Apparently in food deserts you do not have much choices when it comes to food. I would also hazard a guess that if you live in such a food desert, you do not have much mobility (car, public transportation) to get healthy food elsewhere.
I misread that at first to say "food desserts" and I was trying to figure out what the hell you were talking about.
Anyway, I believe the ban said it would ban trans fats in restaurants. Last I checked, people generally aren't forced to go to restaurants. Even when I travel for work and it is most convenient to eat out, I don't have to. When I wasn't making as much money I went to the nearest gas station and picked up some sandwich stuff so I could save all the extra money that I was given to cover food expenses. I don't anymore, but that's my choice.
But if you do live in a food desert where your only source of food is a restaurant of some kind and you lack any means of transportation, you'll probably be doing lots of walking, which will help offset the satanic food curse being put upon you at every meal.
You are forgetting the most evil part of it all: delivery!
/omnious organ music in the background
You are forgetting the most evil part of it all: delivery!
*thunderclap*
Well duh... If I have a choice between non-GM and GM and/or non-trans-fat and trans-fat guess what I'll pay the extra 10 cents for the Non products...
I'd settle for some laws that made it legal to label your food how you want. Such as labeling non-GM food or non-trans fat, which is illegal right now. Of course their excuses are that it might make their profits go down.
Well duh... If I have a choice between non-GM and GM and/or non-trans-fat and trans-fat guess what I'll pay the extra 10 cents for the Non products...
What? I'm pretty sure I've seen products that were labeled as having no trans fat...
I'd settle for some laws that made it legal to label your food how you want. Such as labeling non-GM food or non-trans fat, which is illegal right now. Of course their excuses are that it might make their profits go down.
Well duh... If I have a choice between non-GM and GM and/or non-trans-fat and trans-fat guess what I'll pay the extra 10 cents for the Non products...
What? I'm pretty sure I've seen products that were labeled as having no trans fat...
Maybe it was done volontarely by the compagnie as a marketing strategy. But they aren't obligated to do so.
Why would we pass laws to obligate them to do that? It's to their advantage to tell us, since so many people want to eat healthy.
I'd settle for some laws that made it legal to label your food how you want. Such as labeling non-GM food or non-trans fat, which is illegal right now. Of course their excuses are that it might make their profits go down.
Well duh... If I have a choice between non-GM and GM and/or non-trans-fat and trans-fat guess what I'll pay the extra 10 cents for the Non products...
What? I'm pretty sure I've seen products that were labeled as having no trans fat...
Maybe it was done volontarely by the compagnie as a marketing strategy. But they aren't obligated to do so.
His statement wasn't that companies aren't obligated to advertise the lack of trans fat, he said they were not allowed to even if they wanted to.
I'd love a law that required GM foods to be labeled, but then people would have a choice and these factory farms that produce GM foods would go out of business...
I'd settle for some laws that made it legal to label your food how you want. Such as labeling non-GM food or non-trans fat, which is illegal right now. Of course their excuses are that it might make their profits go down.
Well duh... If I have a choice between non-GM and GM and/or non-trans-fat and trans-fat guess what I'll pay the extra 10 cents for the Non products...
Wouldn't that be about double? At least with corn, I believe that the GM crops are genetically modified to grow twice as big (but, the seeds(from those corn plants) aren't able to grow into corn plants, because they doubled the genetic material). It looks like they also modify them to be disease/insect resistant (yeah, even more benefits).
I'd love a law that required GM foods to be labeled, but then people would have a choice and these factory farms that produce GM foods would go out of business...
Why do you want many thousands or millions of people to starve to death? Let's cut food production by a huge margin! Yeah!
I'd love a law that required GM foods to be labeled, but then people would have a choice and these factory farms that produce GM foods would go out of business...
Why do you want many thousands or millions of people to starve to death? Let's cut food production by a huge margin! Yeah!
Because they hate us anyway? We sell corn and wheat for pennies on the dollar to pretty much every European country (including Russia) and the UN. Personally, I think we should let the haters starve and give them a reason to hate us...
Where would the world be without the arrogant Americans?
Under Nazi control...
Godwin for the win!!!
Earth wouldn't have any light without the USA, since the sun revolves around it.
Quoted for truth
I'd settle for some laws that made it legal to label your food how you want. Such as labeling non-GM food or non-trans fat, which is illegal right now. Of course their excuses are that it might make their profits go down.
Well duh... If I have a choice between non-GM and GM and/or non-trans-fat and trans-fat guess what I'll pay the extra 10 cents for the Non products...
Wouldn't that be about double? At least with corn, I believe that the GM crops are genetically modified to grow twice as big (but, the seeds(from those corn plants) aren't able to grow into corn plants, because they doubled the genetic material). It looks like they also modify them to be disease/insect resistant (yeah, even more benefits).
Actually the only thing that GM does is make it strong against a particular weed killer. The company that sells round-up makes seeds that are resistant to round up. There is literally no other gain. There are many disadvantages though:
- They insert genes that produce micro-doses of antibiotics. They do this so they can infect it with a bacteria to show whether the genetic changed took effect. If it worked the bacteria dies, if it doesn't work the bacteria lives and they throw out that batch. Many people are allergic to these antibiotics. The antibiotics also help to strengthen bacteria because they become immune to it because of repeated exposure.
- There has been no long term testing to see if any side effects will happen. Unless you count the U.S. citizens that eat the stuff day in and day out no formal long term testing has been done. In some cases (check out the corn flakes scare that happened a while back) many people who eat it can go into anaphylactic shock because they have no other allergies.
- Genetic diversity is compromised. There are only a handful of different genetic plants out there. If a insect, virus, parasite, or bacteria were to devastate the GM crops it would kill most of the food supply. With non-GM crops they have genetic diversity where only a portion of the plants will die from these effects.
- Added cost to farmers. Because the GM crops DNA is copyrighted they basically just added another profit cutting layer above the farmers. The GM crops are made to not produce seeds so the farmer has to go back and buy new seeds each year. In addition to this they are required to pay a 'licensing' fee to grow the plant because of the IP that the GMO holds over the DNA of the plant. In other words if it weren't for the subsidies that the government gives to the farmers these plants couldn't be grown economically.
Get over it. It was more then 60 years ago. What have you done for the world lately?
Aside from Bush, polluting and making the world economy go down the drain?
You mean "Besides send rapid-response teams to EVERY major natural disaster in the world?"
How about "Spend millions of dollars to deploy an ENTIRE ****ING HOSPITAL to those same sites." The US Navy has two hospital ships in limited service. They're deployable within five days at full service. The ship that stays in San Diego responded to the Indonesian tsunami. The ship that calls Baltimore home was in Haiti within a week. Each one has 1,000 beds and 12 OR's.
Or maybe "Feed the world becasue they can't feed themselves." If the US gov't didn't subsidize the farmers, there wouldn't be enough food for the rest of the world. And we still have a trade deficit because we (essentially) GIVE the food away.
I didn't know the USA was the only country doing these things and that without them we would be striking stones together to start a fire to cook our neighbor. The more you know.
You would have probably eaten the Anglophones. Then Canada would be full of Quebecois... and it would be a smelly place. The U.S. has done a great service to the world by not allowing this to happen.
I didn't know the USA was the only country doing these things and that without them we would be striking stones together to start a fire to cook our neighbor. The more you know.
You would have probably eaten the Anglophones. Then Canada would be full of Quebecois... and it would be a smelly place. The U.S. has done a great service to the world by not allowing this to happen.
But French cooking is just awesome! Go eat your tasteless hamburger in the corner!
No, French cooking is not awesome. That is a myth propagated by the French. You obviously haven't been wearing your tinfoil hat!
I didn't know the USA was the only country doing these things and that without them we would be striking stones together to start a fire to cook our neighbor. The more you know.
You would have probably eaten the Anglophones. Then Canada would be full of Quebecois... and it would be a smelly place. The U.S. has done a great service to the world by not allowing this to happen.
But French cooking is just awesome! Go eat your tasteless hamburger in the corner!
No, French cooking is not awesome. That is a myth propagated by the French. You obviously haven't been wearing your tinfoil hat!
I had to take mine off. All the radiation from Fukishima was beginning to make it spark.
I didn't know the USA was the only country doing these things and that without them we would be striking stones together to start a fire to cook our neighbor. The more you know.
You would have probably eaten the Anglophones. Then Canada would be full of Quebecois... and it would be a smelly place. The U.S. has done a great service to the world by not allowing this to happen.
But French cooking is just awesome! Go eat your tasteless hamburger in the corner!
No, French cooking is not awesome. That is a myth propagated by the French. You obviously haven't been wearing your tinfoil hat!
Pfffft. American peasant.
Dirty imitation French
Dirty imitation French
Ahhh, quit picking on the poor guy, Squirrel. Everybody knows that even the fake French can't fight. :P
You mean "Besides send rapid-response teams to EVERY major natural disaster in the world?"How about "Spend millions of dollars to deploy an ENTIRE ****ING HOSPITAL to those same sites." The US Navy has two hospital ships in limited service. They're deployable within five days at full service. The ship that stays in San Diego responded to the Indonesian tsunami. The ship that calls Baltimore home was in Haiti within a week. Each one has 1,000 beds and 12 OR's.
Or maybe "Feed the world becasue they can't feed themselves." If the US gov't didn't subsidize the farmers, there wouldn't be enough food for the rest of the world. And we still have a trade deficit because we (essentially) GIVE the food away.
Do you have any proof of this? The last time I checked, there were many, many countries who were exporting more food than they imported, and many, many countries who gave emergency aid to various disasters, frequently more than the USA per capita.
Dirty imitation French
Ahhh, quit picking on the poor guy, Squirrel. Everybody knows that even the fake French can't fight. :P
He's not French, he's Quebecois. That's like a Chinese made French.
I might be thinking of some other kinds of labeling. I know its not legal to label your food as non-GM. The closest you can get is "organic". Of course the GMO's are trying to pass laws that will allow them to put the organic label on their products even if its GMO'd...
I'd love a law that required GM foods to be labeled, but then people would have a choice and these factory farms that produce GM foods would go out of business...
I doubt you have ever eaten a piece of non-GM food in your life. The genetic tampering of food is one of the oldest technologies humanity has developed. We domesticated the dog, the chicken, the pig, and the rabbit by selectively breeding, ensuring that only the traits we desired were passed from generation to generation. We then did the same for wheat, flax, barley, rice, and oats. Then beets, potatoes, yams, breadfruit, cabbage, carrots, tomatoes, oranges, lemons, cherries, raspberries, strawberries, and so on and so forth. Cauliflower and broccoli are basically invented vegetables, ancient derivatives of the cabbage. Modern tomatoes look almost nothing like tomatoes from even two hundred years ago, let alone their wild origin species.
Genetic tampering, through cross breeding and cultivation, is one of the reasons we were able to produce enough calories to sustain the civilization needed to invent modern existance.
I might be thinking of some other kinds of labeling. I know its not legal to label your food as non-GM. The closest you can get is "organic". Of course the GMO's are trying to pass laws that will allow them to put the organic label on their products even if its GMO'd...
I'd love a law that required GM foods to be labeled, but then people would have a choice and these factory farms that produce GM foods would go out of business...
I doubt you have ever eaten a piece of non-GM food in your life. The genetic tampering of food is one of the oldest technologies humanity has developed. We domesticated the dog, the chicken, the pig, and the rabbit by selectively breeding, ensuring that only the traits we desired were passed from generation to generation. We then did the same for wheat, flax, barley, rice, and oats. Then beets, potatoes, yams, breadfruit, cabbage, carrots, tomatoes, oranges, lemons, cherries, raspberries, strawberries, and so on and so forth. Cauliflower and broccoli are basically invented vegetables, ancient derivatives of the cabbage. Modern tomatoes look almost nothing like tomatoes from even two hundred years ago, let alone their wild origin species.
Genetic tampering, through cross breeding and cultivation, is one of the reasons we were able to produce enough calories to sustain the civilization needed to invent modern existence.
Heh... sheeple... heh...
Most of the food you eat in the U.S. is genetically modified food or derived from GM food. nearly 100% of the canola based food is GM. Corn is in the 70%+ range. Tomatoes have a portion of GM. Almost all fruits and vegetables have some GM going on somewhere...
This link has statistics for the GM crops in the U.S.
The difference between GM crops and crops 'eugenically' bred is that all the DNA is from the plant. Your merely breeding for the best possible combination of traits that already exist in that plant. GM plants, you actually insert DNA from animals and bacteria and other organisms then you test by adding DNA that is antibiotic and expose the resultant plant with a specific bacteria. If that bacteria dies you know the DNA changes took place, if they don't you know its a bad batch. So you throw it out. Some plants are actually GM to produce insecticides. So you can't just wash the insecticides off as the plant itself has insecticides throughout it. Basically there has been no long term testing done on GM foods. Its a mess... do some research you might be surprised what you find out...
I've been eating them for this long and they haven't killed me; I think I'll keep my GM foods.
I think preservatives work, personally. How else do you explain all the new (and rcurring) diseases and the expanding life expectancy?
I've been eating them for this long and they haven't killed me; I think I'll keep my GM foods.
I think preservatives work, personally. How else do you explain all the new (and rcurring) diseases and the expanding life expectancy?
Yeah, I also wonder if there's some correlation with the number and severity of medical problems rising since GM foods were introduced?
Bone_Naga how healthy are you? You don't have to tell us what's wrong, but how many medical problems do you have 1, 2, or 20+?
I know I've got obesity, high blood pressure, hypoglycemia, hearing problems, hyper-activity (when I was a child), some people think I have autistic tendencies (no professional diagnosis). I could go on and on, but I'll see what everyone else has to say first...
I know I've got obesity, high blood pressure, hypoglycemia, hearing problems, hyper-activity (when I was a child), some people think I have autistic tendencies (no professional diagnosis). I could go on and on, but I'll see what everyone else has to say first...
Technically, Reggie Bush is obese...
Anyway, I've got Osgood-Schlotter's (hereditary condition that causes bone spurs under the patella), overweight (because I'm lazy), probably hypoglycemic, sleep apnea (mostly structural, so they removed my tonsils), joint damage from an untreated childhood case of rheumatic fever, and I was stabbed eleven times.
How many of those can rightfully be blamed on my food?
Most of the food you eat in the U.S. is genetically modified food or derived from GM food. nearly 100% of the canola based food is GM. Corn is in the 70%+ range. Tomatoes have a portion of GM. Almost all fruits and vegetables have some GM going on somewhere...
This link has statistics for the GM crops in the U.S.
The difference between GM crops and crops 'eugenically' bred is that all the DNA is from the plant. Your merely breeding for the best possible combination of traits that already exist in that plant. GM plants, you actually insert DNA from animals and bacteria and other organisms then you test by adding DNA that is antibiotic and expose the resultant plant with a specific bacteria. If that bacteria dies you know the DNA changes took place, if they don't you know its a bad batch. So you throw it out. Some plants are actually GM to produce insecticides. So you can't just wash the insecticides off as the plant itself has insecticides throughout it. Basically there has been no long term testing done on GM foods. Its a mess... do some research you might be surprised what you find out...
Actually, interspecies crossbreading is also an ancient technique. More than half the species of apple that exist are invented by mankind combining two completely different species, so, no, not all the DNA there came from that plant. In fact, that's completely counter to the concept of sexual reproduction since the entire point is that foreign DNA is being mixed in order to create offspring.
Also the increasing rates of various low-margin diseases in first-world countries has very little to do with genetically modified food. Diseases that used to kill people young no longer exist (polio, small pox) or have become completely manageable (diabetes, severe allergies, athsma). Since fewer people are dying of severe allergic reactions in their adolescence we have more people living with severe allergies. The incident rate doesn't go down, the survival rate just goes up. Beyond that the quantity of diet relative to activity level is far more impacting on the general health of the population than the composition of the food. As far as food composition, sugar content (which has nothing to do with genetic modification) is the principle concern since most of us have little use for such high energy content in modern life. Lastly, a far greater threat to the quality of our farmed food than GM is the braod depletion of nutrients in the soil. All the "organic" wheat in the world isn't going to be enough if the soil doesn't have the building blocks in the first place.
In the end it's a case by case basis. Genetic modification is a completely neutral term, some modifications are for the worse, some for the better. Breeding dogs for loyalty gave us the German Shepard, Border Collie, Labrador, and Golden Retriever. Breeding for size gave us the Chinese Rat Dog and the
html_removed
Bouvier des Flandres. Over-selecting within a tiny pool has given us stupid Dalmations, Dobermans with genetic brain malfunctions, and Pugs that are almost guarenteed to die of a nasal infection.
Most of the food you eat in the U.S. is genetically modified food or derived from GM food. nearly 100% of the canola based food is GM. Corn is in the 70%+ range. Tomatoes have a portion of GM. Almost all fruits and vegetables have some GM going on somewhere...
This link has statistics for the GM crops in the U.S.
The difference between GM crops and crops 'eugenically' bred is that all the DNA is from the plant. Your merely breeding for the best possible combination of traits that already exist in that plant. GM plants, you actually insert DNA from animals and bacteria and other organisms then you test by adding DNA that is antibiotic and expose the resultant plant with a specific bacteria. If that bacteria dies you know the DNA changes took place, if they don't you know its a bad batch. So you throw it out. Some plants are actually GM to produce insecticides. So you can't just wash the insecticides off as the plant itself has insecticides throughout it. Basically there has been no long term testing done on GM foods. Its a mess... do some research you might be surprised what you find out...
Actually, interspecies crossbreading is also an ancient technique. More than half the species of apple that exist are invented by mankind combining two completely different species, so, no, not all the DNA there came from that plant. In fact, that's completely counter to the concept of sexual reproduction since the entire point is that foreign DNA is being mixed in order to create offspring.
Two species can't cross-breed. (except in the rare cases where you get a mule from a horse and donkey, but they can't breed. They did breed apples with different traits with other apples that had different traits. This would produce an apple with traits from both, but it was not cross species. Part of the definition of a species is they can interbreed.
Also the increasing rates of various low-margin diseases in first-world countries has very little to do with genetically modified food. Diseases that used to kill people young no longer exist (polio, small pox) or have become completely manageable (diabetes, severe allergies, athsma).
Polio and small pox have as you say been eradicated. So that means there's no way to compare those two. The flu however has continually gotten worse and worse over time. This is because with a weaker immune system you are more susceptible to viral and bacterial infections.
Diabetes didn't use to kill young people. It affected older people more often than younger people with people in the age group of 45-65 having the highest range. The total percentage of diabetes has gone up since the advent of high fructose corn syrup (a GM product) and other GM foods have been introduced. Its gone up by 1% each decade.
Since fewer people are dying of severe allergic reactions in their adolescence we have more people living with severe allergies. The incident rate doesn't go down, the survival rate just goes up. Beyond that the quantity of diet relative to activity level is far more impacting on the general health of the population than the composition of the food. As far as food composition, sugar content (which has nothing to do with genetic modification) is the principle concern since most of us have little use for such high energy content in modern life. Lastly, a far greater threat to the quality of our farmed food than GM is the braod depletion of nutrients in the soil. All the "organic" wheat in the world isn't going to be enough if the soil doesn't have the building blocks in the first place.
The problem with allergies is that more and more people develop allergies as they age. So its not just an increase in the number that survive from childhood. People with allergies to antibiotics don't know they are allergic until they are exposed (or they get an allergy test, which is rare). Since GM foods contain trace amounts of antibiotics many people that show no previous signs start going into anaphylactic shock for what seems to be no reason. I agree about the exercise being extremely important, however if you don't put the right foods into your body your bodies efficiency and ability to heal goes down. Though you are incorrect about sugar. The most prevalent form of sugar (high fructose corn syrup) comes from a highly GM product: corn. The loss of nutrients in the soil is directly related. It comes from over farming. If you factory farm GM products every year on the same land they are going to suck up the nutrients. The solution is to either allow a field to sit and replenish itself (tilling it with various bio-matter) for a year or two or to use a sustainable non-GM crop that will only take out as much nutrients as the local ecosystem can reconstitute each year. GM plants suck up much more nutrients than a non-GM plant.
In the end it's a case by case basis. Genetic modification is a completely neutral term, some modifications are for the worse, some for the better. Breeding dogs for loyalty gave us the German Shepard, Border Collie, Labrador, and Golden Retriever. Breeding for size gave us the Chinese Rat Dog and the html_removed
Bouvier des Flandres. Over-selecting within a tiny pool has given us stupid Dalmations, Dobermans with genetic brain malfunctions, and Pugs that are almost guarenteed to die of a nasal infection.
The problem is your not understanding what Genetic Modification (GM) is. You are trying to lump it in with Animal Husbandry. The two are not the same thing and are not even comparable. With animal husbandry you are breeding two completely 'natural' animals of the same species and encouraging certain traits. These traits already exist in these animals you are not adding any DNA to the equation, its already there. After breeding for so long you can no longer improve the trait you are trying to improve because it is outside the range of the different traits you are breeding in.
With Genetic Modification we are in the stone age of the technology. We are taking bacteria and allowing viruses to insert their DNA into them. Then we are putting this bacteria in with plant cells. The bacteria then exchanges part of its DNA with the plant cell. In other words its pretty chaotic and random which means there is no telling what kinds of things are really going on. We don't even know exactly how all the DNA in these plants, viruses, and bacteria work. Many of them haven't been sequenced and others that have been sequenced we don't know what most of it does. They use the antibiotic DNA to check to see if the plant cell has gotten the part of the DNA that they wanted. If we knew what every gene did exactly and we sequenced every bit of DNA in the equation and we sequenced the plants DNA afterward to make sure the intended changes were working exactly as we wanted and we had long term trials with the plants, then I'd have no problem with it. As it is though we are pretty much just gambling on health to make money. Not something I want to do...
Two species can't cross-breed. (except in the rare cases where you get a mule from a horse and donkey, but they can't breed. They did breed apples with different traits with other apples that had different traits. This would produce an apple with traits from both, but it was not cross species. Part of the definition of a species is they can interbreed.
You've obviously never seen "Napoleon Dynamite". Otherwise, you would have heard of the Liger. Which, incidentally, can breed.
Otherwise, you would have heard of the Liger. Which, incidentally, can breed.
Thus, further supporting my hypothesis that cats are superior beings and will one day rule this planet.
Bunch of bullshit that shows I don't know how science actually works.
You don't know how genes actually work, and you're self contradictory. They're not inventing new trait, they're combining traits. The fact that the base pair is normally incapable of sexual reproducton is... actually kinda irrelevant. Bacteria and viruses insert themselves into the DNA of their host all the time. Hell, that's the foundational principle behind vaccination (incidentally, I won't be surprised to find out that you think vaccination causes autism, or some retarded s**t like that.)
html_removed
Most fruit that we give the same name isn't actually the same species, and much of it has been bred and crossbred so many times that it's now sterile and can only reproduce through artificial combination: grafting. Now, grafting does require some compatibility, they do need to be in the same genus, but that's about it. Sorry, I wasn't specific enough: they will graft almost flawlessly onto the trunk of any tree in the same genus, though repeated trial and error can produce one-of-a-kind fruit bearing trees from inter-genus (meaning within the same family) grafting.
As far as sterile children goes: that's based on the number of chromisomes in each parent, not magic voodoo "don't tamper in God's domain" rules of the universe. The classic example is the mule: the horse has 64 chromisomes, the donky has 62, and the resulting mule/hinny has 63. The resulting odd-man-out chromisome disrupts meiosis preventing the formation of viable sperm or eggs. Polar bears, Grizzly Bears, and Black Bears all have the same number of chromisomes and produce true-breeding offspring. Same with the above-mentioned Liger/Tigon.
And I'm not even going to bother getting into the chemistry of sugar and how little the source (corn vs cane) matters. (It doesn't, the extract contains little to no genetic material).
I hate to be the one that breaks it to you, but reading conspiracy theory and free-enegry zines isn't the best way to stay abrest of actual scientific theory.
Bunch of facts supported by links that show I know how science actually works.
You don't know how genes actually work, and you're self contradictory. They're not inventing new trait, they're combining traits.
Traits don't combine. Several traits control a single expression like take height for example. Its estimated that 7 genes control height. They don't combine, but each factors into how tall you are. Read the link they explain it in normal english.
The fact that the base pair is normally incapable of sexual reproducton is... actually kinda irrelevant. Bacteria and viruses insert themselves into the DNA of their host all the time. Hell, that's the foundational principle behind vaccination (incidentally, I won't be surprised to find out that you think vaccination causes autism, or some retarded s**t like that.)
Actually it is relevent as it tells us this is a different species. What does this even have to do with our conversation? We are talking about GM foods. I simply explained a simple version of what they do to make the Genetic Modifications. There are other methods but they are about as safe.
Most fruit that we give the same name isn't actually the same species, and much of it has been bred and crossbred so many times that it's now sterile and can only reproduce through artificial combination: grafting. Now, grafting does require some compatibility, they do need to be in the same genus, but that's about it. Sorry, I wasn't specific enough: they will graft almost flawlessly onto the trunk of any tree in the same genus, though repeated trial and error can produce one-of-a-kind fruit bearing trees from inter-genus (meaning within the same family) grafting.
Grafting is used to make crosses between two different fruits, but that once again is not Genetic Modification. The definition of a species is the ability to interbreed. Basically if two apple trees can interbreed they are of the same species. Its just that simple. they may have different traits, but they ARE the same species. With GM foods the sterility is intentional. They do this so the farmers have to come back every year to buy seeds and it keeps the farmers from producing seeds and selling them. Thus protecting their "IP(intellectual property)"...
As far as sterile children goes: that's based on the number of chromisomes in each parent, not magic voodoo "don't tamper in God's domain" rules of the universe. The classic example is the mule: the horse has 64 chromisomes, the donky has 62, and the resulting mule/hinny has 63. The resulting odd-man-out chromisome disrupts meiosis preventing the formation of viable sperm or eggs. Polar bears, Grizzly Bears, and Black Bears all have the same number of chromisomes and produce true-breeding offspring. Same with the above-mentioned Liger/Tigon.
When did I say anything about sterile children, voodoo, or "don't tamper in God's domain". I'm talking about pure science here. The KNOWN facts. Because of the definition of species it could be argued that they are of the same species. That's neither here nor there. It still falls under the category of animal husbandry or selective breeding. Which is not genetic modification. It might be construed as genetic manipulation, but the DNA already exists in the parent plants/animals. Nothing that wasn't already there gets added. In Genetic Modification you take DNA from a whole different species (sometimes crossing plant and animal barriers) and put it in a plant that produces food. They do this without knowing the full impact. Heck they don't even really know the partial impact.
And I'm not even going to bother getting into the chemistry of sugar and how little the source (corn vs cane) matters. (It doesn't, the extract contains little to no genetic material).
Yeah, I completely agree with you there. The DNA is not there, but a chemical analysis WILL turn up the difference in the chemical structure between sugar from cane and high fructose corn syrup. As well as research showing its side effects of obesity and diabetes, which are much higher than sugar. Fact finding will also show the mercury levels being much higher in high fructose corn syrup. As well as the trace amounts of antibiotics from the corn.
I hate to be the one that breaks it to you, but reading conspiracy theory and free-enegry zines isn't the best way to stay abrest of actual scientific theory.
I hate to be the one to break it to you, but trying to tie real valid concerns with Genetically Modified foods to conspiracy theories is not the way to convince people you are right. The best way is to link facts in your post and get expert testimony and scientific research to back up your claims.
I like how you throw around the phrase 'conspiracy theory'. It just shows how little you know. A conspiracy theory is a theory that people with power conspire to make something happen with little or no evidence.
I don't talk about a subject unless there is evidence that points to something being real. If you review my posts you'll find that I link to facts, documents, and witness testimony to these events. Just because it isn't on mainstream media does not automatically make it a conspiracy theory. Its simple review my evidence and counter with evidence. Instead of outrageous claims that you cannot back up...
Apparently in food deserts you do not have much choices when it comes to food. I would also hazard a guess that if you live in such a food desert, you do not have much mobility (car, public transportation) to get healthy food elsewhere.
I misread that at first to say "food desserts" and I was trying to figure out what the hell you were talking about.
Anyway, I believe the ban said it would ban trans fats in restaurants. Last I checked, people generally aren't forced to go to restaurants. Even when I travel for work and it is most convenient to eat out, I don't have to. When I wasn't making as much money I went to the nearest gas station and picked up some sandwich stuff so I could save all the extra money that I was given to cover food expenses. I don't anymore, but that's my choice.
But if you do live in a food desert where your only source of food is a restaurant of some kind and you lack any means of transportation, you'll probably be doing lots of walking, which will help offset the satanic food curse being put upon you at every meal.
You are forgetting the most evil part of it all: delivery!
/omnious organ music in the background
You are forgetting the most evil part of it all: delivery!
*thunderclap*
Well duh... If I have a choice between non-GM and GM and/or non-trans-fat and trans-fat guess what I'll pay the extra 10 cents for the Non products...
I'd settle for some laws that made it legal to label your food how you want. Such as labeling non-GM food or non-trans fat, which is illegal right now. Of course their excuses are that it might make their profits go down.
Well duh... If I have a choice between non-GM and GM and/or non-trans-fat and trans-fat guess what I'll pay the extra 10 cents for the Non products...
What? I'm pretty sure I've seen products that were labeled as having no trans fat...
I'd settle for some laws that made it legal to label your food how you want. Such as labeling non-GM food or non-trans fat, which is illegal right now. Of course their excuses are that it might make their profits go down.
Well duh... If I have a choice between non-GM and GM and/or non-trans-fat and trans-fat guess what I'll pay the extra 10 cents for the Non products...
What? I'm pretty sure I've seen products that were labeled as having no trans fat...
Maybe it was done volontarely by the compagnie as a marketing strategy. But they aren't obligated to do so.
Why would we pass laws to obligate them to do that? It's to their advantage to tell us, since so many people want to eat healthy.
I'd settle for some laws that made it legal to label your food how you want. Such as labeling non-GM food or non-trans fat, which is illegal right now. Of course their excuses are that it might make their profits go down.
Well duh... If I have a choice between non-GM and GM and/or non-trans-fat and trans-fat guess what I'll pay the extra 10 cents for the Non products...
What? I'm pretty sure I've seen products that were labeled as having no trans fat...
Maybe it was done volontarely by the compagnie as a marketing strategy. But they aren't obligated to do so.
His statement wasn't that companies aren't obligated to advertise the lack of trans fat, he said they were not allowed to even if they wanted to.
I'd love a law that required GM foods to be labeled, but then people would have a choice and these factory farms that produce GM foods would go out of business...
I'd settle for some laws that made it legal to label your food how you want. Such as labeling non-GM food or non-trans fat, which is illegal right now. Of course their excuses are that it might make their profits go down.
Well duh... If I have a choice between non-GM and GM and/or non-trans-fat and trans-fat guess what I'll pay the extra 10 cents for the Non products...
Wouldn't that be about double? At least with corn, I believe that the GM crops are genetically modified to grow twice as big (but, the seeds(from those corn plants) aren't able to grow into corn plants, because they doubled the genetic material). It looks like they also modify them to be disease/insect resistant (yeah, even more benefits).
I'd love a law that required GM foods to be labeled, but then people would have a choice and these factory farms that produce GM foods would go out of business...
Why do you want many thousands or millions of people to starve to death? Let's cut food production by a huge margin! Yeah!
I'd love a law that required GM foods to be labeled, but then people would have a choice and these factory farms that produce GM foods would go out of business...
Why do you want many thousands or millions of people to starve to death? Let's cut food production by a huge margin! Yeah!
Because they hate us anyway? We sell corn and wheat for pennies on the dollar to pretty much every European country (including Russia) and the UN. Personally, I think we should let the haters starve and give them a reason to hate us...
Where would the world be without the arrogant Americans?
Under Nazi control...
Godwin for the win!!!
Earth wouldn't have any light without the USA, since the sun revolves around it.
Quoted for truth
I'd settle for some laws that made it legal to label your food how you want. Such as labeling non-GM food or non-trans fat, which is illegal right now. Of course their excuses are that it might make their profits go down.
Well duh... If I have a choice between non-GM and GM and/or non-trans-fat and trans-fat guess what I'll pay the extra 10 cents for the Non products...
Wouldn't that be about double? At least with corn, I believe that the GM crops are genetically modified to grow twice as big (but, the seeds(from those corn plants) aren't able to grow into corn plants, because they doubled the genetic material). It looks like they also modify them to be disease/insect resistant (yeah, even more benefits).
Actually the only thing that GM does is make it strong against a particular weed killer. The company that sells round-up makes seeds that are resistant to round up. There is literally no other gain. There are many disadvantages though:
- They insert genes that produce micro-doses of antibiotics. They do this so they can infect it with a bacteria to show whether the genetic changed took effect. If it worked the bacteria dies, if it doesn't work the bacteria lives and they throw out that batch. Many people are allergic to these antibiotics. The antibiotics also help to strengthen bacteria because they become immune to it because of repeated exposure.
- There has been no long term testing to see if any side effects will happen. Unless you count the U.S. citizens that eat the stuff day in and day out no formal long term testing has been done. In some cases (check out the corn flakes scare that happened a while back) many people who eat it can go into anaphylactic shock because they have no other allergies.
- Genetic diversity is compromised. There are only a handful of different genetic plants out there. If a insect, virus, parasite, or bacteria were to devastate the GM crops it would kill most of the food supply. With non-GM crops they have genetic diversity where only a portion of the plants will die from these effects.
- Added cost to farmers. Because the GM crops DNA is copyrighted they basically just added another profit cutting layer above the farmers. The GM crops are made to not produce seeds so the farmer has to go back and buy new seeds each year. In addition to this they are required to pay a 'licensing' fee to grow the plant because of the IP that the GMO holds over the DNA of the plant. In other words if it weren't for the subsidies that the government gives to the farmers these plants couldn't be grown economically.
Get over it. It was more then 60 years ago. What have you done for the world lately?
Aside from Bush, polluting and making the world economy go down the drain?
You mean "Besides send rapid-response teams to EVERY major natural disaster in the world?"
How about "Spend millions of dollars to deploy an ENTIRE ****ING HOSPITAL to those same sites." The US Navy has two hospital ships in limited service. They're deployable within five days at full service. The ship that stays in San Diego responded to the Indonesian tsunami. The ship that calls Baltimore home was in Haiti within a week. Each one has 1,000 beds and 12 OR's.
Or maybe "Feed the world becasue they can't feed themselves." If the US gov't didn't subsidize the farmers, there wouldn't be enough food for the rest of the world. And we still have a trade deficit because we (essentially) GIVE the food away.
I didn't know the USA was the only country doing these things and that without them we would be striking stones together to start a fire to cook our neighbor. The more you know.
You would have probably eaten the Anglophones. Then Canada would be full of Quebecois... and it would be a smelly place. The U.S. has done a great service to the world by not allowing this to happen.
I didn't know the USA was the only country doing these things and that without them we would be striking stones together to start a fire to cook our neighbor. The more you know.
You would have probably eaten the Anglophones. Then Canada would be full of Quebecois... and it would be a smelly place. The U.S. has done a great service to the world by not allowing this to happen.
But French cooking is just awesome! Go eat your tasteless hamburger in the corner!
No, French cooking is not awesome. That is a myth propagated by the French. You obviously haven't been wearing your tinfoil hat!
I didn't know the USA was the only country doing these things and that without them we would be striking stones together to start a fire to cook our neighbor. The more you know.
You would have probably eaten the Anglophones. Then Canada would be full of Quebecois... and it would be a smelly place. The U.S. has done a great service to the world by not allowing this to happen.
But French cooking is just awesome! Go eat your tasteless hamburger in the corner!
No, French cooking is not awesome. That is a myth propagated by the French. You obviously haven't been wearing your tinfoil hat!
I had to take mine off. All the radiation from Fukishima was beginning to make it spark.
I didn't know the USA was the only country doing these things and that without them we would be striking stones together to start a fire to cook our neighbor. The more you know.
You would have probably eaten the Anglophones. Then Canada would be full of Quebecois... and it would be a smelly place. The U.S. has done a great service to the world by not allowing this to happen.
But French cooking is just awesome! Go eat your tasteless hamburger in the corner!
No, French cooking is not awesome. That is a myth propagated by the French. You obviously haven't been wearing your tinfoil hat!
Pfffft. American peasant.
Dirty imitation French
Dirty imitation French
Ahhh, quit picking on the poor guy, Squirrel. Everybody knows that even the fake French can't fight. :P
You mean "Besides send rapid-response teams to EVERY major natural disaster in the world?"How about "Spend millions of dollars to deploy an ENTIRE ****ING HOSPITAL to those same sites." The US Navy has two hospital ships in limited service. They're deployable within five days at full service. The ship that stays in San Diego responded to the Indonesian tsunami. The ship that calls Baltimore home was in Haiti within a week. Each one has 1,000 beds and 12 OR's.
Or maybe "Feed the world becasue they can't feed themselves." If the US gov't didn't subsidize the farmers, there wouldn't be enough food for the rest of the world. And we still have a trade deficit because we (essentially) GIVE the food away.
Do you have any proof of this? The last time I checked, there were many, many countries who were exporting more food than they imported, and many, many countries who gave emergency aid to various disasters, frequently more than the USA per capita.
Dirty imitation French
Ahhh, quit picking on the poor guy, Squirrel. Everybody knows that even the fake French can't fight. :P
He's not French, he's Quebecois. That's like a Chinese made French.
I might be thinking of some other kinds of labeling. I know its not legal to label your food as non-GM. The closest you can get is "organic". Of course the GMO's are trying to pass laws that will allow them to put the organic label on their products even if its GMO'd...
I'd love a law that required GM foods to be labeled, but then people would have a choice and these factory farms that produce GM foods would go out of business...
I doubt you have ever eaten a piece of non-GM food in your life. The genetic tampering of food is one of the oldest technologies humanity has developed. We domesticated the dog, the chicken, the pig, and the rabbit by selectively breeding, ensuring that only the traits we desired were passed from generation to generation. We then did the same for wheat, flax, barley, rice, and oats. Then beets, potatoes, yams, breadfruit, cabbage, carrots, tomatoes, oranges, lemons, cherries, raspberries, strawberries, and so on and so forth. Cauliflower and broccoli are basically invented vegetables, ancient derivatives of the cabbage. Modern tomatoes look almost nothing like tomatoes from even two hundred years ago, let alone their wild origin species.
Genetic tampering, through cross breeding and cultivation, is one of the reasons we were able to produce enough calories to sustain the civilization needed to invent modern existance.
I might be thinking of some other kinds of labeling. I know its not legal to label your food as non-GM. The closest you can get is "organic". Of course the GMO's are trying to pass laws that will allow them to put the organic label on their products even if its GMO'd...
I'd love a law that required GM foods to be labeled, but then people would have a choice and these factory farms that produce GM foods would go out of business...
I doubt you have ever eaten a piece of non-GM food in your life. The genetic tampering of food is one of the oldest technologies humanity has developed. We domesticated the dog, the chicken, the pig, and the rabbit by selectively breeding, ensuring that only the traits we desired were passed from generation to generation. We then did the same for wheat, flax, barley, rice, and oats. Then beets, potatoes, yams, breadfruit, cabbage, carrots, tomatoes, oranges, lemons, cherries, raspberries, strawberries, and so on and so forth. Cauliflower and broccoli are basically invented vegetables, ancient derivatives of the cabbage. Modern tomatoes look almost nothing like tomatoes from even two hundred years ago, let alone their wild origin species.
Genetic tampering, through cross breeding and cultivation, is one of the reasons we were able to produce enough calories to sustain the civilization needed to invent modern existence.
Heh... sheeple... heh...
Most of the food you eat in the U.S. is genetically modified food or derived from GM food. nearly 100% of the canola based food is GM. Corn is in the 70%+ range. Tomatoes have a portion of GM. Almost all fruits and vegetables have some GM going on somewhere...
This link has statistics for the GM crops in the U.S.
The difference between GM crops and crops 'eugenically' bred is that all the DNA is from the plant. Your merely breeding for the best possible combination of traits that already exist in that plant. GM plants, you actually insert DNA from animals and bacteria and other organisms then you test by adding DNA that is antibiotic and expose the resultant plant with a specific bacteria. If that bacteria dies you know the DNA changes took place, if they don't you know its a bad batch. So you throw it out. Some plants are actually GM to produce insecticides. So you can't just wash the insecticides off as the plant itself has insecticides throughout it. Basically there has been no long term testing done on GM foods. Its a mess... do some research you might be surprised what you find out...
I've been eating them for this long and they haven't killed me; I think I'll keep my GM foods.
I think preservatives work, personally. How else do you explain all the new (and rcurring) diseases and the expanding life expectancy?
I've been eating them for this long and they haven't killed me; I think I'll keep my GM foods.
I think preservatives work, personally. How else do you explain all the new (and rcurring) diseases and the expanding life expectancy?
Yeah, I also wonder if there's some correlation with the number and severity of medical problems rising since GM foods were introduced?
Bone_Naga how healthy are you? You don't have to tell us what's wrong, but how many medical problems do you have 1, 2, or 20+?
I know I've got obesity, high blood pressure, hypoglycemia, hearing problems, hyper-activity (when I was a child), some people think I have autistic tendencies (no professional diagnosis). I could go on and on, but I'll see what everyone else has to say first...
I know I've got obesity, high blood pressure, hypoglycemia, hearing problems, hyper-activity (when I was a child), some people think I have autistic tendencies (no professional diagnosis). I could go on and on, but I'll see what everyone else has to say first...
Technically, Reggie Bush is obese...
Anyway, I've got Osgood-Schlotter's (hereditary condition that causes bone spurs under the patella), overweight (because I'm lazy), probably hypoglycemic, sleep apnea (mostly structural, so they removed my tonsils), joint damage from an untreated childhood case of rheumatic fever, and I was stabbed eleven times.
How many of those can rightfully be blamed on my food?
Most of the food you eat in the U.S. is genetically modified food or derived from GM food. nearly 100% of the canola based food is GM. Corn is in the 70%+ range. Tomatoes have a portion of GM. Almost all fruits and vegetables have some GM going on somewhere...
This link has statistics for the GM crops in the U.S.
The difference between GM crops and crops 'eugenically' bred is that all the DNA is from the plant. Your merely breeding for the best possible combination of traits that already exist in that plant. GM plants, you actually insert DNA from animals and bacteria and other organisms then you test by adding DNA that is antibiotic and expose the resultant plant with a specific bacteria. If that bacteria dies you know the DNA changes took place, if they don't you know its a bad batch. So you throw it out. Some plants are actually GM to produce insecticides. So you can't just wash the insecticides off as the plant itself has insecticides throughout it. Basically there has been no long term testing done on GM foods. Its a mess... do some research you might be surprised what you find out...
Actually, interspecies crossbreading is also an ancient technique. More than half the species of apple that exist are invented by mankind combining two completely different species, so, no, not all the DNA there came from that plant. In fact, that's completely counter to the concept of sexual reproduction since the entire point is that foreign DNA is being mixed in order to create offspring.
Also the increasing rates of various low-margin diseases in first-world countries has very little to do with genetically modified food. Diseases that used to kill people young no longer exist (polio, small pox) or have become completely manageable (diabetes, severe allergies, athsma). Since fewer people are dying of severe allergic reactions in their adolescence we have more people living with severe allergies. The incident rate doesn't go down, the survival rate just goes up. Beyond that the quantity of diet relative to activity level is far more impacting on the general health of the population than the composition of the food. As far as food composition, sugar content (which has nothing to do with genetic modification) is the principle concern since most of us have little use for such high energy content in modern life. Lastly, a far greater threat to the quality of our farmed food than GM is the braod depletion of nutrients in the soil. All the "organic" wheat in the world isn't going to be enough if the soil doesn't have the building blocks in the first place.
In the end it's a case by case basis. Genetic modification is a completely neutral term, some modifications are for the worse, some for the better. Breeding dogs for loyalty gave us the German Shepard, Border Collie, Labrador, and Golden Retriever. Breeding for size gave us the Chinese Rat Dog and the
html_removed
Bouvier des Flandres. Over-selecting within a tiny pool has given us stupid Dalmations, Dobermans with genetic brain malfunctions, and Pugs that are almost guarenteed to die of a nasal infection.
Most of the food you eat in the U.S. is genetically modified food or derived from GM food. nearly 100% of the canola based food is GM. Corn is in the 70%+ range. Tomatoes have a portion of GM. Almost all fruits and vegetables have some GM going on somewhere...
This link has statistics for the GM crops in the U.S.
The difference between GM crops and crops 'eugenically' bred is that all the DNA is from the plant. Your merely breeding for the best possible combination of traits that already exist in that plant. GM plants, you actually insert DNA from animals and bacteria and other organisms then you test by adding DNA that is antibiotic and expose the resultant plant with a specific bacteria. If that bacteria dies you know the DNA changes took place, if they don't you know its a bad batch. So you throw it out. Some plants are actually GM to produce insecticides. So you can't just wash the insecticides off as the plant itself has insecticides throughout it. Basically there has been no long term testing done on GM foods. Its a mess... do some research you might be surprised what you find out...
Actually, interspecies crossbreading is also an ancient technique. More than half the species of apple that exist are invented by mankind combining two completely different species, so, no, not all the DNA there came from that plant. In fact, that's completely counter to the concept of sexual reproduction since the entire point is that foreign DNA is being mixed in order to create offspring.
Two species can't cross-breed. (except in the rare cases where you get a mule from a horse and donkey, but they can't breed. They did breed apples with different traits with other apples that had different traits. This would produce an apple with traits from both, but it was not cross species. Part of the definition of a species is they can interbreed.
Also the increasing rates of various low-margin diseases in first-world countries has very little to do with genetically modified food. Diseases that used to kill people young no longer exist (polio, small pox) or have become completely manageable (diabetes, severe allergies, athsma).
Polio and small pox have as you say been eradicated. So that means there's no way to compare those two. The flu however has continually gotten worse and worse over time. This is because with a weaker immune system you are more susceptible to viral and bacterial infections.
Diabetes didn't use to kill young people. It affected older people more often than younger people with people in the age group of 45-65 having the highest range. The total percentage of diabetes has gone up since the advent of high fructose corn syrup (a GM product) and other GM foods have been introduced. Its gone up by 1% each decade.
Since fewer people are dying of severe allergic reactions in their adolescence we have more people living with severe allergies. The incident rate doesn't go down, the survival rate just goes up. Beyond that the quantity of diet relative to activity level is far more impacting on the general health of the population than the composition of the food. As far as food composition, sugar content (which has nothing to do with genetic modification) is the principle concern since most of us have little use for such high energy content in modern life. Lastly, a far greater threat to the quality of our farmed food than GM is the braod depletion of nutrients in the soil. All the "organic" wheat in the world isn't going to be enough if the soil doesn't have the building blocks in the first place.
The problem with allergies is that more and more people develop allergies as they age. So its not just an increase in the number that survive from childhood. People with allergies to antibiotics don't know they are allergic until they are exposed (or they get an allergy test, which is rare). Since GM foods contain trace amounts of antibiotics many people that show no previous signs start going into anaphylactic shock for what seems to be no reason. I agree about the exercise being extremely important, however if you don't put the right foods into your body your bodies efficiency and ability to heal goes down. Though you are incorrect about sugar. The most prevalent form of sugar (high fructose corn syrup) comes from a highly GM product: corn. The loss of nutrients in the soil is directly related. It comes from over farming. If you factory farm GM products every year on the same land they are going to suck up the nutrients. The solution is to either allow a field to sit and replenish itself (tilling it with various bio-matter) for a year or two or to use a sustainable non-GM crop that will only take out as much nutrients as the local ecosystem can reconstitute each year. GM plants suck up much more nutrients than a non-GM plant.
In the end it's a case by case basis. Genetic modification is a completely neutral term, some modifications are for the worse, some for the better. Breeding dogs for loyalty gave us the German Shepard, Border Collie, Labrador, and Golden Retriever. Breeding for size gave us the Chinese Rat Dog and the html_removed
Bouvier des Flandres. Over-selecting within a tiny pool has given us stupid Dalmations, Dobermans with genetic brain malfunctions, and Pugs that are almost guarenteed to die of a nasal infection.
The problem is your not understanding what Genetic Modification (GM) is. You are trying to lump it in with Animal Husbandry. The two are not the same thing and are not even comparable. With animal husbandry you are breeding two completely 'natural' animals of the same species and encouraging certain traits. These traits already exist in these animals you are not adding any DNA to the equation, its already there. After breeding for so long you can no longer improve the trait you are trying to improve because it is outside the range of the different traits you are breeding in.
With Genetic Modification we are in the stone age of the technology. We are taking bacteria and allowing viruses to insert their DNA into them. Then we are putting this bacteria in with plant cells. The bacteria then exchanges part of its DNA with the plant cell. In other words its pretty chaotic and random which means there is no telling what kinds of things are really going on. We don't even know exactly how all the DNA in these plants, viruses, and bacteria work. Many of them haven't been sequenced and others that have been sequenced we don't know what most of it does. They use the antibiotic DNA to check to see if the plant cell has gotten the part of the DNA that they wanted. If we knew what every gene did exactly and we sequenced every bit of DNA in the equation and we sequenced the plants DNA afterward to make sure the intended changes were working exactly as we wanted and we had long term trials with the plants, then I'd have no problem with it. As it is though we are pretty much just gambling on health to make money. Not something I want to do...
Two species can't cross-breed. (except in the rare cases where you get a mule from a horse and donkey, but they can't breed. They did breed apples with different traits with other apples that had different traits. This would produce an apple with traits from both, but it was not cross species. Part of the definition of a species is they can interbreed.
You've obviously never seen "Napoleon Dynamite". Otherwise, you would have heard of the Liger. Which, incidentally, can breed.
Otherwise, you would have heard of the Liger. Which, incidentally, can breed.
Thus, further supporting my hypothesis that cats are superior beings and will one day rule this planet.
Bunch of bullshit that shows I don't know how science actually works.
You don't know how genes actually work, and you're self contradictory. They're not inventing new trait, they're combining traits. The fact that the base pair is normally incapable of sexual reproducton is... actually kinda irrelevant. Bacteria and viruses insert themselves into the DNA of their host all the time. Hell, that's the foundational principle behind vaccination (incidentally, I won't be surprised to find out that you think vaccination causes autism, or some retarded s**t like that.)
html_removed
Most fruit that we give the same name isn't actually the same species, and much of it has been bred and crossbred so many times that it's now sterile and can only reproduce through artificial combination: grafting. Now, grafting does require some compatibility, they do need to be in the same genus, but that's about it. Sorry, I wasn't specific enough: they will graft almost flawlessly onto the trunk of any tree in the same genus, though repeated trial and error can produce one-of-a-kind fruit bearing trees from inter-genus (meaning within the same family) grafting.
As far as sterile children goes: that's based on the number of chromisomes in each parent, not magic voodoo "don't tamper in God's domain" rules of the universe. The classic example is the mule: the horse has 64 chromisomes, the donky has 62, and the resulting mule/hinny has 63. The resulting odd-man-out chromisome disrupts meiosis preventing the formation of viable sperm or eggs. Polar bears, Grizzly Bears, and Black Bears all have the same number of chromisomes and produce true-breeding offspring. Same with the above-mentioned Liger/Tigon.
And I'm not even going to bother getting into the chemistry of sugar and how little the source (corn vs cane) matters. (It doesn't, the extract contains little to no genetic material).
I hate to be the one that breaks it to you, but reading conspiracy theory and free-enegry zines isn't the best way to stay abrest of actual scientific theory.
Bunch of facts supported by links that show I know how science actually works.
You don't know how genes actually work, and you're self contradictory. They're not inventing new trait, they're combining traits.
Traits don't combine. Several traits control a single expression like take height for example. Its estimated that 7 genes control height. They don't combine, but each factors into how tall you are. Read the link they explain it in normal english.
The fact that the base pair is normally incapable of sexual reproducton is... actually kinda irrelevant. Bacteria and viruses insert themselves into the DNA of their host all the time. Hell, that's the foundational principle behind vaccination (incidentally, I won't be surprised to find out that you think vaccination causes autism, or some retarded s**t like that.)
Actually it is relevent as it tells us this is a different species. What does this even have to do with our conversation? We are talking about GM foods. I simply explained a simple version of what they do to make the Genetic Modifications. There are other methods but they are about as safe.
Most fruit that we give the same name isn't actually the same species, and much of it has been bred and crossbred so many times that it's now sterile and can only reproduce through artificial combination: grafting. Now, grafting does require some compatibility, they do need to be in the same genus, but that's about it. Sorry, I wasn't specific enough: they will graft almost flawlessly onto the trunk of any tree in the same genus, though repeated trial and error can produce one-of-a-kind fruit bearing trees from inter-genus (meaning within the same family) grafting.
Grafting is used to make crosses between two different fruits, but that once again is not Genetic Modification. The definition of a species is the ability to interbreed. Basically if two apple trees can interbreed they are of the same species. Its just that simple. they may have different traits, but they ARE the same species. With GM foods the sterility is intentional. They do this so the farmers have to come back every year to buy seeds and it keeps the farmers from producing seeds and selling them. Thus protecting their "IP(intellectual property)"...
As far as sterile children goes: that's based on the number of chromisomes in each parent, not magic voodoo "don't tamper in God's domain" rules of the universe. The classic example is the mule: the horse has 64 chromisomes, the donky has 62, and the resulting mule/hinny has 63. The resulting odd-man-out chromisome disrupts meiosis preventing the formation of viable sperm or eggs. Polar bears, Grizzly Bears, and Black Bears all have the same number of chromisomes and produce true-breeding offspring. Same with the above-mentioned Liger/Tigon.
When did I say anything about sterile children, voodoo, or "don't tamper in God's domain". I'm talking about pure science here. The KNOWN facts. Because of the definition of species it could be argued that they are of the same species. That's neither here nor there. It still falls under the category of animal husbandry or selective breeding. Which is not genetic modification. It might be construed as genetic manipulation, but the DNA already exists in the parent plants/animals. Nothing that wasn't already there gets added. In Genetic Modification you take DNA from a whole different species (sometimes crossing plant and animal barriers) and put it in a plant that produces food. They do this without knowing the full impact. Heck they don't even really know the partial impact.
And I'm not even going to bother getting into the chemistry of sugar and how little the source (corn vs cane) matters. (It doesn't, the extract contains little to no genetic material).
Yeah, I completely agree with you there. The DNA is not there, but a chemical analysis WILL turn up the difference in the chemical structure between sugar from cane and high fructose corn syrup. As well as research showing its side effects of obesity and diabetes, which are much higher than sugar. Fact finding will also show the mercury levels being much higher in high fructose corn syrup. As well as the trace amounts of antibiotics from the corn.
I hate to be the one that breaks it to you, but reading conspiracy theory and free-enegry zines isn't the best way to stay abrest of actual scientific theory.
I hate to be the one to break it to you, but trying to tie real valid concerns with Genetically Modified foods to conspiracy theories is not the way to convince people you are right. The best way is to link facts in your post and get expert testimony and scientific research to back up your claims.
I like how you throw around the phrase 'conspiracy theory'. It just shows how little you know. A conspiracy theory is a theory that people with power conspire to make something happen with little or no evidence.
I don't talk about a subject unless there is evidence that points to something being real. If you review my posts you'll find that I link to facts, documents, and witness testimony to these events. Just because it isn't on mainstream media does not automatically make it a conspiracy theory. Its simple review my evidence and counter with evidence. Instead of outrageous claims that you cannot back up...