Lady_Lilith wrote:Everything is a "GMO", almost everything we eat has been genetically altered, rather by gene splicing or domestication. There has been numerous studies, including independent studies, over the past 20+ years. GMOs are safe. The fear mongering about GMOs however, probably won't convince people of the science that is correct about it. The science is going to be right, rather anyonr believes it or not. It is still true.
Anti-GMOs groups promote conspiracy theories and false information consistently enough to where even politicians believe that tripe.
Hi Lilith,
It is true that most of what we eat is modified. People have been practicing agriculture for millennia and we have cultivated our food by selecting heritable traits we found beneficial. Do we like our corn? Well that's great because it came from a grass (teosinte) originally, and we kept selecting traits that we preferred and came up with the result we all know and love. It's the same with our peaches, our apples, our flowers, and our pugs. Yes, we genetically modify the world around us and have been doing it for millennia. I'm sure Ms.M is also aware of that.
I am also up on my science and know the benefits of GMO technology......greater yields, pest resistance, etc. I mentioned that. I think it's good to be specific about what kind of GMO technology we talk about, are we simply modifying? Selecting for traits and then using those plants for reproduction, or are we splicing genes in a lab? You are right that most science and academic studies that hold weight are not showing long term risks. I agree.
I think we also need to consider where the funding for academic study comes from, and what scientists, agribusinesses and governments decide are the best questions to ask. I think of the North American testing and acceptance of neonicotinoids and I get a bit nervous....for really good reasons. I think we have to delve into the true nature of science (NOS) and accept that there is creativity, bias and imperfection there. Don't get me wrong I LOVE science. There is a whole world of (NOS) thought that I am learing about in my current studies. It's blowing my mind.
Just becuase we modify something doesn't mean it's better. It's true, it doesn't mean it's bad either. The best floral varieties for pollinators are older heritage varieties because they are easier to pollinate. All the "double" varieties of flower make more work for our pollinators....but they sure are pretty.
I agree this is a complex topic. I think the real truth is like everything else....somewhere in between. I will be interested to hear what Bill has to say, he is a great guy... though in that video does not address the issue you said it does...it says he is going to write more about it and that his mind has changed after visiting Monsanto. Monsanto has done some shady things in the past...as well as creating deveopments that further agriculture.
I liked this article out of Penn state. It talks about what you and I have both mentioned.
http://agsci.psu.edu/magazine/articles/ ... ce-of-gmos
It's very interesting to think about I find, and it's okay to question the dominant paradigm. It doesn't necessarily mean one is a conspiracy theorist.
