@DivineMoleculeDMT GMO isn't selective breeding. "definitions are used by agencies that regulate genetically modified organisms (GMO's). In the United States, under guidelines issued by USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, genetic engineering is defined as the genetic modification of organisms by recombinant DNA techniques (7CFR340: 340.1).""Recombinant DNA techniques (DNA formed by combining segments of DNA from different organisms)"ers.usda.gov/briefing/biotechnology/glossary.htm
"They'd grow 4 eyes, you DONT KNOWWWWWWWW, you can't play with nature".
Fuck you hippies. Peace, love, the beatles and all that other empty hypocritical bullshit, i'd love to drop you off in Africa without your drugs or THE BARE NECESSITIES of life so you can spread that "love".
@cyber151 George Harrison didn't like hippies. Lennon later also made fun of them. So, leave them out of that hypocritical bullshit, which I agree with you, bs.
En verdad se que greenpeace es una porqueria pero defender a los alimentos geneticamente modificados es una estupides. Nadie nos esta regalando un "mejor maiz" estas personas y corporaciones como Monsanto son propietarios de las cepas que han creado y le cobran a los agricultores por sembrarlas, a pesar que las cepas invadieron en contra de su voluntad los sembradios como una verdadera plaga.
im pretty sure they didnt lack "technology" back in the day when they didnt have tractors and engines and shit... they can still till the ground and plant seeds... lol..its not because of the lack of food that people are starving. i like a lot of penn and tellers bullshit shows, but this one really is bullshit.
@Fyreguy16 yea they can idiot, but it takes much longer to grow those seeds into plants, many of the fruits and vegetables won't survive, and not to mention all the war some places in the world have, and yes it is because of lack of food people are starving, a farm in the US that's say 10 acres can produce more food, and have more food survive decay and bugs then say in Sierra Leon.
@Fyreguy16 if your talking about subsidies, yea that contributes and has positives and negatives, but here in there united state there are more ways to efficiently grow food even without government intervention, then in third world country.
@evilcanuck GMO is not selective breeding, etc., "definitions are used by agencies that regulate genetically modified organisms (GMO's).""under guidelines issued by USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, genetic engineering is defined as the genetic modification of organisms by recombinant DNA techniques (7CFR340: 340.1).""Recombinant DNA techniques (DNA formed by combining segments of DNA from different organisms)" ers.usda.gov/briefing/biotechnology/glossary.htm
Penn needs to STFU on this one.Fuck the third world & Let'em starve! Look out for your own people.I know it's cruel,but that's nature's way of thinning the herd,not enough food,too many people=starvation.Billions of people live in poverty,yet they still insist on having alot of children they can't feed.I'm sick n tired of my country helping out others when we have poverty right here.When everybody here has thier fair share of prosperity THEN can we help others. Until then,FU & your people 2!
@scrustle Greenpeace gave far more accurate information in this video than Penn & Teller. For example, I provided FDA, EPA and USDA regulations in these comments and Greepeace was correct, the regulations do not require those government agencies to test GMOs on humans. P&T did a bait and switch when they used footage saying GMOs are "tested"(not saying human tests or it's the biotech companies testing their own GMOs) and then switching it to FDA, etc. "regulate" GMOs.
Farmers have been geneticly changing food for ever. You think cows gave this much milk back in the days? you thing Hens laid this many eggs? You think Corm (mais) actually was a whole cob back in the days?
im not saying that its Not dangerous when we do it in a laboratorium, coz no one knows. im just saying, we eat alot of changed stuff.
@ marco7centurion: The FDA covers all products that are sold to be consumable. You can't pick and choose what food you say they are doing the proper testing on because you have a hunch. You are asking people to DIE because you and others THINK it is bad, yet you lack any proof at all, while people WAY smarter than myself or you devote there live and education to make these products for human consumption, that the FDA then tests and approves or disapproves for human cunsumption.
@DanielPCline Greenpeace gave far more accurate information in this video than Penn & Teller. For example, I provided FDA, EPA and USDA regulations in these comments and Greepeace was correct, the regulations do not require those government agencies to test GMOs on humans. P&T did a bait and switch when they used footage saying GMOs are "tested"(not saying human tests or it's the biotech companies testing their own GMOs) and then switching it to FDA, etc. "regulate" GMOs.
@DanielPCline The FDA does not generally test GMOs at all as part of their regulations. FDA website says "FDA has not to date established any regulations specific to bioengineered food." " FDA established an informal process by which firms can inform the Agency that they have completed a food or feed safety assessment. FDA requests that firms submit a summary of their assessment to the Agency." GMO manufacturers test the GMOs, not the FDA. fda.gov/NewsEvents/Testimony/ucm112927.htm
@DanielPCline P&T tricked you by showing an article that said "Millions face starvation" but not that anybody actually starved! If Zambia accepted GE food it would have crushed their economy and people would have really starved! Most Zambian food exports are to the EU who wouldn't have accepted Zambian food because of their strict regulations on GE. The GE food was replaced by Non-GE food with money donated by the EU and bought locally, benefiting the economy, nobody starved!
@DanielPCline “A UN investigator into food policy, Jean Ziegler, told the London-based Independent newspaper that he was "against the theory of the multinational corporations who say if you are against hunger you must be for genetically modified organisms". "There is plenty of natural, normal, good food in the world to nourish the double of humanity," he says.” news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/2459903.stm
@DanielPCline “European Commission has given Zambia 15 million pounds (23.5 million euros/23.8 million dollars) to purchase about 33,000 tonnes of non-genetically modified (GM) food to help avert the hunger situation” reliefweb.int/node/113295
As you can see P&T are being magicians and tricking people! Nobody starved and FDA regulations do not require they test GMO's at all! I bet FDA scientists would like to test GMO's as part of the regulations, but they don't make the policy.
@TheEagerMcBeaver that's what they said about the new proteins introduced in our diet. that turned out fantastic for americans, eh? europe was smart and said no. now they don't deal with half the bullshit we do relating to health. we're killing ourselves because we want fatter cows faster. worth it?
@TheEagerMcBeaver That is a poor argument, the EU only grows GM crops on 0.1% of their arable land, and they aren't really starving to death either. The world already produces more than enough food to feed everyone, without GM food. In fact U.S. government subsidies on GM food actually increases poverty and starvation in poor countries. So, GM food is actually a contributing factor to increases in starvation.
@myndy86 Hey, subsidies, poverty, I'd love to hear about it. Just as long as you're not arguing on the side of those radical vegan chefs who eat nothing but raw plants, that's cool with me.
@TheEagerMcBeaver Most GM crops aren't "food crops"! Varieties of Bt corn are mostly used for ethanol production, cattle feed and corn syrup, etc. Cotton and Canola varieties are primarily used for oils, Sugar beets used for sugar, etc. Most GM crops are "food additive crops", they don't reduce starvation anymore than table salt reduces starvation. Americans weren't starving to death before GM crops were invented either.
@MastodonManiac The hippies give far more accurate information in this video than Penn & Teller. For example, I provided FDA, EPA and USDA regulations in these comments and Greepeace was correct, the regulations do not require those government agencies to test GMOs on humans. P&T did a bait and switch when they used footage saying GMOs are "tested"(not saying human tests or it's the biotech companies testing their own GMOs) and then switching it to FDA, etc. "regulate" GMOs.
@ghostrider5378 Penn calls people poor hating racists to keep you from realizing he is talking about himself. If Penn cared about poor people he would donate his millions to feed them, but he keeps himself fat while poor people starve. Penn is against minimum wage, welfare, affirmative action, universal health care, etc. which reduce starvation, poverty, etc. Penn tricks you into believing GE reduces starvation when GE INCREASES starvation and makes Penn and his buddies rich!
@ghostrider5378 Screw of... Internet is not the place for all proper grammar. It's just like writing an SMS. If you want to waste your life writing with a dictionary, feel free.
@ghostrider5378 only lame idiots that don't have a point or a proper rebuttal poke on grammar. great job buddy. you lost whatever stupid idea you tried to get across. not everyone speeka da ingles.
Whoa Penn, "Self-centered and racist..." really? I don't see how racism came into play at all. Self-centered, absolutely, but racist? I feel like that was a rating ploy.
@DampNicklas Penn calls people poor hating racists to keep you from realizing he is talking about himself. If Penn cared about poor people he would donate his millions to feed them, but he keeps himself fat while poor people starve. Penn is against minimum wage, welfare, affirmative action, universal health care, etc. which reduce starvation, poverty, etc. Penn tricks you into believing GE reduces starvation when GE INCREASES starvation and makes Penn and his buddies rich!
One of the few BS episodes that are full of crap. Where in this to they discuss that the seeds they're trying to push on these nations from monstanto, are made to not produce a 2nd generation, meaning they would then have to crawl back to the company to buy more seeds every season. Just like a drug dealer, first taste is free.
The problem isn't creating better yielding crops, it's creating crops that produce their own toxic pesticides, and also self-terminate. Turning food into a debt source.
@artmachine2008 The seeds are viable in further generations. The license to grow them is paid each year to the companies that develop them. If you want to risk the fine of growing the seeds without paying the license, that is up to the grower. Try it for yourself. Plant some Roundup Ready soybeans in a garden, then plant the resulting seeds and determine for yourself if they are viable or not.
Do these organic lovers have any idea that food and pretty much everything a thousand years ago were pure organic and didn't have any of these pesticides and other stuff they're worrying about.
What was the life expectancy back then? Yeah, thought so. You organic idiots stfu.
@gredangeo Organic didn't exist 1000 years ago and even if you consider that food near-organic, there are numerous other factors that affect life expectancy. If you eliminate those factors and look at organic food impact in meta-analyses of animal studies in labs, where the only difference in conditions is the food. "Animal studies (among them, on rabbits and chickens) show higher fertility and less morbidity in animals fed organically." ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15195159
@helljumpr5150 Greenpeace gives far more accurate information in this video than Penn & Teller. For example, I provided FDA, EPA and USDA regulations in these comments and Greepeace was correct, the regulations do not require those government agencies to test GMOs on humans. P&T did a bait and switch when they used footage saying GMOs are "tested"(not saying human tests or it is the biotech companies who test their own GMOs) and then switching it to FDA, etc. "regulate" GMOs.
@helljumpr5150 I wish the shopper would have said something like, 'You don't want me to trust the government, but you want me to trust a guy dressed in a silly outfit hanging out at a grocery store in the middle of the day...'
@MrKaozKaoz Most GM crops aren't "food crops"! Varieties of Bt corn are mostly used for ethanol production, cattle feed and corn syrup, etc. Cotton and Canola varieties are primarily used for oils, Sugar beets used for sugar, etc. Most GM crops are "food additive crops", they don't reduce starvation anymore than table salt reduces starvation. GM crops INCREASE starvation in poor countries by wasting land for Non-food crops, using patents, getting government subsidies, etc. !
@pengubaby GM plants have traits bred into them that allow them to be more resistant to certain herbicides or they make more of naturally occuring toxins to help them fight off insects or diseases. That results in farmers using less pesticides. Example is Bt corn that contains toxins to corn borers or root worms. That development alone is responsible for probably 20% increase in yield over the last decade and nearly 100% reduction in spraying corn borer insecticides.
@DAusberger While it may reduce spraying, Bt crops themselves are classified by the EPA as "plant-pesticides". Bt crops are supposed to express Cry proteins 100% of the time, so Bt crops produce more pesticides than what a conventional farmer would use(they don't spray pesticides 100% of the time) and at significantly higher levels of Bt than what organic farmers use(N increases the level of Cry proteins). So actually Bt crops have INCREASED pesticide use!
@DAusberger you didn't answer my question. and it doesn't matter if they have to spray less if the pesticides are built in. I just find it sad that the long term affects were not tested, and now we are paying the price with the death of bees worldwide. I'm not against GM plants, I am just pro intensive testing on GM plants that have signicantly more toxins in them than would be found in nature.
@pengubaby According to Wikipedia, in regard to GM crops and Colony Colaspe Disorder, '..In the scant literature on the topic, there exists no evidence of any negative effects on honey bee populations.' I will look into the other points you have raised as I have time later this week. Cheers!
@DAusberger Wikipedia is a poor source of science related information. "Our results show that transgenic crops expressing Cry1Ab protein at 5000 ppb may affect food consumption or learning processes and thereby may impact honey bee foraging efficiency." ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18206234
@DAusberger "a 7-day oral exposure to the various treatments (transgenic, imidacloprid-treated and control), honey bee feeding behaviour was disturbed and bees consumed significantly less CCRI41 cotton pollen than in the control group in which bees were exposed to conventional cotton pollen. It may indicate an antifeedant effect of CCRI41 pollen on honey bees and thus bees may be at risk because of large areas are planted with transgenic Bt cotton" ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20700762
@pengubaby I just did a quick search of the EPA. .epa.gov/pesticides/about/types.htm They classify GM plants as 'biopesticides', They give an example of a biopesticide as canola oil and baking soda and classify GM plants in the same class. In corn fields, there are commonly 30,000 plants per acre. There is 6" or 7" between the plants and 30" between the rows. If each stalk is 1" in diameter, that means the 'biopesticdie' covers (30,000/6,272,640) .478% of the area.
@DAusberger That is less than half a percent! Compare that to spraying 100% of the ground area with chemicals. If weather or pest conditions dictate, a farmer could be forced to treat multiple times a year. With the resistance built into the crop (of which 20% must be NON-RESISTANT) the plant is protected no matter when the pest attacks. The 20% refuge requirement is to help avoid pest resistance to the GM event. 3rd party auditors make unannounced inspections of growers to check
@DAusberger While refuges are supposed to be used, it is the company that was supposed to check, in the last 10 years the % of farmers who do not use refuges has increased. So, now the companies are going to mix a % of non-Bt seeds with Bt seeds instead of having to check for refuges. However, "Variable Bt toxin production in seeds of refuge plants undermines the high-dose/refuge strategy and could accelerate pest resistance to Bt crops." ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC419639/
@DAusberger Also, you are only considering Bt crops. If you compare conventional farmers who generally spot spray weeds with herbicides(because spraying the crops will kill them) to GM herbicide tolerant farmers who spray the whole field or "100% of the ground area with chemicals", your own argument is used against you. Now compare organic which use no herbicides whatsoever(except vinegar) then that is 0% of the ground area sprayed with chemicals, compared to 100% for GM HT farms.
@DAusberger Organic pesticides are classified as biopesticides as well, however 52% of organic farmers use no pesticides whatsoever, compared to 100% of Bt crops expressing Cry. Your math neglects to include pollen and plant debris which also contain Cry, and that farmers aren't spraying pesticides 100% of the time. Also, pesticides are more likely to degrade when exposed to the elements than when they are being expressed by the plant itself.
I believe that while GE food isn't an inherently bad thing, we should be careful and try to preserve strains of food that AREN'T genetically modified. We have no idea what effects these products can cause in the long run and should have a backup plan.
And part of the problem with lack of food in this planet isn't lack of food at all, but the distribution of said food. Penn himself said it many times, the problem is that some people have too much food while some people don't have any.
@marco7centurion *nods* those seeds that have pesticides in them are genetically modified, right? and they are the indirect cause of the disappearance of the honeybee. It seems to me the FDA should be required to test the things, not telling the companies to test their plants and submit results. Also, I think they should test for long term affect on insects. Hopefully the lawsuits against certain companies by bee keepers will change the way we go about things.
@marco7centurion There's no such thing as a "natural" strain of crop. All cultivated food in the world is man-made BY DEFINITION. If you mean food that has been modified with genetic engineering and technology like that, it's not any different from any other cultivated crops. Just like farmers, scientists select for favorable traits in plants. Once the seeds are planted, the crops will be indistinguishable from something that can be cultivated naturally.
@links212 I hear what you say. All I'm saying is that GEngineering crops isn't quite the same as cross-breeding them. We've been cross breeding and selecting crops since the beggining of farming and the changes have been gradual, allowing the environment to adapt, to a certain point. GE foods introduce changes at an incredibly fast rate and there seems to be little to no control from federal agencies to ensure these changes won't impact negaitively in the environment
@marco7centurion (cont) We don't know what changes in nature these products could make, and that's what I believe we should be cautious about, not the "it's not natural so it's evil".
Once proper testing by third parties have been made and long term studies have been made, I have no objection to introducing these crops seeing as they could help some of the world's problems.
@marco7centurion FYI- As a part of any approval process, all herbicdes, gm plants, etc... are rigorously tested in blind studies by impartial third parties. This is replicated many times over. When approval is granted, it is done in a probationary manner. Any problems that occur during the first 18 months after commercial introduciton can result in the pulling of a product. It is an extremely stringent process. There are thousands of products that dont make it that far.
@DAusberger FALSE! "FDA determined that bioengineered foods should be regulated like their conventional counterparts, FDA has not to date established any regulations specific to bioengineered food.""FDA established an informal process by which firms can inform the Agency that they have completed a food or feed safety assessment. FDA requests that firms submit a summary of their assessment to the Agency." GM manufacturers test their own GMOs! fda.gov/NewsEvents/Testimony/ucm112927.htm
@DAusberger "The most detailed regulatory tests on the GMOs are three-month long feeding trials of laboratory rats, which are biochemically assessed. The tests are not compulsory, and are not independently conducted. The test data and the corresponding results are kept in secret by the companies." ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20941377
@DAusberger "Scientists must ask corporations for permission before publishing independent research on genetically modified crops.""Unfortunately, it is impossible to verify that genetically modified crops perform as advertised. That is because agritech companies have given themselves veto power over the work of independent researchers." scientificAmerican"dot"com/art icle.cfm?id=do-seed-companies-control-gm-crop-research
@DAusberger Same article"For a decade their user agreements have explicitly forbidden the use of the seeds for any independent research. Under the threat of litigation, scientists cannot test a seed to explore the different conditions under which it thrives or fails. They cannot compare seeds from one company against those from another company. And perhaps most important, they cannot examine whether the genetically modified crops lead to unintended environmental side effects."
5:13 - They have all the stuff, but one major problem: They fuck like rabbits, and because western culture has erased all natural death from the world, they never get killed. So the babies just pile up, all are hungry, and the land can no longer feed them. Then we westerners go feed them genetically modded foods, allowing them to make even more babies. And then there's double the hungry babies and the genetic food still isn't enough.
Population control, people. It's the only sollution.
@pengubaby They don't. Americans are cranking out babies just as hard. It just doesn't look like a problem over here because we successfully monopolized the most fertile land on earth so we can all be fatasses despite over-populating.
But yeah, we need to get our birth rates down just as much as poor countries do. Either that or get to work on space travel so we can do the locust routine, going from planet to planet consuming all the resources.
Like that is what is going to happen. I agree with this in broad strokes, but the impression given of large agriculture is way too kind. They want a monopoly on agriculture and the profits taken from it. They want to own living things as intellectual properties. They don't want to help, they want to get paid.
@gabiotta You need money to do research...facililties, educated personnel and equipment all cost money. If there is a company behind the research they should make a profit to enable them to do more research and make more advancements. The more results the more money that others invest into the company. More $= more research= better for everyone. You seem to think that you can't get paid and help at the same time... teachers get paid and help at the same time...
Monsanto sell inviable seeds to dirt poor subsistence farmers. There are bounds of reason that are being broken.
I am not anti-science, or anti-GM (most of us eat chicken DNA without turning into chickens). The point I was making is that the conclusions of this programme are lop-sided. There are arguments to be heard from both sides of this issue.
@gabiotta Actually Monsanto and other companies give poor countries access to their labs and technology so they can develop their own drought resistant crops, especially vegetables, which are not the companies' main focus. They also give traited seed to develping nations. These seeds are absolutely viable and help smallest farmers make a better living than using old varieites that fail much more frequently. In fact, a portion of US seed stock comes from south of the equator.
There have been the resources and ability to feed everybody at all points in human history. That does not mean that it has happened. You are being naive. Children starve to death in Africa surrounded by fertile land that grows tobacco.
This technology could almost certainly help, that does not stop this TV show being BULLSHIT.
@DWarrior4 Most GM crops aren't "food crops". Varieties of Bt corn are primarily used for ethanol production, cattle feed and corn syrup, corn oil, etc. Cotton and Canola varieties are primarily used for oils, Sugar beets used for sugar, etc. Most GM crops are "food additive crops", they don't reduce starvation anymore than table salt reduces starvation. We already produce more than enough food to feed the world, without GM crops! P&T are magicians who get paid to trick you!
Missing the point! There are many fruits and veg in my local supermarket from African countries - the problem is the world economy. Subsidies from EU and USA on their own foods means it's cheaper for Africans to buy these products than develop their own agriculture. So no one is going to buy an African farmer's products in Africa because the imports are cheaper so there's going to be no advance in techonology there!
@PrincessGarnet85 African's can't export to USA and EU as they have trade tarriffs but bully Africans into not having any of their own so the USA and EU can flood their market place!
messing around with the genes of plants isn't what you need to worry about, it's been done for thousands of years through selective breeding.
messing around with viruses like the idiots in the Netherlands who created a new and highly contagious version of the bird flu virus is the kind of stuff you should be worried about.
I'm sorry but Greenpeace is moronic! so what if we don't know what happens to the people who eat this food at least we know there not dead for starvation.
@pepsifan013 If Zambia accepted GE food it would have crushed their economy, because 53% of Zambian food exports are to the European Union who probably wouldn't have accepted Zambian food because of their strict regulations on GE. The GE food was replaced by Non-GE food donated by the European Union and bought locally, benefiting the local economy. Nobody starved because of not accepting GE food but many Zambians may have starved if Zambia did accept the GE food.
@lvsoad22 Penn calls people poor hating racists to keep you from realizing he is talking about himself. If Penn cared about poor people he would donate his millions to feed them, but he keeps himself fat while poor people starve. Penn is against minimum wage, welfare, affirmative action, universal health care, etc. which reduce starvation, poverty, etc. UN reports support organic to reduce hunger and poverty, if Penn cared about poor people he would support organic not GM.
@myndy86 How the mother fuck do you know what Penn does with his money? Your comment shows your colors. You blurt out things like that as fact. Have you looked at his bank records?
@dangerics Penn mentions on several youtube videos his position! He wants to eliminate minimum wage so him and his rich buddies can have poor people work in sweat shops so they can get richer! He want no universal health care so poor people can stay in debt from medical expenses. He wants to eliminate welfare(food stamps) so poor children can starve to death, etc. Your comment shows your colors. You blurt out things like that as fact. I back my claims! You haven't!
@YouAreABunghole Most GMO crops aren't "food crops". Varieties of Bt corn are primarily used for ethanol production, cattle feed and corn syrup, corn oil, etc. Cotton and Canola varieties are primarily used for oils, Sugar beets used for sugar, etc. Most GMO crops are "food additive crops", they don't reduce starvation anymore than table salt reduces starvation. We already produce more than enough food to feed the world, without GMO crops!
@thearbiter221 The hippies give far more accurate information in this video than Penn and Teller. For example, I provided FDA, EPA and USDA regulations in these comments and Greepeace was correct, the regulations do not require those government agencies to test GMOs on humans. P&T did a bait and switch when they used footage saying GMOs are "tested"(not saying human tests or it is the biotech companies who test their own GMOs) and then switching it to FDA, etc. "regulate" GMOs.
I totally disagree with P&T here. There is more than enough food to feed everyone. It's just that some countries don't have the economic power to acquire it, while other get so much they end up wasting it. Obese people are proof of this. Plus if you ever worked in a restaurant or supermarket you'll know how much food gets thrown away every day.
@PktMma no, that is not true. We are wasting food, that's true, but not that much food, I will over estimate it and I'll say that we waste 50% of our food production. So this 50% could go to starving people isntead. But only maybe 1 billion people is wasting food and there is 6 billion people in need (different levels of need) of food.
It's really about the technology to produce food that we must share and not food itself, ergo P&T is right
@Trollsnews According to the FAO approx. 925 million people go hungry/undernourished. The FAO also states that approx. 1/3 of of food produced for human consumption is lost/wasted globally. If 6 billion people are not starving/undernourished then that 1/3 of wasted food could easily feed the 1 billion starving/undernourished. Therefore, P&T are wrong. The main issue is poverty, not technology. Which is why organic and not GM is a better solution to reduce hunger, poverty, etc.
@pepsifan013 Wrong. Europe every year burns tons of food while America eats it and get obese. These measures are taken precisely to make sure that food is scarce and prices remain high. A drop in food prices would spell economic disaster in our current system.
@PktMma even if that's true. bring other country's out of poverty and starvation would help improve the global economy because they could afford to by our goods and the goods of other country's. This would improve their living conditions and health, meaning these 3rd world people could actually afford school and basic technology. allowing them to contribute to today's society
@yoeldg Are you serious? Most of the EU uses little GE crops and countries like Austria use no GE crops and still have excess food supply. Excess food supply has little to do with starvation/undernourishment. People in the U.S. and numerous other developed countries have people who starve to death or are undernourished. We produce more than enough food to feed the world, without GE crops! People starve or are undernourished primarily because they are too poor to buy food!
@yoeldg Developing countries are capable of growing food themselves, the problem is there are huge government subsidies on GE crops like corn and soy in the U.S. and the poor governments can not compete with the U.S. subsidies. Subsidies create an artificial low price for these products and farmers in poor countries who do not receive subsidies can't compete. It is subsidies on GE crops that INCREASE poverty, hunger, etc. U.S. imports food too, so they must not be sustainable either!
@yoeldg The issue isn't about growing food, it is about poverty, war, etc. If they can't sell the food for a good price they starve, lose their land, etc. Another issue is war, if a soldier, army, etc. comes and takes your food, you starve, lose your land, etc. Yet, another issue is poor governments are selling land to Western countries for various uses, oil, etc. Therefore many of the people in these poor countries don't even have good access to their own land.
@yoeldg "Organic farming can lead to increased food production – in many cases a doubling of yields has been seen""the average crop yield increase was even higher for these projects: 116 per cent increase for all African projects and 128 per cent increase for the projects in East Africa""These findings are backed up by studies from Asia and Latin America that concluded that organic farming can reduce poverty in an environmentally friendly way." unctad.org/en/docs/ditcted200715_en.pdf
@yoeldg "Today's scientific evidence demonstrates that agroecological methods outperform the use of chemical fertilizers in boosting food production where the hungry live- especially in unfavorable environments.""To date agroecological projects have shown an average crop yield increase of 80% in 57 developing countries, with an average increase of 116% for all African projects."srfood.org/index.php/en/component/content/article/1174-report-agroecology-and-the-right-to-food
@yoeldg "Organic farming can yield up to three times as much food as conventional farming on the same amount of land.""in developed countries, yields were almost equal on organic and conventional farms. In developing countries, food production could double or triple using organic methods" sciencedaily"dot"com/releases/2007/07/070711134523.htm
@yoeldg Poor countries need more organic not GE. This way they won't have to pay for expensive inputs(synthetic fertilizer, pesticides, etc.), or GE seeds which generally can not be saved, etc. and they can get more money selling organic because they will not have to compete with the government subsidies on GE crops. Several studies also suggest organic yields higher in times of drought or poor access to water, etc. which is the case in most poor countries.
@yoeldg You didn't even know that countries have excess food without GE crops, as if if before GE crops(only used in the past 15 years) the human race was just barely survivng. I already provided several studies to back my claims. You believe poor countries need GE "food additive crops" that sell for less and cost more for inputs, seeds, etc. than organic, and those farmers won't get subsidies for GE crops and will have to compete with the subsidized crops, are you insane?
@yoeldg Most GE crops aren't "food crops". Varieties of Bt corn are primarily used for ethanol production, cattle feed and corn syrup, corn oil, etc. Cotton and Canola varieties are primarily used for oils, Sugar beets used for sugar, etc. Most GE crops are "food additive crops", they don't contribute to an excess food supply anymore than table salt contributes to an excess food supply.
@PktMma You just repeated what they said. How can you be disagreeing with them? They never said there isn't enough food IN THE WORLD. They said most of the world can't afford it.
@dangerics Yes but the fact that they are pushing for GE crops makes me think this episode was sponsored by Monsanto to push a technology we don't need but that they can greatly benefit from.
@PktMma When someone learns how to redistribute food so everyone has access to it then I'll agree with you that we don't need GE crops. Right now, yes we do. We also need assholes like Greenpeace to shut the fuck up and let us feed Zambia.
Whether we need them or not, GE crops are safe and better for the environment than organics.
It sounds to me like they're pushing feeding hungry people.
And how do GMO's benefit P and T besides being fodder for a show?
@dangerics Most GE crops are not "food crops"! Varieties of Bt corn are primarily used for ethanol production, cattle feed and corn syrup, corn oil, etc. GE Cotton and GE Canola varieties are primarily used for oils, GE Sugar beets used for sugar, etc. Most GE crops are "food additive crops", they do not reduce starvation anymore than table salt reduces starvation.
@dangerics People starve/undernourished primarily because they are too poor to buy food! Developing countries are capable of growing food themselves, the problem is there are huge government subsidies on GE crops like corn and soy in the U.S. and the poor governments can not compete with the U.S. subsidies. Subsidies create an artificial low price for these products and farmers in poor countries who do not receive subsidies can't compete. So, GE crops INCREASE poverty, hunger, etc.
@dangerics The issue isn't about growing food, it is about poverty, war, etc. If they can't sell the food for a good price they starve, lose their land, etc. Another issue is war, if a soldier, army, etc. comes and takes your food, you starve, lose your land, etc. Yet, another issue is poor governments are selling land to Western countries for various uses, oil, etc. Therefore many of the people in these poor countries don't even have good access to their own land.
@dangerics Poor countries need more organic not GE. This way they won't have to pay for expensive inputs(synthetic fertilizer, pesticides, etc.), or GE seeds which generally can not be saved, etc. and they can get more money selling organic because they will not have to compete with the government subsidies on GE crops. Several studies also suggest organic yields higher in times of drought or poor access to water, etc. which is the case in most poor countries.
@dangerics "Organic farming can lead to increased food production–in many cases a doubling of yields has been seen""the average crop yield increase was even higher for these projects:116 per cent increase for all African projects and 128 per cent increase for the projects in East Africa""These findings are backed up by studies from Asia and Latin America that concluded that organic farming can reduce poverty in an environmentally friendly way."unctad.org/en/docs/ditcted200715_en.pdf
@dangerics "Today's scientific evidence demonstrates that agroecological methods outperform the use of chemical fertilizers in boosting food production where the hungry live- especially in unfavorable environments.""To date agroecological projects have shown an average crop yield increase of 80% in 57 developing countries, with an average increase of 116% for all African projects." srfood.org/index.php/en/component/content/article/1174-report-agroecology-and-the-right-to-food
@dangerics "Organic farming can yield up to three times as much food as conventional farming on the same amount of land.""in developed countries, yields were almost equal on organic and conventional farms. In developing countries, food production could double or triple using organic methods" sciencedaily"dot"com/releases/2007/07/070711134523.htm
@myndy86 Y U NO STOP SPAMMING!?
thebruteslayer 3 days ago
Four eyes? That kinda sounds awesome!
rehwr 4 days ago
I LOVE THE ENDING. Penn & Teller kick ass!
MikeySH07 6 days ago
Hmmm grow 4 eyes or die from starvation. Gimme the 4 eyes, I want to eat damn it!
GProduct 1 week ago 7
@GProduct Anyway ge food will not make you grow four eyes
killerburgerprods 6 days ago
@GProduct I bet they smoke weed that was selectively bred which is a form of gene modification. I do and I love it. =D
DivineMoleculeDMT 5 days ago
@DivineMoleculeDMT GMO isn't selective breeding. "definitions are used by agencies that regulate genetically modified organisms (GMO's). In the United States, under guidelines issued by USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, genetic engineering is defined as the genetic modification of organisms by recombinant DNA techniques (7CFR340: 340.1).""Recombinant DNA techniques (DNA formed by combining segments of DNA from different organisms)"ers.usda.gov/briefing/biotechnology/glossary.htm
myndy86 5 days ago
"They'd grow 4 eyes, you DONT KNOWWWWWWWW, you can't play with nature".
Fuck you hippies. Peace, love, the beatles and all that other empty hypocritical bullshit, i'd love to drop you off in Africa without your drugs or THE BARE NECESSITIES of life so you can spread that "love".
cyber151 1 week ago
@cyber151 George Harrison didn't like hippies. Lennon later also made fun of them. So, leave them out of that hypocritical bullshit, which I agree with you, bs.
G
wendileona 5 days ago
This chapter of bullshit is bullshit
xmenprince 1 week ago
Que bajo han caido penn y teller.
En verdad se que greenpeace es una porqueria pero defender a los alimentos geneticamente modificados es una estupides. Nadie nos esta regalando un "mejor maiz" estas personas y corporaciones como Monsanto son propietarios de las cepas que han creado y le cobran a los agricultores por sembrarlas, a pesar que las cepas invadieron en contra de su voluntad los sembradios como una verdadera plaga.
xmenprince 1 week ago
FAMOUS SHUT THE FUCK UP!
SuperRuckaali 1 week ago
im pretty sure they didnt lack "technology" back in the day when they didnt have tractors and engines and shit... they can still till the ground and plant seeds... lol..its not because of the lack of food that people are starving. i like a lot of penn and tellers bullshit shows, but this one really is bullshit.
Fyreguy16 1 week ago
@Fyreguy16 yea they can idiot, but it takes much longer to grow those seeds into plants, many of the fruits and vegetables won't survive, and not to mention all the war some places in the world have, and yes it is because of lack of food people are starving, a farm in the US that's say 10 acres can produce more food, and have more food survive decay and bugs then say in Sierra Leon.
maximunoutlaw32 1 week ago
@maximunoutlaw32 and thats because of the government involvement
Fyreguy16 1 week ago
@Fyreguy16 if your talking about subsidies, yea that contributes and has positives and negatives, but here in there united state there are more ways to efficiently grow food even without government intervention, then in third world country.
maximunoutlaw32 1 week ago
5:40
Typhlosion10110 1 week ago
i wounder if these hippies eat bananas they are gentically altered
evilcanuck 1 week ago
@evilcanuck GMO is not selective breeding, etc., "definitions are used by agencies that regulate genetically modified organisms (GMO's).""under guidelines issued by USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, genetic engineering is defined as the genetic modification of organisms by recombinant DNA techniques (7CFR340: 340.1).""Recombinant DNA techniques (DNA formed by combining segments of DNA from different organisms)" ers.usda.gov/briefing/biotechnology/glossary.htm
myndy86 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Penn needs to STFU on this one.Fuck the third world & Let'em starve! Look out for your own people.I know it's cruel,but that's nature's way of thinning the herd,not enough food,too many people=starvation.Billions of people live in poverty,yet they still insist on having alot of children they can't feed.I'm sick n tired of my country helping out others when we have poverty right here.When everybody here has thier fair share of prosperity THEN can we help others. Until then,FU & your people 2!
MrOpinion1971 1 week ago
Comment removed
MrOpinion1971 1 week ago
Go random shopper! Pwn Greenpeace!
scrustle 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@scrustle Greenpeace gave far more accurate information in this video than Penn & Teller. For example, I provided FDA, EPA and USDA regulations in these comments and Greepeace was correct, the regulations do not require those government agencies to test GMOs on humans. P&T did a bait and switch when they used footage saying GMOs are "tested"(not saying human tests or it's the biotech companies testing their own GMOs) and then switching it to FDA, etc. "regulate" GMOs.
myndy86 1 week ago
Every one needs to SHUT THE FUCK UP about this
Goofyattack 2 weeks ago
Farmers have been geneticly changing food for ever. You think cows gave this much milk back in the days? you thing Hens laid this many eggs? You think Corm (mais) actually was a whole cob back in the days?
im not saying that its Not dangerous when we do it in a laboratorium, coz no one knows. im just saying, we eat alot of changed stuff.
biorn1973 2 weeks ago
@ marco7centurion: The FDA covers all products that are sold to be consumable. You can't pick and choose what food you say they are doing the proper testing on because you have a hunch. You are asking people to DIE because you and others THINK it is bad, yet you lack any proof at all, while people WAY smarter than myself or you devote there live and education to make these products for human consumption, that the FDA then tests and approves or disapproves for human cunsumption.
DanielPCline 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DanielPCline Greenpeace gave far more accurate information in this video than Penn & Teller. For example, I provided FDA, EPA and USDA regulations in these comments and Greepeace was correct, the regulations do not require those government agencies to test GMOs on humans. P&T did a bait and switch when they used footage saying GMOs are "tested"(not saying human tests or it's the biotech companies testing their own GMOs) and then switching it to FDA, etc. "regulate" GMOs.
myndy86 2 weeks ago
@DanielPCline The FDA does not generally test GMOs at all as part of their regulations. FDA website says "FDA has not to date established any regulations specific to bioengineered food." " FDA established an informal process by which firms can inform the Agency that they have completed a food or feed safety assessment. FDA requests that firms submit a summary of their assessment to the Agency." GMO manufacturers test the GMOs, not the FDA. fda.gov/NewsEvents/Testimony/ucm112927.htm
myndy86 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DanielPCline P&T tricked you by showing an article that said "Millions face starvation" but not that anybody actually starved! If Zambia accepted GE food it would have crushed their economy and people would have really starved! Most Zambian food exports are to the EU who wouldn't have accepted Zambian food because of their strict regulations on GE. The GE food was replaced by Non-GE food with money donated by the EU and bought locally, benefiting the economy, nobody starved!
myndy86 2 weeks ago
@DanielPCline “A UN investigator into food policy, Jean Ziegler, told the London-based Independent newspaper that he was "against the theory of the multinational corporations who say if you are against hunger you must be for genetically modified organisms". "There is plenty of natural, normal, good food in the world to nourish the double of humanity," he says.” news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/2459903.stm
myndy86 2 weeks ago
@DanielPCline “European Commission has given Zambia 15 million pounds (23.5 million euros/23.8 million dollars) to purchase about 33,000 tonnes of non-genetically modified (GM) food to help avert the hunger situation” reliefweb.int/node/113295
As you can see P&T are being magicians and tricking people! Nobody starved and FDA regulations do not require they test GMO's at all! I bet FDA scientists would like to test GMO's as part of the regulations, but they don't make the policy.
myndy86 2 weeks ago
These idiots know nothing about how Genes, Genetics, and DNA work. they obviously weren't paying attention during basic eighth science.
DRDTV12 3 weeks ago
@DRDTV12 which idiots?
MrHonordeath 2 weeks ago
@MrHonordeath Probably the idiots who don't know that technologically advanced food doesn't have any effect on genetics whatsoever....
TheEagerMcBeaver 2 weeks ago
@TheEagerMcBeaver that's what they said about the new proteins introduced in our diet. that turned out fantastic for americans, eh? europe was smart and said no. now they don't deal with half the bullshit we do relating to health. we're killing ourselves because we want fatter cows faster. worth it?
RandomTrollAccount 2 weeks ago
@RandomTrollAccount Uh..yes! American people aren't starving to death. Of course, it's worth it!
TheEagerMcBeaver 1 week ago
@TheEagerMcBeaver That is a poor argument, the EU only grows GM crops on 0.1% of their arable land, and they aren't really starving to death either. The world already produces more than enough food to feed everyone, without GM food. In fact U.S. government subsidies on GM food actually increases poverty and starvation in poor countries. So, GM food is actually a contributing factor to increases in starvation.
myndy86 1 week ago
@myndy86 Hey, subsidies, poverty, I'd love to hear about it. Just as long as you're not arguing on the side of those radical vegan chefs who eat nothing but raw plants, that's cool with me.
TheEagerMcBeaver 1 week ago
@myndy86 yep, they want to give us GMO because they know what it does to us.
Fyreguy16 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheEagerMcBeaver Most GM crops aren't "food crops"! Varieties of Bt corn are mostly used for ethanol production, cattle feed and corn syrup, etc. Cotton and Canola varieties are primarily used for oils, Sugar beets used for sugar, etc. Most GM crops are "food additive crops", they don't reduce starvation anymore than table salt reduces starvation. Americans weren't starving to death before GM crops were invented either.
myndy86 1 week ago
Holy shit, I consider my self pretty hippie'ish but these guys are just fucked!
MastodonManiac 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MastodonManiac The hippies give far more accurate information in this video than Penn & Teller. For example, I provided FDA, EPA and USDA regulations in these comments and Greepeace was correct, the regulations do not require those government agencies to test GMOs on humans. P&T did a bait and switch when they used footage saying GMOs are "tested"(not saying human tests or it's the biotech companies testing their own GMOs) and then switching it to FDA, etc. "regulate" GMOs.
myndy86 2 weeks ago
@MastodonManiac which guys?
MrHonordeath 2 weeks ago
How about we kill fucking everyone? Makes life easier.
FatJoe214 3 weeks ago
YOU NEED TO SHUT! THE FUCK! UP!!
ghostrider5378 3 weeks ago 26
This has been flagged as spam show
@ghostrider5378 Penn calls people poor hating racists to keep you from realizing he is talking about himself. If Penn cared about poor people he would donate his millions to feed them, but he keeps himself fat while poor people starve. Penn is against minimum wage, welfare, affirmative action, universal health care, etc. which reduce starvation, poverty, etc. Penn tricks you into believing GE reduces starvation when GE INCREASES starvation and makes Penn and his buddies rich!
myndy86 3 weeks ago
@ghostrider5378 u need to.
MrHonordeath 2 weeks ago
@MrHonordeath I believe you should learn how to use proper grammar. Until then, go back to your Club Penguin, little girl.
ghostrider5378 2 weeks ago
@ghostrider5378 Screw of... Internet is not the place for all proper grammar. It's just like writing an SMS. If you want to waste your life writing with a dictionary, feel free.
I only cannot recomend it.
MrHonordeath 2 weeks ago
@ghostrider5378 only lame idiots that don't have a point or a proper rebuttal poke on grammar. great job buddy. you lost whatever stupid idea you tried to get across. not everyone speeka da ingles.
RandomTrollAccount 2 weeks ago
@RandomTrollAccount 0/10
Troll harder, faggot.
ghostrider5378 2 weeks ago
@ghostrider5378 haha oh man... dig it deeper, buddy. we have a smart one here
RandomTrollAccount 2 weeks ago
Whoa Penn, "Self-centered and racist..." really? I don't see how racism came into play at all. Self-centered, absolutely, but racist? I feel like that was a rating ploy.
Arbiterofjustice 3 weeks ago
This could very well be the best ending in TV-history.
DampNicklas 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DampNicklas Penn calls people poor hating racists to keep you from realizing he is talking about himself. If Penn cared about poor people he would donate his millions to feed them, but he keeps himself fat while poor people starve. Penn is against minimum wage, welfare, affirmative action, universal health care, etc. which reduce starvation, poverty, etc. Penn tricks you into believing GE reduces starvation when GE INCREASES starvation and makes Penn and his buddies rich!
myndy86 3 weeks ago
5:43 ok :)
radanju3 4 weeks ago
One of the few BS episodes that are full of crap. Where in this to they discuss that the seeds they're trying to push on these nations from monstanto, are made to not produce a 2nd generation, meaning they would then have to crawl back to the company to buy more seeds every season. Just like a drug dealer, first taste is free.
The problem isn't creating better yielding crops, it's creating crops that produce their own toxic pesticides, and also self-terminate. Turning food into a debt source.
artmachine2008 1 month ago
@artmachine2008 The seeds are viable in further generations. The license to grow them is paid each year to the companies that develop them. If you want to risk the fine of growing the seeds without paying the license, that is up to the grower. Try it for yourself. Plant some Roundup Ready soybeans in a garden, then plant the resulting seeds and determine for yourself if they are viable or not.
DAusberger 4 weeks ago
Do these organic lovers have any idea that food and pretty much everything a thousand years ago were pure organic and didn't have any of these pesticides and other stuff they're worrying about.
What was the life expectancy back then? Yeah, thought so. You organic idiots stfu.
gredangeo 1 month ago
@gredangeo Organic didn't exist 1000 years ago and even if you consider that food near-organic, there are numerous other factors that affect life expectancy. If you eliminate those factors and look at organic food impact in meta-analyses of animal studies in labs, where the only difference in conditions is the food. "Animal studies (among them, on rabbits and chickens) show higher fertility and less morbidity in animals fed organically." ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15195159
myndy86 4 weeks ago
YOU need to SHUT the FUCK UP.
You Tell them Penn......
PENN AND TELLER 2012
Fu3R4 1 month ago
Someone should give that shopper a gold medal for breaking those greenpeace guys down to what they really are.
helljumpr5150 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@helljumpr5150 Greenpeace gives far more accurate information in this video than Penn & Teller. For example, I provided FDA, EPA and USDA regulations in these comments and Greepeace was correct, the regulations do not require those government agencies to test GMOs on humans. P&T did a bait and switch when they used footage saying GMOs are "tested"(not saying human tests or it is the biotech companies who test their own GMOs) and then switching it to FDA, etc. "regulate" GMOs.
myndy86 1 month ago
@helljumpr5150 I wish the shopper would have said something like, 'You don't want me to trust the government, but you want me to trust a guy dressed in a silly outfit hanging out at a grocery store in the middle of the day...'
DAusberger 1 month ago
Growing 4 eyes or dying of starvation? that si a HARD one *wink... wink wink wink*
MrKaozKaoz 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrKaozKaoz Most GM crops aren't "food crops"! Varieties of Bt corn are mostly used for ethanol production, cattle feed and corn syrup, etc. Cotton and Canola varieties are primarily used for oils, Sugar beets used for sugar, etc. Most GM crops are "food additive crops", they don't reduce starvation anymore than table salt reduces starvation. GM crops INCREASE starvation in poor countries by wasting land for Non-food crops, using patents, getting government subsidies, etc. !
myndy86 1 month ago
What kind of people would we be creating? Uhhh none, we'd be giving them food. WTF???
ErrolSOConner 1 month ago
the seeds that have pesticides in them were genetically engineered, right?
pengubaby 1 month ago
@pengubaby GM plants have traits bred into them that allow them to be more resistant to certain herbicides or they make more of naturally occuring toxins to help them fight off insects or diseases. That results in farmers using less pesticides. Example is Bt corn that contains toxins to corn borers or root worms. That development alone is responsible for probably 20% increase in yield over the last decade and nearly 100% reduction in spraying corn borer insecticides.
DAusberger 1 month ago
@DAusberger While it may reduce spraying, Bt crops themselves are classified by the EPA as "plant-pesticides". Bt crops are supposed to express Cry proteins 100% of the time, so Bt crops produce more pesticides than what a conventional farmer would use(they don't spray pesticides 100% of the time) and at significantly higher levels of Bt than what organic farmers use(N increases the level of Cry proteins). So actually Bt crops have INCREASED pesticide use!
myndy86 1 month ago
@DAusberger you didn't answer my question. and it doesn't matter if they have to spray less if the pesticides are built in. I just find it sad that the long term affects were not tested, and now we are paying the price with the death of bees worldwide. I'm not against GM plants, I am just pro intensive testing on GM plants that have signicantly more toxins in them than would be found in nature.
pengubaby 4 weeks ago
@pengubaby According to Wikipedia, in regard to GM crops and Colony Colaspe Disorder, '..In the scant literature on the topic, there exists no evidence of any negative effects on honey bee populations.' I will look into the other points you have raised as I have time later this week. Cheers!
DAusberger 4 weeks ago
@DAusberger Wikipedia is a poor source of science related information. "Our results show that transgenic crops expressing Cry1Ab protein at 5000 ppb may affect food consumption or learning processes and thereby may impact honey bee foraging efficiency." ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18206234
myndy86 4 weeks ago
@DAusberger "a 7-day oral exposure to the various treatments (transgenic, imidacloprid-treated and control), honey bee feeding behaviour was disturbed and bees consumed significantly less CCRI41 cotton pollen than in the control group in which bees were exposed to conventional cotton pollen. It may indicate an antifeedant effect of CCRI41 pollen on honey bees and thus bees may be at risk because of large areas are planted with transgenic Bt cotton" ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20700762
myndy86 4 weeks ago
@pengubaby I just did a quick search of the EPA. .epa.gov/pesticides/about/types.htm They classify GM plants as 'biopesticides', They give an example of a biopesticide as canola oil and baking soda and classify GM plants in the same class. In corn fields, there are commonly 30,000 plants per acre. There is 6" or 7" between the plants and 30" between the rows. If each stalk is 1" in diameter, that means the 'biopesticdie' covers (30,000/6,272,640) .478% of the area.
DAusberger 4 weeks ago
@DAusberger That is less than half a percent! Compare that to spraying 100% of the ground area with chemicals. If weather or pest conditions dictate, a farmer could be forced to treat multiple times a year. With the resistance built into the crop (of which 20% must be NON-RESISTANT) the plant is protected no matter when the pest attacks. The 20% refuge requirement is to help avoid pest resistance to the GM event. 3rd party auditors make unannounced inspections of growers to check
DAusberger 4 weeks ago
@DAusberger While refuges are supposed to be used, it is the company that was supposed to check, in the last 10 years the % of farmers who do not use refuges has increased. So, now the companies are going to mix a % of non-Bt seeds with Bt seeds instead of having to check for refuges. However, "Variable Bt toxin production in seeds of refuge plants undermines the high-dose/refuge strategy and could accelerate pest resistance to Bt crops." ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC419639/
myndy86 4 weeks ago
@DAusberger Also, you are only considering Bt crops. If you compare conventional farmers who generally spot spray weeds with herbicides(because spraying the crops will kill them) to GM herbicide tolerant farmers who spray the whole field or "100% of the ground area with chemicals", your own argument is used against you. Now compare organic which use no herbicides whatsoever(except vinegar) then that is 0% of the ground area sprayed with chemicals, compared to 100% for GM HT farms.
myndy86 4 weeks ago
@DAusberger 1 acre = 43,560 square feet or 6,272,640 square inches. 30,000 plants = 30,000 inches, so 30,000/6,272,640 = .0048726
DAusberger 4 weeks ago
@DAusberger Organic pesticides are classified as biopesticides as well, however 52% of organic farmers use no pesticides whatsoever, compared to 100% of Bt crops expressing Cry. Your math neglects to include pollen and plant debris which also contain Cry, and that farmers aren't spraying pesticides 100% of the time. Also, pesticides are more likely to degrade when exposed to the elements than when they are being expressed by the plant itself.
myndy86 4 weeks ago
I believe that while GE food isn't an inherently bad thing, we should be careful and try to preserve strains of food that AREN'T genetically modified. We have no idea what effects these products can cause in the long run and should have a backup plan.
And part of the problem with lack of food in this planet isn't lack of food at all, but the distribution of said food. Penn himself said it many times, the problem is that some people have too much food while some people don't have any.
marco7centurion 1 month ago
@marco7centurion *nods* those seeds that have pesticides in them are genetically modified, right? and they are the indirect cause of the disappearance of the honeybee. It seems to me the FDA should be required to test the things, not telling the companies to test their plants and submit results. Also, I think they should test for long term affect on insects. Hopefully the lawsuits against certain companies by bee keepers will change the way we go about things.
pengubaby 1 month ago
@marco7centurion There's no such thing as a "natural" strain of crop. All cultivated food in the world is man-made BY DEFINITION. If you mean food that has been modified with genetic engineering and technology like that, it's not any different from any other cultivated crops. Just like farmers, scientists select for favorable traits in plants. Once the seeds are planted, the crops will be indistinguishable from something that can be cultivated naturally.
links212 1 month ago
@links212 I hear what you say. All I'm saying is that GEngineering crops isn't quite the same as cross-breeding them. We've been cross breeding and selecting crops since the beggining of farming and the changes have been gradual, allowing the environment to adapt, to a certain point. GE foods introduce changes at an incredibly fast rate and there seems to be little to no control from federal agencies to ensure these changes won't impact negaitively in the environment
marco7centurion 1 month ago
@marco7centurion (cont) We don't know what changes in nature these products could make, and that's what I believe we should be cautious about, not the "it's not natural so it's evil".
Once proper testing by third parties have been made and long term studies have been made, I have no objection to introducing these crops seeing as they could help some of the world's problems.
marco7centurion 1 month ago
@marco7centurion FYI- As a part of any approval process, all herbicdes, gm plants, etc... are rigorously tested in blind studies by impartial third parties. This is replicated many times over. When approval is granted, it is done in a probationary manner. Any problems that occur during the first 18 months after commercial introduciton can result in the pulling of a product. It is an extremely stringent process. There are thousands of products that dont make it that far.
DAusberger 1 month ago
@DAusberger FALSE! "FDA determined that bioengineered foods should be regulated like their conventional counterparts, FDA has not to date established any regulations specific to bioengineered food.""FDA established an informal process by which firms can inform the Agency that they have completed a food or feed safety assessment. FDA requests that firms submit a summary of their assessment to the Agency." GM manufacturers test their own GMOs! fda.gov/NewsEvents/Testimony/ucm112927.htm
myndy86 1 month ago
@DAusberger "The most detailed regulatory tests on the GMOs are three-month long feeding trials of laboratory rats, which are biochemically assessed. The tests are not compulsory, and are not independently conducted. The test data and the corresponding results are kept in secret by the companies." ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20941377
myndy86 1 month ago
@DAusberger "Scientists must ask corporations for permission before publishing independent research on genetically modified crops.""Unfortunately, it is impossible to verify that genetically modified crops perform as advertised. That is because agritech companies have given themselves veto power over the work of independent researchers." scientificAmerican"dot"com/art icle.cfm?id=do-seed-companies-control-gm-crop-research
myndy86 1 month ago
@DAusberger Same article"For a decade their user agreements have explicitly forbidden the use of the seeds for any independent research. Under the threat of litigation, scientists cannot test a seed to explore the different conditions under which it thrives or fails. They cannot compare seeds from one company against those from another company. And perhaps most important, they cannot examine whether the genetically modified crops lead to unintended environmental side effects."
myndy86 1 month ago
@marco7centurion You too. Shut the fuck up unless you begin citing sources that are hippie natural foodist propaganda sites.
Jallandhara 3 weeks ago
5:13 - They have all the stuff, but one major problem: They fuck like rabbits, and because western culture has erased all natural death from the world, they never get killed. So the babies just pile up, all are hungry, and the land can no longer feed them. Then we westerners go feed them genetically modded foods, allowing them to make even more babies. And then there's double the hungry babies and the genetic food still isn't enough.
Population control, people. It's the only sollution.
lavalizard3 1 month ago
@lavalizard3 um. where is your source that proves third world countries fuck more than first world?
pengubaby 1 month ago
@pengubaby They don't. Americans are cranking out babies just as hard. It just doesn't look like a problem over here because we successfully monopolized the most fertile land on earth so we can all be fatasses despite over-populating.
But yeah, we need to get our birth rates down just as much as poor countries do. Either that or get to work on space travel so we can do the locust routine, going from planet to planet consuming all the resources.
lavalizard3 1 month ago
1:15 She got told so hard
h4kesi 1 month ago
This vid segment reminds me of why I hate Venice beach so much.
drivershigh29 1 month ago
We should share all of the technology!
Like that is what is going to happen. I agree with this in broad strokes, but the impression given of large agriculture is way too kind. They want a monopoly on agriculture and the profits taken from it. They want to own living things as intellectual properties. They don't want to help, they want to get paid.
gabiotta 1 month ago 12
@gabiotta Well, they want to help so long as it gets them paid.
ODaemienE 1 month ago
@gabiotta You need money to do research...facililties, educated personnel and equipment all cost money. If there is a company behind the research they should make a profit to enable them to do more research and make more advancements. The more results the more money that others invest into the company. More $= more research= better for everyone. You seem to think that you can't get paid and help at the same time... teachers get paid and help at the same time...
jmomm 1 month ago
@jmomm
Monsanto sell inviable seeds to dirt poor subsistence farmers. There are bounds of reason that are being broken.
I am not anti-science, or anti-GM (most of us eat chicken DNA without turning into chickens). The point I was making is that the conclusions of this programme are lop-sided. There are arguments to be heard from both sides of this issue.
gabiotta 1 month ago
@gabiotta Actually Monsanto and other companies give poor countries access to their labs and technology so they can develop their own drought resistant crops, especially vegetables, which are not the companies' main focus. They also give traited seed to develping nations. These seeds are absolutely viable and help smallest farmers make a better living than using old varieites that fail much more frequently. In fact, a portion of US seed stock comes from south of the equator.
DAusberger 1 month ago
@gabiotta I like your chicken comment- good one!
DAusberger 1 month ago
@gabiotta well fucking DUH!
of course they want to get payed, who doesn't?
but as long as they get fed WHO GIVES A SHIT!
ussopking 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ussopking
"as long as they get fed WHO GIVES A SHIT!"
There have been the resources and ability to feed everybody at all points in human history. That does not mean that it has happened. You are being naive. Children starve to death in Africa surrounded by fertile land that grows tobacco.
This technology could almost certainly help, that does not stop this TV show being BULLSHIT.
gabiotta 1 month ago
@gabiotta "they they they they they" Shut the fuck up, please.
Jallandhara 3 weeks ago
@Jallandhara
Oh shush...
gabiotta 3 weeks ago
This episode was a huge eye opener.
DWarrior4 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DWarrior4 Most GM crops aren't "food crops". Varieties of Bt corn are primarily used for ethanol production, cattle feed and corn syrup, corn oil, etc. Cotton and Canola varieties are primarily used for oils, Sugar beets used for sugar, etc. Most GM crops are "food additive crops", they don't reduce starvation anymore than table salt reduces starvation. We already produce more than enough food to feed the world, without GM crops! P&T are magicians who get paid to trick you!
myndy86 1 month ago
Missing the point! There are many fruits and veg in my local supermarket from African countries - the problem is the world economy. Subsidies from EU and USA on their own foods means it's cheaper for Africans to buy these products than develop their own agriculture. So no one is going to buy an African farmer's products in Africa because the imports are cheaper so there's going to be no advance in techonology there!
PrincessGarnet85 1 month ago 12
@PrincessGarnet85 African's can't export to USA and EU as they have trade tarriffs but bully Africans into not having any of their own so the USA and EU can flood their market place!
PrincessGarnet85 1 month ago
shit I failed the P&T diet...
ArsenicApplejuice 1 month ago
There's nothing balanced in terms of scientific evidence on this show. A lot of information just isn't brought up.
polyanthesis 1 month ago
messing around with the genes of plants isn't what you need to worry about, it's been done for thousands of years through selective breeding.
messing around with viruses like the idiots in the Netherlands who created a new and highly contagious version of the bird flu virus is the kind of stuff you should be worried about.
nyctreeman 1 month ago
I'm sorry but Greenpeace is moronic! so what if we don't know what happens to the people who eat this food at least we know there not dead for starvation.
pepsifan013 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@pepsifan013 If Zambia accepted GE food it would have crushed their economy, because 53% of Zambian food exports are to the European Union who probably wouldn't have accepted Zambian food because of their strict regulations on GE. The GE food was replaced by Non-GE food donated by the European Union and bought locally, benefiting the local economy. Nobody starved because of not accepting GE food but many Zambians may have starved if Zambia did accept the GE food.
myndy86 1 month ago
5:42
lvsoad22 1 month ago in playlist Liked videos
This has been flagged as spam show
@lvsoad22 Penn calls people poor hating racists to keep you from realizing he is talking about himself. If Penn cared about poor people he would donate his millions to feed them, but he keeps himself fat while poor people starve. Penn is against minimum wage, welfare, affirmative action, universal health care, etc. which reduce starvation, poverty, etc. UN reports support organic to reduce hunger and poverty, if Penn cared about poor people he would support organic not GM.
myndy86 1 month ago
@myndy86 How the mother fuck do you know what Penn does with his money? Your comment shows your colors. You blurt out things like that as fact. Have you looked at his bank records?
BTW, why are all your comments marked as spam?
dangerics 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dangerics Penn mentions on several youtube videos his position! He wants to eliminate minimum wage so him and his rich buddies can have poor people work in sweat shops so they can get richer! He want no universal health care so poor people can stay in debt from medical expenses. He wants to eliminate welfare(food stamps) so poor children can starve to death, etc. Your comment shows your colors. You blurt out things like that as fact. I back my claims! You haven't!
myndy86 1 month ago
@lvsoad22 the invention of "STFU!"
zenthex1234 1 month ago
Kid: I Hate Lab-Engineered crops!
Me: 5:40
YouAreABunghole 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@YouAreABunghole Most GMO crops aren't "food crops". Varieties of Bt corn are primarily used for ethanol production, cattle feed and corn syrup, corn oil, etc. Cotton and Canola varieties are primarily used for oils, Sugar beets used for sugar, etc. Most GMO crops are "food additive crops", they don't reduce starvation anymore than table salt reduces starvation. We already produce more than enough food to feed the world, without GMO crops!
myndy86 1 month ago
Everyone knows about corruption and bribery, it's just that nobody cares enough to do shit..
YouAreABunghole 1 month ago
all hippies should be exterminated
thearbiter221 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@thearbiter221 The hippies give far more accurate information in this video than Penn and Teller. For example, I provided FDA, EPA and USDA regulations in these comments and Greepeace was correct, the regulations do not require those government agencies to test GMOs on humans. P&T did a bait and switch when they used footage saying GMOs are "tested"(not saying human tests or it is the biotech companies who test their own GMOs) and then switching it to FDA, etc. "regulate" GMOs.
myndy86 1 month ago
I totally disagree with P&T here. There is more than enough food to feed everyone. It's just that some countries don't have the economic power to acquire it, while other get so much they end up wasting it. Obese people are proof of this. Plus if you ever worked in a restaurant or supermarket you'll know how much food gets thrown away every day.
PktMma 1 month ago 9
@PktMma no, that is not true. We are wasting food, that's true, but not that much food, I will over estimate it and I'll say that we waste 50% of our food production. So this 50% could go to starving people isntead. But only maybe 1 billion people is wasting food and there is 6 billion people in need (different levels of need) of food.
It's really about the technology to produce food that we must share and not food itself, ergo P&T is right
Trollsnews 1 month ago
@Trollsnews According to the FAO approx. 925 million people go hungry/undernourished. The FAO also states that approx. 1/3 of of food produced for human consumption is lost/wasted globally. If 6 billion people are not starving/undernourished then that 1/3 of wasted food could easily feed the 1 billion starving/undernourished. Therefore, P&T are wrong. The main issue is poverty, not technology. Which is why organic and not GM is a better solution to reduce hunger, poverty, etc.
myndy86 1 month ago
@PktMma that's why we are trying to create enough food for those people, because the more food the cheaper we can sell it.
pepsifan013 1 month ago
@pepsifan013 Wrong. Europe every year burns tons of food while America eats it and get obese. These measures are taken precisely to make sure that food is scarce and prices remain high. A drop in food prices would spell economic disaster in our current system.
PktMma 1 month ago
@PktMma even if that's true. bring other country's out of poverty and starvation would help improve the global economy because they could afford to by our goods and the goods of other country's. This would improve their living conditions and health, meaning these 3rd world people could actually afford school and basic technology. allowing them to contribute to today's society
pepsifan013 1 month ago
@pepsifan013 How would creating more food bring countries out of poverty and starvation if that food ends up being destroyed anyway?
PktMma 1 month ago
@PktMma well its not being destroyed? idk where you got that info? theres no proof behind it
pepsifan013 1 month ago
@pepsifan013 You could read up on the EU milk quotas to start with.
PktMma 1 month ago
@PktMma as Penn so wisely said.....
"SHUT THE FUCK UP!!"
You non-contributing spoiled rotten piece of hipster shit!
nyctreeman 1 month ago 5
@nyctreeman Interesting point.
PktMma 1 month ago
@PktMma
name one country that does not use GE crops and has excess food supply.
yoeldg 1 month ago
@yoeldg Are you serious? Most of the EU uses little GE crops and countries like Austria use no GE crops and still have excess food supply. Excess food supply has little to do with starvation/undernourishment. People in the U.S. and numerous other developed countries have people who starve to death or are undernourished. We produce more than enough food to feed the world, without GE crops! People starve or are undernourished primarily because they are too poor to buy food!
myndy86 1 month ago
@myndy86
because it is to expensive to ship the food to them.
if they were able to grow it themselves,the problem was solved.
the question is why aren't they able to do so?
i think the answer is because of inferior agriculture tech and tough conditions,
so they need agri-tech advisors and tougher crops.
can you find data on GE as % of food consumption in EU?
on not- imported food as % of consumption in EU?
(if the non GE crops were grown elsewhere the EU may not be Sustainable)
yoeldg 1 month ago
@yoeldg Developing countries are capable of growing food themselves, the problem is there are huge government subsidies on GE crops like corn and soy in the U.S. and the poor governments can not compete with the U.S. subsidies. Subsidies create an artificial low price for these products and farmers in poor countries who do not receive subsidies can't compete. It is subsidies on GE crops that INCREASE poverty, hunger, etc. U.S. imports food too, so they must not be sustainable either!
myndy86 1 month ago
@yoeldg The issue isn't about growing food, it is about poverty, war, etc. If they can't sell the food for a good price they starve, lose their land, etc. Another issue is war, if a soldier, army, etc. comes and takes your food, you starve, lose your land, etc. Yet, another issue is poor governments are selling land to Western countries for various uses, oil, etc. Therefore many of the people in these poor countries don't even have good access to their own land.
myndy86 1 month ago
@yoeldg "Organic farming can lead to increased food production – in many cases a doubling of yields has been seen""the average crop yield increase was even higher for these projects: 116 per cent increase for all African projects and 128 per cent increase for the projects in East Africa""These findings are backed up by studies from Asia and Latin America that concluded that organic farming can reduce poverty in an environmentally friendly way." unctad.org/en/docs/ditcted200715_en.pdf
myndy86 1 month ago
@yoeldg "Today's scientific evidence demonstrates that agroecological methods outperform the use of chemical fertilizers in boosting food production where the hungry live- especially in unfavorable environments.""To date agroecological projects have shown an average crop yield increase of 80% in 57 developing countries, with an average increase of 116% for all African projects."srfood.org/index.php/en/component/content/article/1174-report-agroecology-and-the-right-to-food
myndy86 1 month ago
@yoeldg "Organic farming can yield up to three times as much food as conventional farming on the same amount of land.""in developed countries, yields were almost equal on organic and conventional farms. In developing countries, food production could double or triple using organic methods" sciencedaily"dot"com/releases/2007/07/070711134523.htm
myndy86 1 month ago
Comment removed
PrincessGarnet85 1 month ago
@yoeldg Poor countries need more organic not GE. This way they won't have to pay for expensive inputs(synthetic fertilizer, pesticides, etc.), or GE seeds which generally can not be saved, etc. and they can get more money selling organic because they will not have to compete with the government subsidies on GE crops. Several studies also suggest organic yields higher in times of drought or poor access to water, etc. which is the case in most poor countries.
myndy86 1 month ago
@myndy86
tl:dfuckingr...
are you insane?
yoeldg 1 month ago
@yoeldg You didn't even know that countries have excess food without GE crops, as if if before GE crops(only used in the past 15 years) the human race was just barely survivng. I already provided several studies to back my claims. You believe poor countries need GE "food additive crops" that sell for less and cost more for inputs, seeds, etc. than organic, and those farmers won't get subsidies for GE crops and will have to compete with the subsidized crops, are you insane?
myndy86 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@yoeldg Most GE crops aren't "food crops". Varieties of Bt corn are primarily used for ethanol production, cattle feed and corn syrup, corn oil, etc. Cotton and Canola varieties are primarily used for oils, Sugar beets used for sugar, etc. Most GE crops are "food additive crops", they don't contribute to an excess food supply anymore than table salt contributes to an excess food supply.
myndy86 1 month ago
@yoeldg Considering that surplus doesn't go to feed the people that need it I don't see what you are trying to get at.
PktMma 1 month ago
@PktMma Presumably your referring to third world restaurants...
Xollob2 1 month ago
@PktMma You just repeated what they said. How can you be disagreeing with them? They never said there isn't enough food IN THE WORLD. They said most of the world can't afford it.
dangerics 1 month ago
@dangerics Yes but the fact that they are pushing for GE crops makes me think this episode was sponsored by Monsanto to push a technology we don't need but that they can greatly benefit from.
PktMma 1 month ago
@PktMma When someone learns how to redistribute food so everyone has access to it then I'll agree with you that we don't need GE crops. Right now, yes we do. We also need assholes like Greenpeace to shut the fuck up and let us feed Zambia.
Whether we need them or not, GE crops are safe and better for the environment than organics.
It sounds to me like they're pushing feeding hungry people.
And how do GMO's benefit P and T besides being fodder for a show?
dangerics 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dangerics Most GE crops are not "food crops"! Varieties of Bt corn are primarily used for ethanol production, cattle feed and corn syrup, corn oil, etc. GE Cotton and GE Canola varieties are primarily used for oils, GE Sugar beets used for sugar, etc. Most GE crops are "food additive crops", they do not reduce starvation anymore than table salt reduces starvation.
myndy86 1 month ago
@dangerics People starve/undernourished primarily because they are too poor to buy food! Developing countries are capable of growing food themselves, the problem is there are huge government subsidies on GE crops like corn and soy in the U.S. and the poor governments can not compete with the U.S. subsidies. Subsidies create an artificial low price for these products and farmers in poor countries who do not receive subsidies can't compete. So, GE crops INCREASE poverty, hunger, etc.
myndy86 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dangerics The issue isn't about growing food, it is about poverty, war, etc. If they can't sell the food for a good price they starve, lose their land, etc. Another issue is war, if a soldier, army, etc. comes and takes your food, you starve, lose your land, etc. Yet, another issue is poor governments are selling land to Western countries for various uses, oil, etc. Therefore many of the people in these poor countries don't even have good access to their own land.
myndy86 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dangerics Poor countries need more organic not GE. This way they won't have to pay for expensive inputs(synthetic fertilizer, pesticides, etc.), or GE seeds which generally can not be saved, etc. and they can get more money selling organic because they will not have to compete with the government subsidies on GE crops. Several studies also suggest organic yields higher in times of drought or poor access to water, etc. which is the case in most poor countries.
myndy86 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dangerics "Organic farming can lead to increased food production–in many cases a doubling of yields has been seen""the average crop yield increase was even higher for these projects:116 per cent increase for all African projects and 128 per cent increase for the projects in East Africa""These findings are backed up by studies from Asia and Latin America that concluded that organic farming can reduce poverty in an environmentally friendly way."unctad.org/en/docs/ditcted200715_en.pdf
myndy86 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dangerics "Today's scientific evidence demonstrates that agroecological methods outperform the use of chemical fertilizers in boosting food production where the hungry live- especially in unfavorable environments.""To date agroecological projects have shown an average crop yield increase of 80% in 57 developing countries, with an average increase of 116% for all African projects." srfood.org/index.php/en/component/content/article/1174-report-agroecology-and-the-right-to-food
myndy86 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dangerics "Organic farming can yield up to three times as much food as conventional farming on the same amount of land.""in developed countries, yields were almost equal on organic and conventional farms. In developing countries, food production could double or triple using organic methods" sciencedaily"dot"com/releases/2007/07/070711134523.htm
myndy86 1 month ago