Discussion in 'What's On Your Mind?' started by Elizabeth Conley, Sep 30, 2012.
This seems shockingly unethical to me.
color me cynical, but I think lots of crap that nobody else wants/stuff companies can't otherwise get rid of ends up going to other countries in these type of humanitarian aid packages.
GMO corn is in our food stream and we are the lab rats.
Monsanto is a survivor. I predict that someday there will be nothing left but Monsanto, the last corporation, and cock roaches, the only species not made extinct by Monsanto's irresponsible profiteering. With any kind of justice they'll be duking it out for control over a gargantuan heap of Round-up saturated GMO corn.
"500,000 genetically deformed Vietnamese babies"? Is there a bit of hyperbole there?
The actual number is around 150,000 -- still an appalling number -- but gross exaggerations like that really destroy the writer's credibility.
It's funny you use the term hyperbole, because it's the exact word that danced through my head this AM as I got myself and my family up and running this AM. (I hit the deck at 0415, and it's go-go-go 'til about now Mon-Fri.)
Anyway, yes the author of that post wrote in hyperbole, as I did last night as well. It does undermine credibility, but it's also emotionally satisfying. There's something very frustrating about observing an intractable monster like Monsanto lumbering through the decades, leaving misery in its wake.
When I was a child we almost never saw an Osprey. I didn't see a wild Bald Eagle in VA until I was over 40. I watched the comeback of both species after DDT was withdrawn from the market. Now I see Bald Eagles about once a month and Ospreys whenever I want to, (in season of course.)
I've watched Monsanto in action all my life, in matters large and small, and I'm not impressed with the company's integrity. They really bug me. DDT is just one way Monsanto's activity touched my life. Their chemicals have harmed people I know, and I think supporting Monsanto has hurt the U.S. Government's international reputation.
What our nation's leaders eat, vs what they want us to eat:
Clinton and Bush families:
If we want to live, we had better do as they do, not as they say. These people know the truth, and they don't eat GMO.
Could a plant be grown organically and still be GM? How do we know what we see being sold as "organic" is truly an unmodified plant?
Perhaps only growing heirloom plants yourself is the only way to be sure.
I don't care as much as I might about GMO vs non GMO. If it's safe to eat, it's safe to eat. I get cranky when I find out that safety testing has been slipshod. Further, I don't like the way GMO plant technology is owned to the extent that innocent people can be sued for using seeds from non-GMO plants incidentally fertilized by GMO plants due to drifting GMO pollen. (Long sentence, I know. Seriously though, does that seem fair or logical? Leave it to our bench sitting azzclowns in black robes to come up with that.) I don't like the fact that Round-up ready and pest resistant GMOs have led to even greater pesticide and Round-up use. How is that good for us or our environment?
It's not that I have a superstitious terror of GMOs, I just don't like the fundamental unfairness of the GMO company's leverage over farmers, the extra pesticides and weed killers or the questionable safety testing the FDA has winked at. Enough already!
Label that crap!
I am not generally in favor of GM plants or animals, at least not for our food stream. I think it matters since the complexity of a plant or animal and how our bodies treat it as a food source will not be known for decades and by then any bad consequences will be to late.
The organic label in my mind is more hype than anything else. It has been proven by reliable sources that plants that are washed well before preparation have about the same trace chemicals as organically grown plants.
GM food is a much bigger issue and one that can have long lasting negative issues.
Separate names with a comma.