have lower levels of glyphosate in their urine. The study was published in the Journal of Environmental & Analytical Toxicology.

2. Glyphosate Found in Breast Milk

Very recently, the Organic Consumers Association have demanded that U.S. regulators such as the FDA, EPA, and USDA ban glyphosate as many other communities and even nations have. Why? Because a new piece of research found that the toxic ingredient is actually found in the breast milk of women, leading to damage to underdeveloped human beings.

Moms Across America and Sustainable Pulse found ‘high’ levels in 3 out of the 10 samples tested. The levels found in the breast milk testing of 76 ug/l to 166 ug/l are 760 to 1600 times higher than the European Drinking Water Directive allows for individual pesticides.

“The mothers tested are mostly familiar with GMOs and glyphosate. Most of them have been trying to avoid GMOs and glyphosate for several months to two years, so the levels of mothers who are not aware of GMOs and glyphosate may be much higher,” Moms Across America Founder and Director, Zen Honeycutt, stated.

3. Glyphosate Found in our Blood

In addition to being found in urine and breast milk, glyphosate has also been found in people’s blood in 18 different countries. A new study entitled, ‘The effect of metabolites and impurities of glyphosate on human erythrocytes (in vitro),’ explains just how RoundUp chemicals are invading our human blood.

Researchers exposed participants’ blood to different levels of glyphosate consistent with the ranges and concentrations which have already been well established in our drinking water, air, soil and food – between .01-5 millimolar (mM) for 1, 4, and 24 hours. What they found was that glyphosate and other ingredients in RoundUp lead to ‘slightly significant’ negative effects on red blood cells. In other words, our blood is simply not ‘RoundUp Ready’.

It seems that regulatory authorities as well as the biotech industry can no longer claim that toxic ingredients such as glyphosate don’t bioaccumulate in the body and are excreted. As anyone may have guessed, these toxins really are doing some damage.

GMO and the x-icide is a BUSINESS profit-making/enslaving venture, not a health or humanitarian venture.

And now that 80% of glyphosate croplands are infested with glyphosate-resistant super weeds, Monsanto, etc is flogging MORE GMO seeds for crops the are resistant to Monsanto's Agent Orange.

SCR3W GMO and all the corporate poisons tainting us all.

and then there is the horrible problem of antibiotics pumped into meat factory animals.

One of the great rivers of the world draining America's heartland is a sewer of industrial and agriculture chemicals delivering its poisons into the Gulf of Mexico where it creates a huge dead zone.
Joined: 8/12/2010
Msg: 65
Question about genetically modified foods (gmo's)
Posted: 5/5/2014 8:46:13 AM
Anyone who cannot see that a company like Monsanto, engineering seeds so that once you grow the veg/fruit, you cannot lay the seed to ground for a fresh crop- is not solely in this for the money, is pretty naive.

I dont hate on all gmo foods, many have come about through science, hybrids etc that are beneficial.

However, those fruits/veggies, after I eat them, I can plant the seeds and get more if I care to put in the effort. And that is how it should be. Engineering the seeds so that they cannot be replanted after consumption is pure greed and not for the good of humanity. its all about the money and being beholden to a greedy corporation.

The foods should be labelled as gmo so consumers can CHOOSE and speak with thier spending dollars on what they want.

Until labelling is up to my standards, chain stores have lost almost all of my spending dollars. I drive out of my way and spend more at a store that does label all foods, so I can be informed. I will continue to shop this way until the bigger chains notice my money missing from thier till and change how they operate. Money talks afterall.

It's not just about the fact that the foods has been genetically is the ethics/money trail behind the venture that mostly concern me.
Joined: 10/30/2007
Msg: 66
view profile
Question about genetically modified foods (gmo's)
Posted: 6/27/2014 9:01:02 AM
MOs Shown to be Safe? Science Media Center Exposed for Incredible GMO Deceit

Science Media Center has given the world a ‘false’ sense of truth about GMOs based on politicized science, not real science, and PR Watch explains why.

The Science Media Center (SMC) influences governments. It acts as if its coverage of GMOs is unbiased, and their report on genetically modified ingredients was released with great fanfare. Their actions have outcomes that affect us all.

SMC was conceived in 2002, and enjoys a cozy relationship with the British government. It is now based at the Wellcome Trust, one of the world’s largest non-profit foundations ($22.5 billion in total assets as of late 2012), founded on the fortune of American-born pharmaceutical magnate Sir Henry Wellcome, whose drug company has since evolved to become GlaxoSmithKline.

The Wellcome Trust provides the SMC with more than five percent of its annual budget. If this is sounding more and more like Monsanto’s usual tactics to buy out scientists and labs, governments, and even Supreme Courts, then you are getting the idea.

Furthermore, its current funding comes from BASF, Bayer, and Syngenta – three of the world’s biggest pesticide and GMO corporations – as well as a number of agrichemical trade groups like CropLife International. But we are supposed to believe that their scientific inquiries into GMOs are unbiased?

SMC initially promised to “provide an anti-GM scientist and a pro-GM scientist, a pro-legalisation of cannabis scientist and an anti-, etc, etc.,” but it has done nothing like this. They also spearheaded the attack on the controversial Gilles-Éric Séralini study, which showed GMOs to be extremely toxic to rats. The study will now be republished despite SMC’s attack, with the support of thousands of scientists all over the world.

SMC director Fiona Fox told the Center for Media and Democracy (CMD), “[W]e are not about to reinforce the ‘he-said-she-said’ false balance by trawling our universities for climate skeptics or plant scientists who take issue with GM.”

There you have it. The SMC is a paragon for biotech’s bottom line, not real science that tells the truth about GMOs.

Pretty much the same with ALL "our/their stuff is SAFE" reports.

They're paid for by corporations who make the stuff.
Joined: 3/30/2012
Msg: 67
view profile
Question about genetically modified foods (gmo's)
Posted: 6/28/2014 7:39:47 AM
There are many scientific studies that demonstrate why GMOs should not be consumed.

They use many more TYPES of pesticides on one crop than in the past .
If a farmer used a one or two combo in the past on non GMO crops, now they combine 5/6.
We all know 1 pesticide can cause harm and have no idea what a combination of pesticides use will actually do to us and future generations.
Do we need our kids to have kids born with 3 legs for people to wake up? If the FDA has anything to do with it, my answer is yes.
We all have our fav foods and we then build up that pesticide in our body.
They are meant to be poison, and they are poison and they are poison for a reason, to kill, period.

If a product in the U.S is labeled non GMO can we trust that if 'USDA certified non GMO'?Maybe not.
An organic product with that label is not guaranteed to be 100% organic, only 80% of the product has to be organic to have the USDA certified organic label.
Joined: 8/12/2010
Msg: 68
Question about genetically modified foods (gmo's)
Posted: 7/4/2014 1:20:37 PM
The fda regulates how much pesticide can be used and the growers believe they are following the rules. The issue as I understand it, the rule doesnt speak to how many different types can be used on 1 they can and do, apply multiple different types at the regulated level...but it is not regulated how many different types they can use. (any way I type this, it comes off as confusing, sorry)

We have no studies showing the effects of multiple types on 1 crop-how or if these multiple applications cause problems. Id like to see this studied personally. Id like people to have access to this information so they can decide on their own what to eat, with all the information in hand.

I read an article that states in N America the amount of pesticides being used has more than quadrupled since GMO crops are now resistant...but then so are the pests which evolved to be more more juice is needed to keep these resistant pests at bay. (we created super bugs it seems, good going!) This seems to me, to be why the amount of juices being used has skyrocketed.

Studies are coming fast and furious that eating gmo food regularly is not good for us.

I'm concerned that the entire food chain in N America is pooched. I have been for some time.

I also read somewhere that one of the big guys at Monsanto has or had a very high position within the FDA. Conflict of interest? If this is true...YES! It is getting so I cannot tell a fabricated article from a valid one, with lobbying from both sides launching attacks.

I'll stick to paying more for labelled, locally grown organic foods until this clears up. I miss many of the exotics I used to buy but until I know what the heck is going on, I'll do without.

Im not one for conspiracy theories and such...but the people who have been making noise about these issues have been looked at as being a little nutty...and the more I research I do, the less nutty they look to me.
Joined: 3/7/2014
Msg: 69
Question about genetically modified foods (gmo's)
Posted: 7/4/2014 2:29:23 PM

We all know 1 pesticide can cause harm and have no idea what a combination of pesticides use will actually do to us

I'm personally hoping for x-ray vision and the ability to leap over tall buildings in a single bound.
Joined: 3/30/2012
Msg: 70
view profile
Question about genetically modified foods (gmo's)
Posted: 7/5/2014 4:26:06 AM
The people working with these crops are in a lot of danger for untreatable deadly cancers and possibly kids with serious health issues and deformities. Produce pickers esp. They spray while people are in the fields also.
I have seen crop poisoning among many high school kids who had to work fields in the late 70's , so can imagine what gets in the system of crop workers today.

Who will pay for these health conditions? YOU.

Best bet is to take money out of their pockets. Don't use them.
In the long run, it will benefit us to support non GMO and demand labeling, even if just nagging /asking the grocers and people that sell produce at markets what is used on the food.
If they cant answer, dont buy it..

Take a look -see at PLU numbers

If there are only four numbers in the PLU, this means that the produce was grown conventionally or “traditionally” with the use of pesticides. The last four letters of the PLU code are simply what kind of vegetable or fruit.EXP is that all bananas are labeled with the code of 4011.
If there are five numbers in the PLU code, and the number starts with “8?, this tells you that the item is a genetically modified fruit or vegetable. Genetically modified fruits and vegetables trump being organic. So, it is impossible to eat organic produce that are grown from genetically modified seeds. A genetically engineered (GE or GMO) banana would be: 84011
If there are five numbers in the PLU code, and the number starts with “9?, this tells you that the produce was grown organically and is not genetically modified. An organic banana would be: 94011

Pick your "battles". Realistically we cant all afford all 100% organic non GMO foods in most cases.
Pick thick skinned fruits but clean before cutting.Avoid "grown on the ground foods" that are not organic and one of my favs, apples is at the top of the list, so eat less of them that I would like to.

Some argue that the health benefits of the skins ( antioxidants and pectin) balance out the toxicity of pesticides.
Not if they are soaked with numerous poisons. You cant clean or cut it all off.

So that X ray vision may be in the future along with a tumor in the brain.

The fda regulates how much pesticide can be used and the growers believe they are following the rules. The issue as I understand it, the rule doesnt speak to how many different types can be used on 1 they can and do, apply multiple different types at the regulated level...but it is not regulated how many different types they can use. (any way I type this, it comes off as confusing, sorry)

We have no studies showing the effects of multiple types on 1 crop-how or if these multiple applications cause problems. Id like to see this studied personally. Id like people to have access to this information so they can decide on their own what to eat, with all the information in hand.

I read an article that states in N America the amount of pesticides being used has more than quadrupled since GMO crops are now resistant...but then so are the pests which evolved to be more more juice is needed to keep these resistant pests at bay. (we created super bugs it seems, good going!) This seems to me, to be why the amount of juices being used has skyrocketed.

Studies are coming fast and furious that eating gmo food regularly is not good for us.


We all know what the FDA is /priorities are (I think ) since so many FDA approved products have killed people and law suits are continuously filed over FDA approved poison.

They approved DEET ,FFS.

NYC has put a half foot down anyway on some toxic chemicals.
Joined: 3/30/2008
Msg: 71
view profile
Question about genetically modified foods (gmo's)
Posted: 7/11/2014 1:47:22 AM

One of the overlooked dangers of genetically modified crops is the seeds are usually a single yield crop. With every crop he plants, the farmer has to buy new seeds from the supplier.
Traditionally farmers would hold back a certain percentage of seed for planting, this would be the next crop. Can't do that with most genetically modified crops, the seeds from the grown plants are sterile.
This is a potentially dangerous route to go down, business gains a stranglehold on the food supply, in the worst case scenario food could be used as a weapon. (it's happened in the past)
Historically the population and farmers have always had the ability to grow food. Not anymore if we go down the genetically modified seed route.

Addressed previously. You have to assume that farmers are either a) irrational, or b) stupid.

If the benefits of a GMO crop do not outweigh the cost of having to buy seed each year, why on earth would they plant them? Most farmers of commercial food crops buy their seed from seed companies, regardless of whether they are GMO or otherwise.

For those who fear transgenic organisms, should you not be advocating for sterile crops?
Joined: 7/10/2014
Msg: 72
Question about genetically modified foods (gmo's)
Posted: 7/13/2014 9:40:03 AM
Two words......

Brundle + Fly

We have absolutely no idea what we are doing -how it will affect us and the environment as a whole -and if we can reverse our eventual major botch job.

We do things when we can -because we can -and the motivation is usually less than noble. Then we say oops when things go south and throw as little money as possible toward those whose lives we've destroyed -just as it is with big pharma, etc.

Billions of years in the making -and we can mess everything up in a few hundred years.....
Joined: 3/12/2013
Msg: 73
Question about genetically modified foods (gmo's)
Posted: 7/14/2014 2:52:02 PM
the people who hate GMO crops would be content to let the estimated 1 billion people in the Indian subcontinent whose lives have been saved by GMO food (genetically modified what that can withstand extreme heat & drought) just die, I guess

don't affect 'mercans..better to have less world pop, maybe
Joined: 7/10/2014
Msg: 74
Question about genetically modified foods (gmo's)
Posted: 7/14/2014 6:10:38 PM
I knew a guy who lost a lot of weight by smoking crack. It doesn't mean crack is good, it just means it can have a positive effect along with all of the rest.
Joined: 7/10/2014
Msg: 75
Question about genetically modified foods (gmo's)
Posted: 7/14/2014 6:26:47 PM
I've never smoked crack, btw -just thought I'd make that clear.
Joined: 10/30/2007
Msg: 76
view profile
Question about genetically modified foods (gmo's)
Posted: 7/22/2014 7:48:15 AM
from a newsletter"


Dow Chemical Co. calls it a weed killer. But it has the potential to harm a lot more than weeds.

As I write, Dow Chemical Co. is seeking the EPA’s approval to market its new herbicide Enlist Duo, a toxic mix of 2,4-D and glyphosate, the main ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup weed killer.

If it’s approved, it will be sprayed on millions of acres of genetically engineered crops.

This dangerous mixture has been shown to increase the risk of endocrine and reproductive system disruption, Parkinson’s disease and non-Hodgkin Lymphoma."

BigChem and BigAg poisoning us all and the environment, with FDA/USDA as captured regulators and enablers.
Joined: 10/30/2007
Msg: 77
view profile
Question about genetically modified foods (gmo's)
Posted: 8/8/2014 11:59:52 AM
One Little Piggy Had Birth Defects: Is Monsanto's Roundup to Blame?

One little piglet was born with only one large eye. A second piglet was missing an ear. A third piglet had a large hole in its skull. A fourth piglet had a monstrously huge "elephant tongue." A female piglet was born with testes. Still others had malformed limbs, spines, skulls and gastrointestinal tracts.

The pigs in question belonged to a Danish pig farmer. For three years he had fed his pigs ordinary, non-genetically modified soy. When he ran out, he bought the cheaper genetically modified (GM) soy pig feed. His herdsman, unaware of the feed switch, immediately noticed that the pigs lost their appetite and that the piglets developed diarrhea. Even worse was the sudden and shocking increase in birth defects. The farmer, eager to understand the cause, had 38 of the deformed pigs euthanized and tested for glyphosate, the herbicide used on the GM soy. The results were published in the April 2014 issue of the Journal of Environmental and Analytic Toxicology. The samples of lung, liver, kidney, brain, gut wall, heart and muscle all tested positive.

( ... lots of other info you won't ever hear from GMO industry and their lobbyists, or even from mainstream media)

The FIRST and ONLY assumption about corporate communications is that they are LYING for profit, until proven
Joined: 10/30/2007
Msg: 78
view profile
Question about genetically modified foods (gmo's)
Posted: 8/11/2014 11:15:41 AM
New Wave of GMO Crops Poised for Approval Despite Public Outcry

Despite its own admission that it will cause an up to seven-fold increase in chemical pesticide use, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is poised to approve a new type of genetically engineered seed built to resist one of the most toxic weedkillers on the market.
Show ALL Forums  > Health Wellness  >