Just Say No To GMO's

Do you really want to feed yourself and your kids this toxic garbage designed to destroy life? Or do you want food with real taste and real nutrition? The choice is yours

Category:

Music

Tags:

• genetically
• modified
• gmo
• g.m.o.
• david
• wolfe
• cancer
• raw
• organic
• infowars
• 911
• 9/11
• 9-11
• barack
• soetoro
• sheeple
• candida
• soy
• mcdonalds
• locally
• grown

[Coldwarwinner]

GMO's have saved more lives from starvation than all smug self-righteous organic-pushers put together ever will. They are safe, well-regulated and have the same nutrition value as non-gmo products (unless they were modified to have a higher nutrition value, of course)

[ultimateGodhead]

That's why starving African nations refused a huge supply of GMO corn from the U.N. right? That's why GMO potatoes gave lab mice brain tumors in a couple weeks time. Bottom line- you're spewing bullshit, go back to eating your Chernobyl puffs, I'll take food the way God intended, not Monsanto

[myndy86]

@Uuuurk I would like to say I respect that you admitted your mistake about wikipedia. However, I think the real problem is you are unaware of the many GM contamination, herbicide resistant weed, etc. problems in the U.S. and therefore you believe there is nothing bad about GM crops, etc. If your agriculture studies have not mentioned these already occurring problems than perhaps they are being censored, because anyone in agriculture in the U.S. has seen or dealt with these problems firsthand.

[myndy86]

@Uuuurk UN report on organic continued "As a result soils are healthier, are better able to hold water and are more stable, can sustain plant growth better and have a higher nutrient content. All this enables farmers to grow crops for longer periods, with higher yields and in marginal conditions." Notice that organic soils are better able to hold water, which is one of the reasons yields are higher in organic in poor countries, because they have poor access to water and/or drought conditions

[myndy86]

@Uuuurk UN report on organic "Organic farming leads to many improvements to the natural environment, including increased water retention in soils, improvements in the water table (with more drinking water in the dry season), reduced soil erosion combined with improved organic matter in soil leading to better carbon sequestration, and increased agro-biodiversity."

[myndy86]

@Uuuurk I don't believe I was wrong. As far as I am aware there were approximately 900 authors in the study and over 400 were scientists from various fields. I'm not sure the exact amount of Monsanto, Syngenta, etc. scientists left before the report was finished but I would guess the total number of scientists were still around 400. As I mentioned there are other factors involved in GM crops, etc. other than agricultural, such as ecological, health, economic, etc. impacts.

[myndy86]

@Uuuurk I read the report already and many of the studies main focus was not on GM safety but on if the GM crop, etc. performed the way it was supposed to(if it was designed to be fungicide resistant was it fungicide resistant) Most of the info on GM safety in these studies was secondary, short term, and not thoroughly studied. Also consider all 27 environment ministers concluded that the legal requirements of GMO authorization in Europe are not being met, so it's not tested enough.

[myndy86]

@Uuuurk I said close to the same yield or better in developed countries, who generally have better access to water and don't exist in drought conditions. What do you mean you don't know what soil damage and water contamination, etc. conventional farming causes? Read the UN report save and grow for some basic information on ythe subject, but as someone in the agricultural field you should already know this and again, I have seen firsthand the damage conventional farming can do.

[myndy86]

@Uuuurk They let both sides participate in the report, Monsanto, Syngenta, Dupont, etc. were also involved in the report as well, but they decided to leave when the huge majority of independent scientists involved in the report agreed that there was not enough testing to conclude GM is safe, that most studies are done by the biotech companies themselves making that data anecdotal and patents on trangenes restrict the experimentation of the independent researchers that could provide real data.

[Uuuurk]

@myndy86 In science u shoulden let activists influence a scientific report. U dont let NS activsts influence a sociology report, u dun let creationist influence stemcell report, and u shouldent let greenbeace influence GM report. I know who monsantao r,they suck, but the reason why greenpeace is against GMO is because that they think monsanto make to much money from it that dumb

Well either I searched on the wikipedia in my country or I misspelled it I stand corrected on the wikipedia artical..

[Uuuurk]

@myndy86 Why would the soil damages be more when they switch over? U know what soil damage is? I see comparisons between ecological and conventinol farmers yield almost every week. First u say organic farms have much more yield now u say they might get close to have the same yield?Many orgF use more machinery and thus get more soil damage.I would guess that if u go to a farmer in a undeveloped country learn him good agricultural strategics, organic or not he will get a better yield then before

[Uuuurk]

@myndy86 U r aware that ppl donate money to greenpeace because they r against GMO. Being against GMO is a income as selling GMO is for monsanto. Anyway as I pointed out you try to make this report look importent by saying that there were 400 scientests and u were wrong. Not all were scientests some were social scientests not agricultural, many of the scientests that contributed to the report critisised so heavy its impossible to critisise it more.