Monsanto cannabis yes or no? The DNA Protection Act of 2013

[Doer]

If we wanted to live outside of the mud, we had to contend with the all the nay saying, and handwaving....what about this, what about that? The Dirt Gods won't like it, whatever.

Then, we couldn't live near a swamp, but didn't mind a mosquito bite. They don't bath in France to this day, though the Romans did and the Japanese always have.

The Curies' died so you may see the Time.

Can you not see my point? There is no other way if we don't want to live under a rock. Somebody has got to try it. That is me. I'm old, don't care, glad to do, would not be alive but for GMO, etc.

You do not have to and you know that. GMO is all labeled already, just look it up. I have.

The rest, you are just trying to teach ole, grandma Doer, how to suck an egg. I learned that from the snakes, long ago.

 

[camillo]

prove it, or it is only fear based

can you use the Net ? there're many search engines

and i say: prove that GMO is safe,
....or it's only MONEY based

 

[camillo]

See. If you are against genetic research, you are against renewable energy also

LOL
i'm against GMO
AND
i'm NOT against Hemp! *


*Hemp is the only good renewable energy resource!

 

[camillo]

:facepalm:

jeez, it's all going wrong just as it was predicted in a 1995 book!
`The industrial society and its Future` (Theodore K.)
It was considered a "Cassandra" at that time, but now it's all just as described in the book.

and it predicted that the genetic engineering will destroy humanity.

And here we are:
we have such monsters like Monsanto

 

[camillo]

Long term safety? NOTHING is tested for long term safety. We do that.

CANNABIS (NATURAL cannabis) is TESTED for long term safety. Humans use it since 10000 years ago.

 

[camillo]

You do not have to and you know that. GMO is all labeled already, just look it up. I have.

not true!
there's no choice.
I can drink non-GMO milk but the cows can be feeded with GMO vegetables.
Is that milk natural?
no! And so i can get cancer.

Another case:
I grow NATURAL (not GMO) corn and my neighbour grow GMO corn.
When that GMO corn contaminates (seeds via wind, but in case of other coltures it could happens also via pollen) my soil i will grow , without even noticing it, some GMO corn.

What happens next,
simple: Monsanto or other GMO-stuff companies sue me for copyright/patent infrigment and i LOSE EVERYTHING:
my soil, my house , EVERYTHING.
This continue to happend (many are the cases already occured like the one example i've just described, search it on the Net! ) and i suspet that the contamination has been, in many cases, deliberately done by the GMO-stuff firm....
...that's why they are so "speedy" in doing "random checks" on the cultivations sorrounding the licensed GMO crop

this apply to crop
but it could apply to many other cultivation as well
think about HEMP:
you cultivation could create seeds 'cause of pollen coming from a nearby GMO-HEMP cultivation.
and then you're f*k*d!

 

[Doer]

Hold on. You don't get cancer from GMO, and don't show that stupid relgious artifact, call the cancer mouse study.

Those were GMO mice, designed to get cancer.

There is no proof. There is no litigated harm except against Monsanto. That rip-off has been proven,\\
\
If this GMO stuff is so bad, why does Monstanto have to sue grain operators for stealing it?

It cannot be worthless and valuable at the same time.

Right now, NO harm is not shown to be present, yet you believe it causes cancer, with fake evidence.

But, I bet you support, Nuke power Poison. And is a known and proven, serious, 100,000 year, DNA deformation poison, you think that is OK, to solve Global warming....I bet.

If so, you are a card carrying evil Saganist that will believe nothing I say.

 

[Doer]

If you think that accidentally crossing can happen, it cannot. Nor does corn seed blow around easily on the wind. You have been so lied to, and they way you spout the sound bites show that.

Not only that, I seriously doubt you have a neighbor growing GMO against your field. But, if so, aren't his yields in the bad years, just stunning compared to yours?

And you think Monsanto has to dough to go after you for a few accidental plants you ate? No.

If you stripped seed, to replant, then you are breaking the law. But, you don't want GMO, so you would not steal.

Law is based solely on intent, my son.

Did you do anything, to promote GMO grow? Of course, you do not. You will chop that stuff as soon as you see it.

See the how the system works? It is nothing but the lie the GMO hippy lawyers claim. They are conducting the rip off of the American Farmer.

You are peddling their rip-off lies.

 

[Dr Kynes]

if you guys were gonna try and ressurect this thread, you shoulda called me, i woulda brought my kit.

 

[camillo]

Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize


http://ac.els-cdn.com/S0278691512005637/1-s2.0-S0278691512005637-main.pdf?_tid=6cf64a2e-92c5-11e3-8938-00000aab0f6c&acdnat=1392086418_2dfd610689b1959fea9c354ce40c8098

Not long after the study came out, FCT created a new editorial position—Associate Editor for Biotechnology—and appointed none other than a former Monsanto employee, Richard E. Goodman, to the post.
So the article was "retracted" (censored) by the monsanto employee


GMO causes CANCER.


and then you say nonsense like:"If you think that accidentally crossing can happen,"

YES, it already happened.
It happened in Mexico. Mexico has been contaminated and all the mais (corn) mexican cultivations are at risk

And monsanto also tried to cover up the scandal:
Mexico Corn Contamination: How Monsanto & University of California Tried to Silence Dr. Ignacio Chapela

http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_17843.cfm




GMO Cotton is causing a wave of suicides in the cotton cultivators of India.
The pattern is clear: ~ 90% of suicides are in zones where GE cotton is cultivated. They kill themself because they (and their economy) have been ruined by Monsanto GE cotton.


You can also watch the film (but i know you already watched it ) "The World according to monsanto"
I dont post here the streaming-link for that film, 'cause i know that you will immediately inform Monsanto (your employer) so that it can make pressure to censore the video.

 

[Dr Kynes]

Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize


http://ac.els-cdn.com/S0278691512005637/1-s2.0-S0278691512005637-main.pdf?_tid=6cf64a2e-92c5-11e3-8938-00000aab0f6c&acdnat=1392086418_2dfd610689b1959fea9c354ce40c8098

Not long after the study came out, FCT created a new editorial position—Associate Editor for Biotechnology—and appointed none other than a former Monsanto employee, Richard E. Goodman, to the post.
So the article was "retracted" (censored) by the monsanto employee


GMO causes CANCER.


and then you say nonsense like:"If you think that accidentally crossing can happen,"

YES, it already happened.
It happened in Mexico. Mexico has been contaminated and all the mais (corn) mexican cultivations are at risk

And monsanto also tried to cover up the scandal:
Mexico Corn Contamination: How Monsanto & University of California Tried to Silence Dr. Ignacio Chapela

http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_17843.cfm




GMO Cotton is causing a wave of suicides in the cotton cultivators of India.
The pattern is clear: ~ 90% of suicides are in zones where GE cotton is cultivated. They kill themself because they (and their economy) have been ruined by Monsanto GE cotton.


You can also watch the film (but i know you already watched it ) "The World according to monsanto"
I dont post here the streaming-link for that film, 'cause i know that you will immediately inform Monsanto (your employer) so that it can make pressure to censore the video.

the serelini "study" was retracted because it was SHIT (the same retarded nonsense that has been reposted in this thread no less then 12 times so far)

it was examined and rejected as garbage by the peer review system, not by monstanto.

even the results of his "study" didnt show what his press releases claimed.

the actual results:

over their entire 2 year lifespan, Onco-Mice (gmo rodents designed to get cancer, for cancer research...) got cancer.

they got cancer when fed "GMO" corn
they got cancer when fed "organic" corn
they got cancer when fed a mix of GMO and "organic" corn.
they got LESS cancer when fed GMO corn, "organic" corn or a mix of the two, when their water was spiked with glyphosate (the active ingredient in roundup) far in excess of the safety standards for glyphosate exposure.

so Roundup is a health potion.

sounds legit.

 

[camillo]

" You will chop that stuff as soon as you see it."


how can i know if it's GE or not?
I will know when monsanto sues me and so steal my land and my house

Or, if i'm "lucky" it will not happen so fast. But i will know that the plant is a GE plant when i GET CANCER after a few years.

so please stop marketing your firm. This's bullshit.
I know that you, as everybody else, have a family and you have someway to work to feed them.
But the work that you're doing for monsanto (you're doing what i call "DEATH PROPAGANDA" ) is a very bad thing.
Dont you want your child to leave in a healty world , eating healty food? or do you want them to get cancer?

So, my advice (dont take it as offensive) is:
PLEASE, stop working in the P.R. of Monsanto and FIND a honest job!

remember, after the third reich some germans said "we were only executing orders"....
...Do you really want to use such a phrase, in the year ~ 2020, when your son gets cancer and he asks you "Dad, WHY, WHY have you done this? Why did you contribute in the cancer epidemics? Why didnt you STOP monsanto, instead of aiding it ?

i think we're done.
please consider my advice

 

[camillo]

doer's collegue: "over their entire 2 year lifespan, Onco-Mice (gmo rodents designed to get cancer, for cancer research...) got cancer. "

http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_28863.cfm

But as Séralini and his supporters point out, “the offending strain of rat (the Sprague-Dawley) is used routinely in the United States—including sometimes by Monsanto to study the carcinogenicity and chronic toxicity of chemicals.” What’s more, Séralini told Sustainable Pulse, the FCT in 2004 published a study by Monsanto finding the same strain of GMO corn (NK603) safe after measuring its effects on only ten Sprague-Dawley rats for three months only.[/b]

“Only studies pointing to adverse effects of GMOs are rigorously scrutinized on their experimental and statistical methods,” he said, “while those who say GMOs are safe are taken at face value.”

we're done.
до свидания

 

[Dr Kynes]

doer's collegue: "over their entire 2 year lifespan, Onco-Mice (gmo rodents designed to get cancer, for cancer research...) got cancer. "

http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_28863.cfm

But as Séralini and his supporters point out, “the offending strain of rat (the Sprague-Dawley) is used routinely in the United States—including sometimes by Monsanto to study the carcinogenicity and chronic toxicity of chemicals.” What’s more, Séralini told Sustainable Pulse, the FCT in 2004 published a study by Monsanto finding the same strain of GMO corn (NK603) safe after measuring its effects on only ten Sprague-Dawley rats for three months only.[/b]

“Only studies pointing to adverse effects of GMOs are rigorously scrutinized on their experimental and statistical methods,” he said, “while those who say GMOs are safe are taken at face value.”

we're done.
до свидания

youre retarded.

thats not how you convince people of the "dangers" of GMO's.

find a reputable study, ANY reputable study, cite it, and support your claims.

trotting out discredited shit from dopey eco-loon publications and websites and then declaring yourself infallible is NOT the way to succeed.

but it does demonstrate your petulance and doucheyness in bold relief.

 

[canndo]

youre retarded.

thats not how you convince people of the "dangers" of GMO's.

find a reputable study, ANY reputable study, cite it, and support your claims.

trotting out discredited shit from dopey eco-loon publications and websites and then declaring yourself infallible is NOT the way to succeed.

but it does demonstrate your petulance and doucheyness in bold relief.

As always - follow the money. How much money is there in studies that show damage vs the money in studies that show no damage?


Monstanto not only used the same rats, but the same number, and their study showed no such tumors. But GMOs may or may not cause problems in and of themselves, what they DO is depleat the commons for company gain. Sooner or later, if nothing else, this will come back and bite us all.

GM crops adjusted to withstand 2,4,D have just been approved. Why do we need a variant if the first products are so successful?

 

[Dr Kynes]

As always - follow the money. How much money is there in studies that show damage vs the money in studies that show no damage?


Monstanto not only used the same rats, but the same number, and their study showed no such tumors. But GMOs may or may not cause problems in and of themselves, what they DO is depleat the commons for company gain. Sooner or later, if nothing else, this will come back and bite us all.

GM crops adjusted to withstand 2,4,D have just been approved. Why do we need a variant if the first products are so successful?

pointing at something being changed and murmuring "Cui Bono" does not transform something which has been demonstrated harmless into a poison.

producers of products are required to demonstrate their shit isnt dangerous.

this costs money.

thus producers of new GMO's pay to have their shit tested, by GOVERNMENT REQUIREMENT not as a scheme to fool us into eating poison.

that there is no Underwriter's Laboratory for Ag products doing independent testing is not terrifying to me.

if this is so horrifying for you, then i suggest remedying the problem.

of course any independent lab will be pilloried for employing scientists who might have worked for monsanto in the past, might have gone to university with a person who works for monasnto, or might have sat too close to a monsanto employee on a bus.

conspiracy lunatics are never satisfied with any evidence, they just make more wild claims.

 

[canndo]

pointing at something being changed and murmuring "Cui Bono" does not transform something which has been demonstrated harmless into a poison.

producers of products are required to demonstrate their shit isnt dangerous.

this costs money.

thus producers of new GMO's pay to have their shit tested, by GOVERNMENT REQUIREMENT not as a scheme to fool us into eating poison.

that there is no Underwriter's Laboratory for Ag products doing independent testing is not terrifying to me.

if this is so horrifying for you, then i suggest remedying the problem.

of course any independent lab will be pilloried for employing scientists who might have worked for monsanto in the past, might have gone to university with a person who works for monasnto, or might have sat too close to a monsanto employee on a bus.

conspiracy lunatics are never satisfied with any evidence, they just make more wild claims.

Funny thing, independent researchers are customarily denied access to the company's products for those purposes, and their reports tend to be marginalized or worse. Producers do pay for studies - which might very well skew the results. Again - the money. No, Monsanto wouldn't poison us, and neither would the tobaco comanies.


No conspirices in big business hmmm? Really?

 

[Dr Kynes]

Funny thing, independent researchers are customarily denied access to the company's products for those purposes, and their reports tend to be marginalized or worse. Producers do pay for studies - which might very well skew the results. Again - the money. No, Monsanto wouldn't poison us, and neither would the tobaco comanies.


No conspirices in big business hmmm? Really?

tobacco companies didnt poison anyone.

they dint hold you down and force that first Lucky Strike between your lips.

health professionals have been saying "Smoking is bad for you" since the 50's.

the lefties just wanted to sue them for "defective products" and "being meanies", so the tobacco companies (made HUGE by regulation's pressures) covered their balls and went on the offensive.

but thats just proof that they are "meanies"

 

[canndo]

tobacco companies didnt poison anyone.

they dint hold you down and force that first Lucky Strike between your lips.

health professionals have been saying "Smoking is bad for you" since the 50's.

the lefties just wanted to sue them for "defective products" and "being meanies", so the tobacco companies (made HUGE by regulation's pressures) covered their balls and went on the offensive.

but thats just proof that they are "meanies"

I know you better than that doc. No, no one held anyone down, but they managed to addict tens of millions, while making their product more addictive and more enticing at the same time. The "health professioals have been saying "smoking is bad for you" since the 50's is crap as well. You don't get to claim this and still demand hard proof that GMOs are bad before anything is done to curtail it's use. You might easily be saying the exact same thing you are about GMOs in those "50's" - no proof.

The tobacco companies had proof, they didn't release it. THey knew and had other "professionals" state and show that smoking wasn't bad - They introduced "scientific doubt" into the converstation about the safety of tobacco and inhibited all sorts of studies until the evidence was overwhelming. gee, maybe kinda like Monstanto might be doing hmmm?


They were meanies because the lied under oath to congress, they sought to and did make their products ever more addictive and they knew long before that their products tended to, over the long run, kill people. So you figure that "the lefties" managed to change the course of the tobacco industry and a "leftie" dropped all those secret documents off on a doorstep - damn those leftist communist scum.

 

[Antidisestablishmentarian]

Back then they also didn't have the studies reviewed by the FDA. Now all of the GMO products get tested, then the results are viewed by the FDA and a determination is made.

Apples and oranges.