feds 'contemplate' new laws to regulate cannabis, do you want gmo weed?

[DNAprotection]

324 votes so far (now shooting for 420)


As the feds 'contemplate' ( = dog and pony show to help get us all to swallow the coming new regs etc) new laws to regulate cannabis its a good time to let the corpsgov know how you feel about genetically engineered cannabis (or GMO cannabis as some might say) and one way to do that is by voting in the poll here @RIU in the politics forum:


https://www.rollitup.org/politics/602854-monsanto-cannabis-yes-no-dna.html

 

[racerboy71]

Depends on what you mean by GMO weed.. if they some how managed to bring the THC levels up to 50% or so by genetically modifying cannabis, hell yeah I'm all for it..
GMO doesn't equal bad.. your applying the label of.Monsanto to anything GMO is very misleading and discredits GMO imvho..

 

[DNAprotection]

so in other words if you had a good cow you would trade her to someone that says they'll give you magic beans and a golden goose...maybe your right, after all they did such a good job with ge corn

 

[racerboy71]

so in other words if you had a good cow you would trade her to someone that says they'll give you magic beans and a golden goose...maybe your right, after all they did such a good job with ge corn

What?? Where did I say I'm giving up my stock pile of genetics for GMO cannabis w 50% THC?
I simply said not all GMO is the evil empire! And not all GMO is Monsanto as they're but one company in a sea of many and that by attaching their name to all things GMO you're trying to slant peoples views into believing anything GMO is bad because we all know Monsanto is the evil empire ..
I will not vote on your poll because you don't make a distinction between GMO and Monsanto, when anyone with half a brain knows that not all GMO comes from the evil empire and not all GMO is bad..

 

[DNAprotection]

What?? Where did I say I'm giving up my stock pile of genetics for GMO cannabis w 50% THC?
I simply said not all GMO is the evil empire! And not all GMO is Monsanto as they're but one company in a sea of many and that by attaching their name to all things GMO you're trying to slant peoples views into believing anything GMO is bad because we all know Monsanto is the evil empire ..
I will not vote on your poll because you don't make a distinction between GMO and Monsanto, when anyone with half a brain knows that not all GMO comes from the evil empire and not all GMO is bad..

i sincerely hope you never give up your seeds stock because i predict we will one day all need them to help repair the genetics of the species (if possible) after monsanto et al gets through...
further i think our naturally occurring seed stock will still be illegal when the smoke clears on the up and coming new fed laws...
monsanto et al has a shot at finally achieving total control over a crop species with cannabis in that unlike corn the naturally occurring varieties are already illegal...
as to your other point:

[h=2]U.S. and Monsanto Dominate Global Market for GM Seeds[/h][h=2]

• By Organic Consumers Association
  August 7, 2013
  
  

For related articles and more information, please visit OCA's Millions Against Monsanto page and our Genetic Engineering page.

One glance at the statistics and it’s clear: The U.S. and Monsanto dominate the global market for genetically engineered crops. Forty percent of the world’s genetically modified (GM) crops are grown in the U.S., where Monsanto controls 80 percent of the GM corn market, and 93 percent of the GM soy market.

Worldwide, 282 million acres are planted in Monsanto’s GM crops, up from only 3 million in 1996, according to Food and Water Watch.

Forty percent of U.S. cropland, or 151.4 million acres, are planted in Monsanto’s crops. Monsanto owns 1,676 seed, plant and other applicable patents.

Maybe it’s time we ask ourselves: How long will we tolerate the growing monopolization and genetic engineering of seeds by a monopolistic pesticide company that poses a deadly threat to our health, our environment and the future of our food?

Global GM Seed Market
40.8: Percent of world’s GM crops grown in the U.S.
Source: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech... (ISAAA), 2012

76.3: Percent of world’s GM crops grown by the U.S., Brazil, and Argentina.
Source: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech... (ISAAA), 2012

9: Number of countries responsible for 97% of the world’s GMO crops.
Source: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech...(ISAAA), 2012

8: Number of GMO crops that have been approved for commercial production worldwide (soy, cotton, corn, canola, sugarbeet, papaya, squash/yellow zucchini, and alfalfa).
Source: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech...(ISAAA), 2012

11: Number of countries that grow GM soybean (81% of global planting).
Source: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech...(ISAAA), 2012

15. Number of countries that grow GM cotton (81% of global planting).
Source: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech...(ISAAA), 2012

17: Number of countries that grow GM maize (35% of global planting).
Source: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech...(ISAAA), 2012

4: Number of countries that grow GM canola (30% of global planting).
Source: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech...(ISAAA), 2012

Monsanto Monopoly
80: Percent of U.S. corn grown from Monsanto patented GMO seeds.
Source: Food And Water Watch, 2013

93: Percent of U.S. soy grown from Monsanto patented GMO seeds.
Source: Food And Water Watch, 2013

27: Percent of Monsanto profits that came from the sale of Roundup herbicide.
Source: Food And Water Watch, 2013

1,676: Number of seed, plant, and other applicable patents owned by Monsanto.
Source: Food And Water Watch, 2013

282 million: Number of acres Monsanto products are grown worldwide (up from 3 million in 1996).
Source: Food And Water Watch, 2013

151.4 million: Number of acres Monsanto’s GE crop traits are grown in the U.S. (40% of total cropland).
Source: Food and Water Watch, 2013

95: Percent of the U.S. GE corn seed market containing Monsanto’s traits.
Source: Food And Water Watch, 2013

89: Percent of the U.S. GE cotton seed market containing Monsanto’s traits.
Source: Food And Water Watch, 2013

Compiled by Zack Kaldveer, assistant media director for the Organic Consumers Association

[/h]

 

[GreenSummit]

i sincerely hope you never give up your seeds stock because i predict we will one day all need them to help repair the genetics of the species (if possible) after monsanto et al gets through...
further i think our naturally occurring seed stock will still be illegal when the smoke clears on the up and coming new fed laws...
monsanto et al has a shot at finally achieving total control over a crop species with cannabis in that unlike corn the naturally occurring varieties are already illegal...
as to your other point:

U.S. and Monsanto Dominate Global Market for GM Seeds

• By Organic Consumers Association
  August 7, 2013
  
  

For related articles and more information, please visit OCA's Millions Against Monsanto page and our Genetic Engineering page.

One glance at the statistics and it’s clear: The U.S. and Monsanto dominate the global market for genetically engineered crops. Forty percent of the world’s genetically modified (GM) crops are grown in the U.S., where Monsanto controls 80 percent of the GM corn market, and 93 percent of the GM soy market.

Worldwide, 282 million acres are planted in Monsanto’s GM crops, up from only 3 million in 1996, according to Food and Water Watch.

Forty percent of U.S. cropland, or 151.4 million acres, are planted in Monsanto’s crops. Monsanto owns 1,676 seed, plant and other applicable patents.

Maybe it’s time we ask ourselves: How long will we tolerate the growing monopolization and genetic engineering of seeds by a monopolistic pesticide company that poses a deadly threat to our health, our environment and the future of our food?

Global GM Seed Market
40.8: Percent of world’s GM crops grown in the U.S.
Source: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech... (ISAAA), 2012

76.3: Percent of world’s GM crops grown by the U.S., Brazil, and Argentina.
Source: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech... (ISAAA), 2012

9: Number of countries responsible for 97% of the world’s GMO crops.
Source: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech...(ISAAA), 2012

8: Number of GMO crops that have been approved for commercial production worldwide (soy, cotton, corn, canola, sugarbeet, papaya, squash/yellow zucchini, and alfalfa).
Source: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech...(ISAAA), 2012

11: Number of countries that grow GM soybean (81% of global planting).
Source: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech...(ISAAA), 2012

15. Number of countries that grow GM cotton (81% of global planting).
Source: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech...(ISAAA), 2012

17: Number of countries that grow GM maize (35% of global planting).
Source: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech...(ISAAA), 2012

4: Number of countries that grow GM canola (30% of global planting).
Source: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech...(ISAAA), 2012

Monsanto Monopoly
80: Percent of U.S. corn grown from Monsanto patented GMO seeds.
Source: Food And Water Watch, 2013

93: Percent of U.S. soy grown from Monsanto patented GMO seeds.
Source: Food And Water Watch, 2013

27: Percent of Monsanto profits that came from the sale of Roundup herbicide.
Source: Food And Water Watch, 2013

1,676: Number of seed, plant, and other applicable patents owned by Monsanto.
Source: Food And Water Watch, 2013

282 million: Number of acres Monsanto products are grown worldwide (up from 3 million in 1996).
Source: Food And Water Watch, 2013

151.4 million: Number of acres Monsanto’s GE crop traits are grown in the U.S. (40% of total cropland).
Source: Food and Water Watch, 2013

95: Percent of the U.S. GE corn seed market containing Monsanto’s traits.
Source: Food And Water Watch, 2013

89: Percent of the U.S. GE cotton seed market containing Monsanto’s traits.
Source: Food And Water Watch, 2013

Compiled by Zack Kaldveer, assistant media director for the Organic Consumers Association

we need more people like you. and thanks for the comment earlier. i feel i have only become human in the last 2 years as i have had an incredible awakening in my thinking

 

[DNAprotection]

truth is we need more people like you <3

 

[Red1966]

I find it odd that you are worried about some corporation engineering a better crop of a plant THEY CAN NOT LEGALLY GROW.

 

[DNAprotection]

I find it odd that you are worried about some corporation engineering a better crop of a plant THEY CAN NOT LEGALLY GROW.

seriously?
have you read anything here?
do you watch the news or read news?
ok i'll help you catch up...
feds are contemplating new cannabis laws

ps...they also are hopelessly addicted to money and amendments...

 

[Dan Kone]

Depends on what you mean by GMO weed.. if they some how managed to bring the THC levels up to 50% or so by genetically modifying cannabis, hell yeah I'm all for it..
GMO doesn't equal bad.. your applying the label of.Monsanto to anything GMO is very misleading and discredits GMO imvho..

I agree with this. GMO's should be regulated and labeled, but not banned. GMO's can bring great advancement. I'd love a GMO that doubles potency and yield. However what will likely happen is they will come up with GMO's that are resistant to highly toxic new mitocides that a plant currently could not survive.

The regulation of GMO's is badly needed, but the idea we should ban them all is just hysteria that stands in the way of progress.

 

[Dan Kone]

so in other words if you had a good cow you would trade her to someone that says they'll give you magic beans and a golden goose...maybe your right, after all they did such a good job with ge corn

I'd trade that cow for one that produces a higher quality milk in larger volumes. GMO's are not magic nor are they a myth. They are science.

 

[DNAprotection]

I'd trade that cow for one that produces a higher quality milk in larger volumes. GMO's are not magic nor are they a myth. They are science.

trading for a better cow was not an option in the post your quoting, it was a 'golden goose' = money = usually bad $cience...

 

[Dan Kone]

trading for a better cow was not an option in the post your quoting, it was a 'golden goose' = money = usually bad $cience...

Industry experts getting together and genetically modifying a plant is generally doesn't qualify as "bad science".

And yes, trading for a better cow wasn't an option in your question, which was my point. You posed a false choice. Not every question has a binary solution. Sometimes there are many different options. The options in your mind seem to be either "happy organics filled with everything good in the world" or "evil science which has come here on the death star to destroy us all". But it's not that simple. While I do oppose using GMO's to modify plants to make them resistant to pesticides, I do not oppose scientific advancement in agriculture, including the creation of GMO's. Just labeling everything that is genetically modified as automatically bad is simply false. Nor is everything that is organic automatically good.

 

[PurpleBuz]

Industry experts getting together and genetically modifying a plant is generally doesn't qualify as "bad science".

.

Problem is the Anti-GMO religious zealots are focused on a scientific technique, rather than a specific modified variety. Genetically Modifying a strain is really nothing more than accelerated Plant Breeding and Selection. Something that humans have been doing since cultivation started. Despite what the God zealots think plants animals and humans are not as different as we think we are. Virus's, gene insertion, radiation, inter species crosses are all basic techniques that changes a varieties traits. Test what is bred, and stop lumping all GMO products together.

 

[DNAprotection]

Industry experts getting together and genetically modifying a plant is generally doesn't qualify as "bad science".

And yes, trading for a better cow wasn't an option in your question, which was my point. You posed a false choice. Not every question has a binary solution. Sometimes there are many different options. The options in your mind seem to be either "happy organics filled with everything good in the world" or "evil science which has come here on the death star to destroy us all". But it's not that simple. While I do oppose using GMO's to modify plants to make them resistant to pesticides, I do not oppose scientific advancement in agriculture, including the creation of GMO's. Just labeling everything that is genetically modified as automatically bad is simply false. Nor is everything that is organic automatically good.

i'm glad you used the word 'seem' otherwise you'd be way of base about what i think and dont think etc
further, the question was posed as a metaphor, the driving factor being 'greed' if you will...maybe you should have wrote the question instead of me?
i'm glad there is much though we seem to agree on
on the issue of 'science', think of all the gov inspired cannabis studies over the years, have they been trust worthy?
what about all the 'studies' that go into introducing new pharmaceuticals (in general), do you feel comfortable with that 'scientific' process?
this kinda goes in part to my point about $cience...


[video=youtube;UPccMlgug8A]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPccMlgug8A[/video]

 

[DNAprotection]

Problem is the Anti-GMO religious zealots are focused on a scientific technique, rather than a specific modified variety. Genetically Modifying a strain is really nothing more than accelerated Plant Breeding and Selection. Something that humans have been doing since cultivation started. Despite what the God zealots think plants animals and humans are not as different as we think we are. Virus's, gene insertion, radiation, inter species crosses are all basic techniques that changes a varieties traits. Test what is bred, and stop lumping all GMO products together.

truly im sorry to have to say that your post here is entirely inaccurate and misleading, you should do some research about such if you really believe that...and frankly bro it seems to me that it is you who are 'lumping' all people who have concerns about 'gmo's' into what you call 'anti gmo religious zealots'...just sayin...

 

[Dan Kone]

on the issue of 'science', think of all the gov inspired cannabis studies over the years, have they been trust worthy?

And what does that have to do with private corporations genetically modifying agricultural products?

what about all the 'studies' that go into introducing new pharmaceuticals (in general), do you feel comfortable with that 'scientific' process?

Yes I do. I don't feel comfortable with the lack of regulations, but the scientific process used to create them, yes.

this kinda goes in part to my point about $cience...

Yeah, put a dollar sign on science and it's evil. Well done. We should all live in caves and die before we are 30, because fuck science and money.

 

[DNAprotection]

And what does that have to do with private corporations genetically modifying agricultural products?



Yes I do. I don't feel comfortable with the lack of regulations, but the scientific process used to create them, yes.



Yeah, put a dollar sign on science and it's evil. Well done. We should all live in caves and die before we are 30, because fuck science and money.

as to do with what corporate 'science' (referring mostly to big corps) and gov 'science' (in general) have in common, its all about a desired outcome and what can be gotten away with...
as to the issue of trusting big corporate pharmaceutical 'science' the same applies and if you haven't had a friend or relative directly effected then just research the seemingly endless filings of class action suits over all the seemingly 'well tested' drugs and their unintended consequences etc...

"Yeah, put a dollar sign on science and it's evil. Well done. We should all live in caves and die before we are 30, because fuck science and money"

purely your words and assumptions, not my words or opinions bro...

 

[JackTheBongRipper]

as to do with what corporate 'science' (referring mostly to big corps) and gov 'science' (in general) have in common, its all about a desired outcome and what can be gotten away with...
as to the issue of trusting big corporate pharmaceutical 'science' the same applies and if you haven't had a friend or relative directly effected then just research the seemingly endless filings of class action suits over all the seemingly 'well tested' drugs and their unintended consequences etc...

"Yeah, put a dollar sign on science and it's evil. Well done. We should all live in caves and die before we are 30, because fuck science and money"

purely your words and assumptions, not my words or opinions bro...

So then what was your motivation for putting the dollar sign in "$cience"? It's science! Because not all science! has been for money, or to see what it could get away with. Some science! may have been not so great, but when you place a dollar sign on the word science! then we assume you mean to lump the entire concept of science! into your narrow viewpoint. I'm sure when Jonas Salk created the polio vaccine, easing the suffering and future suffering of millions of people, that he was just in it for the money.

I could name a thousand more examples of people who discovered things for the good of mankind, and made no money, or were outright demonized for their contributions. But hey, science! is just politics and money. Even the many non-profit charitable organizations conducting scientific research are in it for the money too, right?

Based on your own words you haven't conceded that any science! is good at all. And if you will allow that some is good, then you must allow that not all GMO research is bad, or based on pure profit. Monsanto, maybe, but not all.

So then your entire point devolves into either fear-mongering or worrying about something that may not exist as you fear it may.

As someone else said they felt as though they have awakened because they fear GMOs and "know" the motivations of corporations who research them. Not really awakened, more like led down another rabbit hole to confuse you and give you a maze to try to navigate. Mostly done to sell books or get eyeballs on websites to sell advertising dollars.

Think about it a little.

 

[DNAprotection]

i thought i explained the reason for the $...it seems that you might should reread whatever you thought you read that has you reacting this way...
no one said 'all science was for money' or that 'all science was bad' etc thats you taking yourself down a rabbit hole imo...but much corporate 'science' is for 'money' and thats the point and i think you might should think more about that and how it can and will effect this issue just like it has since the beginning of cannabis prohabition...