Yes!.....Cheerios to go non-GMO......

[Doer]

most times I can compensate for my own liberal bias

I can hold it steady if you can. The mirror I mean. I take it kinda like this.

Life ain't nothing but a happy, happy riddle. Wait...funny, funny.

 

[doublejj]

Your stated goal is to abolish the practice of genetically modified crops, so you want to decide what I eat and as you said you don't get to decide what's good for me, I do.

No I said I wish to abolish my consumption of GMO's. I could care less what you choose to eat, why do you care what I choose? You don't even want me to have the choice. Your stance is why medical marijuana is still outlawed in many states.

 

[Dr Kynes]

No I said I wish to abolish my consumption of GMO's. I could care less what you choose to eat, why do you care what I choose? You don't even want me to have the choice. Your stance is why medical marijuana is still outlawed in many states.

if you want to avoid GMO's become a subsistence farmer.

otherwise you are imposing your Gris-Gris on the rest of society through your irrational dietary restrictions and your demand everything be labeled beyond all reason.

people who are allergic to peanuts should take responsibility for their issue and NOT eat foods which might be prepared with peanuts.
those who are lactose intolerant (lol, the only intolerance allowed, except for intolerance of intolerance...) should figure out how to avoid milk products.
people who are allergic to shellfish should grab the bull by the horns and keep shellfish away from their delicate digestive tracts.

insisting that everybody else submit to endless idiotic warnings about how "this product was prepared in a facility that processes tree nuts, pea nuts, soy, dairy and shellfish" is ridiculous, and this is for REAL medical conditions.

vegans, vegetarians, macrobiotic dingbats, raw foodies, and whatnot should either make like the jews hindus and moslems and set up their own food supply systems, adhering to their specific dietary superstitions, or STFU.

people who are terrified of GMO's "Contaminating" them with "Tainted Genetics" should be put in the stocks in the town square and be subjected to humiliating scorn from the rest of the village.

 

[desert dude]

No I said I wish to abolish my consumption of GMO's. I could care less what you choose to eat, why do you care what I choose? You don't even want me to have the choice. Your stance is why medical marijuana is still outlawed in many states.

I support your right to spend your money as you see fit. There are companies that cater to your fear of GMOs, and they label their products with "contains no GMOs", i.e. you have a choice. What you said was that you want to force labeling on companies as a method to force them to stop using GMOs, i.e. you want to deny the rest of us a choice. I don't support that. I see absolutely nothing wrong with GMO crops, or selective breeding of crops. Both methods achieve more or less the same result, but genetic modification does it faster and better.

Here is what you said:

"The sooner we get busy labeling GMO's, the sooner less will be grown. It will be a self correcting problem over time. Firm pressure relentlessly applied, will achieve the desired result."

 

[canndo]

if you want to avoid GMO's become a subsistence farmer.

otherwise you are imposing your Gris-Gris on the rest of society through your irrational dietary restrictions and your demand everything be labeled beyond all reason.

people who are allergic to peanuts should take responsibility for their issue and NOT eat foods which might be prepared with peanuts.
those who are lactose intolerant (lol, the only intolerance allowed, except for intolerance of intolerance...) should figure out how to avoid milk products.
people who are allergic to shellfish should grab the bull by the horns and keep shellfish away from their delicate digestive tracts.

insisting that everybody else submit to endless idiotic warnings about how "this product was prepared in a facility that processes tree nuts, pea nuts, soy, dairy and shellfish" is ridiculous, and this is for REAL medical conditions.

vegans, vegetarians, macrobiotic dingbats, raw foodies, and whatnot should either make like the jews hindus and moslems and set up their own food supply systems, adhering to their specific dietary superstitions, or STFU.

people who are terrified of GMO's "Contaminating" them with "Tainted Genetics" should be put in the stocks in the town square and be subjected to humiliating scorn from the rest of the village.

In short, we don't really have the right to east what we wish in this country. We only have the right to be good little consumers "eat what we tell you to eat or go away"

Simply because YOU worship at the altar of GMO's and advance regardless of the danger - (and advance for the same ofindustry as you get little or no beneifit from your GMOs - they are not cheaper, they are not better for you.


In short you are imposing your dietary religion upon mine. Who'd have thought?

 

[canndo]

I support your right to spend your money as you see fit. There are companies that cater to your fear of GMOs, and they label their products with "contains no GMOs", i.e. you have a choice. What you said was that you want to force labeling on companies as a method to force them to stop using GMOs, i.e. you want to deny the rest of us a choice. I don't support that. I see absolutely nothing wrong with GMO crops, or selective breeding of crops. Both methods achieve more or less the same result, but genetic modification does it faster and better.

Here is what you said:

"The sooner we get busy labeling GMO's, the sooner less will be grown. It will be a self correcting problem over time. Firm pressure relentlessly applied, will achieve the desired result."

You make the assumption that GMO foods are either more tastey, more healthy or more beneificial to you and so you should have that choice. In truth you can't tell the difference, so why rally for that trumpted up " choice" you are insisting on.

 

[joe macclennan]

otherwise you are imposing your Gris-Gris on the rest of society through your irrational dietary restrictions and your demand everything be labeled beyond all reason.
.

explain how adding three more words to a label is "beyond all reason" ??

people who are allergic to peanuts should take responsibility for their issue and NOT eat foods which might be prepared with peanuts.
those who are lactose intolerant (lol, the only intolerance allowed, except for intolerance of intolerance...) should figure out how to avoid milk products.
people who are allergic to shellfish should grab the bull by the horns and keep shellfish away from their delicate digestive tracts.

soooo exactly how are consumers to know if foods are prepared around possible allergy causing substances if they are not labeled....really?

wtf? this is probably one of the dumbest things you've ever posted.

insisting that everybody else submit to endless idiotic warnings about how "this product was prepared in a facility that processes tree nuts, pea nuts, soy, dairy and shellfish" is ridiculous, and this is for REAL medical conditions.

your logic is absurd...as in, there is no logic here. If you don't care about the warnings....DON'T READ THEM

simple really.

and as far as labeling these things being ridiculous, i'm sure there are millions of people who would disagree

people who are terrified of GMO's "Contaminating" them with "Tainted Genetics" should be put in the stocks in the town square and be subjected to humiliating scorn from the rest of the village.

retarded...just retarded

 

[desert dude]

You make the assumption that GMO foods are either more tastey, more healthy or more beneificial to you and so you should have that choice. In truth you can't tell the difference, so why rally for that trumpted up " choice" you are insisting on.

I don't make any of those assumptions. I believe GMO foods are cheaper to produce thereby making them cheaper to the consumer. Healthy, tasty, beneficial is a dead heat probably.

I rally for that choice because there are 7 billion people on the planet, each one hungry on a daily basis. Some of them will starve if the cost of food increases. If your goal is population control then "non GMO" is pretty good start.

 

[cannabineer]

Those like Kubrick are the ones who imagined Krishna and Buddha out of human imagination. Figments of our imagination don't create themselves.

To the bolded: I disagree. This can be argued vigorously.

 

[joe macclennan]

I don't make any of those assumptions. I believe GMO foods are cheaper to produce thereby making them cheaper to the consumer. Healthy, tasty, beneficial is a dead heat probably.

I rally for that choice because there are 7 billion people on the planet, each one hungry on a daily basis. Some of them will starve if the cost of food increases. If your goal is population control then "non GMO" is pretty good start.

I rally for those 7 billion learning how to grow their own food.

and having the choice to grow gmo or non gmo crops.

as far as the cheaper for the consumer. Sure it is, but we should be given the right to choose.

that is all

 

[cannabineer]

The evidence mounts, but those who fancy themselves as real - macho men, the ones who scoff at vegitarians and vegans are perfectly willing to eat GMO foods with gusto, oh, and they are the same ones who claim that they take responsiblity for their own health. So, in short, they claim to be "taking care of themselves", contrary to the unwashed masses who want "free medical care" while obviously stuffing their face with crap. But these self righteous don't even know what the hell they are eating and claim that everything is ok because a company with a terrible track record told them that the food they are given is just fine. Yeah, it all makes huge sense. "but the marlboro man said they help my digestion..... what the hell happened?

I realize this will be a lost post, since you haven't answered one of my questions posed to you in quite a long time.

But how, and to what degree, is accepting GM in my food a dereliction of my responsibility to my health? I cannot find any useful data ... just value judgments dressed up as reason. I'd like to find something more real.

The mention of Monsanto is a classic argumentum ad hominem (and not in the sense used often in this forum, where ad hom has become shorthand for a personal attack). While I heartily agree that Monsanto has played some dirty pool, this does not suffice to prove that Monsanto's GM crops are bad, or bad for us. Are there any actual, not inferential data to allow me to gain a sense of the degree to which rejecting GM food improves my health, and my discharging my duty to maintain it?

 

[cannabineer]

And that's why I demand labeling......because you don't get to decide what's good for me, I do!.....as it is right now, if it don't say Non-GMO, I won't buy it. If they label it, I can decide for myself......

But when you say "less will be grown, and that is good" you are leading a moral crusade. It becomes no longer about individual choice but society-wide pressure. At the point at which that raises my food costs without demonstrated benefit, I'll be annoyed.

 

[Dr Kynes]

In short, we don't really have the right to east what we wish in this country. We only have the right to be good little consumers "eat what we tell you to eat or go away"

Simply because YOU worship at the altar of GMO's and advance regardless of the danger - (and advance for the same ofindustry as you get little or no beneifit from your GMOs - they are not cheaper, they are not better for you.


In short you are imposing your dietary religion upon mine. Who'd have thought?

you have the right to "east" whatever you choose, you do NOT have the right to demand that others bow to your irrational desires or your dietary superstitions.

wanna keep kosher? theres ways to do that, but if i dont want to produce kosher food i do not have to. you can shop elsewhere.
wanna keep halal? ditto.
wanna avoid beef? ditto
wanna avoid peanuts? ditto
wanna avoid shellfish? ditto
wanna avoid dairy? ditto.
wanna eat vegan? ditto.

if i chose to grow my produce using magic fertilizers made from worm poop and composted vegetable material exclusively, then i can do that. i may chose to blast that info on the label, or i may not, it's my choice as a producer.

as a "consumer" you have no right to demand i kowtow to your fears, only those facts which have scientific merit should be put on the label by law.

nobody is trying to stop you from paying 3x more for the same shit with a silly "non-GMO" or "Organic" label, and you only have actionable complaints if the claims made are fraudulent.

if you REALLY wanna adhere to some dietary restriction the only way to do it is to seek out those who will produce what you desire, or produce it yourself. if theres a market for it, it will be produced, or you can produce a surplus and sell it to those who adhere to your same beliefs, no matter how crazy.

thats Capitalism.

and it works.

 

[Dr Kynes]

explain how adding three more words to a label is "beyond all reason" ??



soooo exactly how are consumers to know if foods are prepared around possible allergy causing substances if they are not labeled....really?

wtf? this is probably one of the dumbest things you've ever posted.





your logic is absurd...as in, there is no logic here. If you don't care about the warnings....DON'T READ THEM

simple really.

and as far as labeling these things being ridiculous, i'm sure there are millions of people who would disagree




retarded...just retarded

if you demand special dietary considerations, SEEK IT OUT.

you have no right to force me to submit to your desires.

you can pay extra for all the Organic, Fair Trade, Artisinal, Non-GMO, Vegan, Cruelty Free, Hand Harvested, Micro-Culture, Sustainable products exclusively harvested by dewy virgins on the south side of Mount Aetna by the light of the full moon products that you want.

insisting that this be the default option for everybody else, or the product has to have a giant warning label cautioning against the hazards of less spectacularly esoteric methods of production is ridiculous.

if you simply MUST have products adhering to your very special desires and bizarre requirements, then you should go into the business of producing these products.

maybe youll become rich.

 

[Dr Kynes]

You make the assumption that GMO foods are either more tastey, more healthy or more beneificial to you and so you should have that choice. In truth you can't tell the difference, so why rally for that trumpted up " choice" you are insisting on.

au contraire.

YOU make the assumption that GMO products are less tasty, less nutritious, dangerous to the natural, wild, indigenous domestic crop cultivar ecosystem (lolwut?) and further assume that GMO crops are in any way distinct from traditional crops by any means other then gene sequencing.

if you simply must have GMO-free foods, grow them yourself, or run a DNA test on every kernel of wheat you will consume, before you grind it into flour on your hand cranked grist mill.

 

[desert dude]

I rally for those 7 billion learning how to grow their own food.

and having the choice to grow gmo or non gmo crops.

as far as the cheaper for the consumer. Sure it is, but we should be given the right to choose.

that is all

There is not much for me to disagree with in your post.

Farmers DO have the choice whether to grow GMO crops or "heirloom" crops. In the case of corn, soybeans, and cotton about 90% (not certain of the actual percentages) CHOOSE to grow GMOs because it reduces their production costs. The ones who steal patented seeds reduce their production costs even more.

 

[Dr Kynes]

But when you say "less will be grown, and that is good" you are leading a moral crusade. It becomes no longer about individual choice but society-wide pressure. At the point at which that raises my food costs without demonstrated benefit, I'll be annoyed.

just say NO to GMO seal blubber and non-Organic garbage dumps.

 

[joe macclennan]

if you demand special dietary considerations, SEEK IT OUT.

you have no right to force me to submit to your desires.

you can pay extra for all the Organic, Fair Trade, Artisinal, Non-GMO, Vegan, Cruelty Free, Hand Harvested, Micro-Culture, Sustainable products exclusively harvested by dewy virgins on the south side of Mount Aetna by the light of the full moon products that you want.

insisting that this be the default option for everybody else, or the product has to have a giant warning label cautioning against the hazards of less spectacularly esoteric methods of production is ridiculous.

if you simply MUST have products adhering to your very special desires and bizarre requirements, then you should go into the business of producing these products.

maybe youll become rich.

if you demand special dietary considerations, SEEK IT OUT

ppl do, they read the labels.....duh

can it be more simple?




the question I'll pose is if gmo products are so good, it seems like this would be a selling point....

Why NOT add "contains gmo" to the label?

do you think the extra ink would break em?

maybe they'll become rich

 

[Dr Kynes]

if you demand special dietary considerations, SEEK IT OUT

ppl do, they read the labels.....duh

can it be more simple?




the question I'll pose is if gmo products are so good, it seems like this would be a selling point....

Why NOT add "contains gmo" to the label?

do you think the extra ink would break em?

maybe they'll become rich

and theres where you fail.

a big happy voluntary label advertising "GMO Free!" is a good thing. as long as the label is only applied to products which are actually "GMO Free" then thats all that is needed.

HOWEVER...

a big scary label reading "May Contain GMO's" has no value save to inflame the fears of the ignorant, and give a boost to the "GMO Free" producers, since why put a warning label on something if it is harless, ergo GMO's must be dangerous...

thats how we get allergen warnings like "May Contain Peanuts" on a jar of motherfucking PEANUT BUTTER.

if you are allergic to peanuts, dont buy motherfucking peanut butter.

if you really are scared of GMO's, seek out the products already sporting the "GMO Free!" label.

it's not that hard to figure out.

"Warning! All Mc Donalds Products may contain, or have come into contact with Beef and Beef Products!" just so hindus wont be surprised when they eat at a Burger Joint.

"Warning! This Bacon may not be Kosher!"

"Caution! Nutella may contain Tree Nuts and Chocolate!"

"Danger! do not use hairdryer in bathtub or shower!"

"Caution! Razor Blades may be sharp. keep away from children!"

or how about this one:

"Warning! Motor Vehicle Traffic may not stop for jaywalkers!"

when will the warning label frenzy end?

 

[joe macclennan]

a big scary label reading "May Contain GMO's" has no value save to inflame the fears of the ignorant, and give a boost to the "GMO Free" producers, since why put a warning label on something if it is harless, ergo GMO's must be dangerous...


"Warning! All Mc Donalds Products may contain, or hav

when will the warning label frenzy end?

and there is where YOU fail. If gmo products are essentially the same as non. There is nothing scary about a label.

Informing consumers about a products' ingredients list has been practiced for decades....nothing wrong with that. If you choose to be ignorant on what you consume...That is your choice.

You have no right to force me to submit to your desires.

again, if you do not care to read the labels....DON'T!

Really, what is so difficult about that?