GMO Gold. GMOs are not being blocked because they are bad for people. They are opposed on ideological grounds which fuel anti-scientific paranoia.. miimii' , he
Click to expand

GMO Gold

GMO Gold. GMOs are not being blocked because they are bad for people. They are opposed on ideological grounds which fuel anti-scientific paranoia.. miimii' , he

GMOs are not being blocked because they are bad for people.
They are opposed on ideological grounds which fuel anti-scientific paranoia.

miimii' , he learning
about Ingo and
Peter Bever in schools.
leev should have awards.
Thev should he known as
Instead thev have heen
demonized through huge
media ior over
14 items.
Bceause thev added it
new genes to 30. 000 in
There were two
changes in thatit. we it
turned to deen Bellow
it heeauw billed with
vitamin A.
Sine it was invented
in 1999
and green organizations
scent millions on media
and Gilli“ tta
In the same period 18
million adriaan children
died of vitamin ll
million went blind.
No Ems in our eood
Moe isn' t . There
is no gromit to he made.
lust tree grain to save
lives. do one has ever
died irom arons.
Millions have tor the melt
of it.
  • Recommend tagsx
Views: 65492
Favorited: 190
Submitted: 08/09/2013
Share On Facebook
Add to favorites Subscribe to angelusprimus submit to reddit


What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#11 - grandtheftkoala **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [+] (10 replies)
#16 to #11 - angelusprimus (08/09/2013) [-]
Before I believe this I want to see exactly where those came from, what they were treated with and a full time lapse.
I believe in scientific method and peer review research, not anecdotal "evidence".
#136 - BeoX (08/09/2013) [+] (12 replies)
Nothing is this black and white, friends. I did presentations on GMOs for my school's environmental club this year, and we tried to show both sides of it. You're absolutely right, OP, these men are heroes. Some GMOs can be absolute godsends for both the first and third world. They can save countless lives. However, there are also some GMOs, specifically those produced by corporations such as Monsanto, that are designed to maximize profit and run small farmers out of business. Their only modifications are to ensure patent rights or to require farmers to purchase certain types of pesticides. These modifications are rushed out of the lab quickly and with no concern to the potential consequences to the environment. These are the type of GMOs that people are concerned about; no one I've ever met denies the benefit of the GMOs described by OP.

tl;dr- nothing is black and white. Look for the nuance in things. There are good and bad GMOs, and anti-GMO people can make as much sense and agree with this post as much as pro-GMO people.
User avatar #23 - ronyx ONLINE (08/09/2013) [+] (33 replies)
We have to be very careful with altering genes of grains such as rice. We still don't know what the future consequences could be if we just go around changing **** around. I applaud these 2 gentlemen for what they did and I don't support the media demonizing them. But we have to be very careful when genetically modifying food.
#178 - atma (08/10/2013) [+] (2 replies)
I agree, BMO should be shared with the world
I agree, BMO should be shared with the world
User avatar #60 - whistleandrun ONLINE (08/09/2013) [+] (6 replies)
I'm pretty a liberal guy, but the anti-GM food movement is so retarded it's untrue. Something being "organic" doesn't automatically make it better for you or the environment, it just gives you an easy ego boost.

When such a high proportion of the world is starving, mass production of cheap, high-nutrition food should be priority number one.
User avatar #12 - bokkos (08/09/2013) [+] (7 replies)
The issue with GMOs is that we have no idea what the addition of 3 genes will do. On the face of it it increases Vitamin A yield, but it could also cause the production of carcinogenic proteins. I'm not saying the green activists are right (as a biologist I have a strong animosity and distrust for them), but we can't blindly jump onto the GMO bandwagon. 3 genes is all it takes to turn a docile bacterium into a pathogenic scourge.
#15 to #12 - angelusprimus (08/09/2013) [-]
Actually since we mapped the entire rice genome we know exactly what happens with those three genes.
And since that rice was produced 14 years ago, and tested in every single way possible and so far after 14 years and rats being fed exclusively on it for about 100 generations have not developed any diseases, I'm going to go with safe.
User avatar #204 - ilfarmboy (08/10/2013) [+] (6 replies)
As a farmer i feel its my duty to set the record straight. I see some of you think that GMO's are more expensive to grow, they are not. However the seed does cost more, the cost/acre to grow them is less because the need for insecticide applications throughout the stages of plant growth is less. This is twofold because it often leads to higher crop yields. In response to those of you who think they are unsafe, they are quite safe. There are 2 main ways of creating GMO, crossbreeding (aka hybrids) and in a lab. So veggies like cherry tomatoes, seedless grapes, and most apples are GMOs created through crossbreeding (just to name a few) The proteins and genes that are in the cash crops of today are done in a lab because it is much quicker and practical to produce(it takes over 10 years of crossbreeding to achieve the same end result), these genes are naturally occurring in other plants found throughout the world and inserted to the plants giving us a more efficient and productive food supply. I could go on but thats the quick version. Thumbs up to you OP.
#307 - dentalfloss (08/10/2013) [-]
Don't forget Norman

#376 - zaw (08/10/2013) [+] (2 replies)
GMOs can only possibly be dangerous to humans because of chemical differences between that and the normal food. For example, corn that makes its own pesticide chemicals and you eat the pesticides within it. Anything about how GMOs change your genes or something like that is complete ********* .
User avatar #303 - incontinence (08/10/2013) [-]
I once did a research paper on GMO crops, the more i did, the more i hated greenpeace and the whole anti GMO ****
#478 - anonymous (08/10/2013) [+] (2 replies)
GMO's are making me sick! I **** like a goose all the damn time and It's getting harder for me to find foods that I can eat. They are not saving me...they are killing me!
User avatar #480 to #478 - trainverse (08/10/2013) [-]
because ******** like a goose is deadly
User avatar #349 - Leopard (08/10/2013) [+] (10 replies)
Two things:

One, didn't they make the world's first test tube burger the other week? I'm pretty sure times have changed since 1999, and genetically altered foods are now allowed.

And, why should we care about saving starving kids in africa. They'll just die later on. The life expectancy there is like... 30 years.
User avatar #375 to #366 - Endofzeeworld (08/10/2013) [-]
>Not enough food
>why try to make more food for it
#330 - cookiedude (08/10/2013) [+] (5 replies)
MFW I work for Monsanto.

They pay well, and I love my job. I'll eat food made from Monsanto crops all day, because it's food. And most of the time, it is better for you than organic **** .
#353 to #330 - victorianfancyman (08/10/2013) [-]
Monsanto isn't 'bad' because their food kills you, it's because they screw over independent farmers in quite a few different ways. I don't have much time to post this so I'm just going to ask you to do some google searches.
#28 - evilpowersjr (08/09/2013) [+] (3 replies)
The problem with GMOs is pesticides in the seed coatings and are later sprayed on fields are killing bees. Bees are responsible for pollinating about 1/3 of the worlds food. You wanna starve to death cuz you don't make enough money?
#445 - anonymous (08/10/2013) [+] (3 replies)
Gene manipulation + bees = killer bees.
Gene manipulation + corn = sudden increase of allergies.
Gene manipulation + economy = industrialized food + monopolists
Americans sure love playing with genes and nothing wrong with it.

But when Hitler wanted to create his genetic masterrace, you said it is evil - d'ooooooh....
User avatar #451 to #445 - continuo (08/10/2013) [-]
Cause genocide is totally involved in the creation of a new rice.
User avatar #328 - strangemoo (08/10/2013) [-]
Hey guys, y'know we could actually do something about this. We could get up and actually try and change something! No? Just gonna keep bitching about it on the internet? I think I'll join you.
#322 - FudgeTart (08/10/2013) [+] (10 replies)
Sure lets save kids in Africa while we're the ones supplying weapons across the ******* world for mass murder! Hurr Durr lets focus on food while we ignore the fact we're waging wars! Hurr ******* Durr! Lets focus on what our fat asses can eat while laws are being made to constrain free speech and company influence on politics! Hurr Mother ******* Durr! Now say it with me you dense mother ******* ! HURR ******* DURR!
User avatar #343 to #322 - Thehappyemu ONLINE (08/10/2013) [-]
I'm sorry, but as a debate goes, you lost me at "hurr ******* durr" the first time. This is not the way to capture an audience.
#295 - jackassalope (08/10/2013) [-]
Google Norman Borlaug, the only man in history who can be credited with saving a billion lives, and is in my belief the greatest man who ever lived. He traveled the world replacing crops in starving areas with strains that would quadruple the agricultural output.

Without GMO's it is literally impossible to feed everyone in the world. In the words of Borlaug, "We are 6.6 billion people now, we can only feed 4 billion. I don't see 2 billion volunteers". And I guarantee anyone against GMO's isn't one of those 2 billion.
#241 - dontknowmeatall (08/10/2013) [-]
I had to make a research about it for a homework a few weeks ago. It had to be a neutral talk with pros and cons. The only conclusive, non-demonizing scientificly proven fact against GMO was "it has not been proven to be inoffensive to the human body". And a lot of pros. Well, Coke has not been proven to be inoffensive to the human body. McDonald's has not been proven to be inoffensive to the human body. Cherrios cereal has not been proven to be inoffensive to the human body. And yet we consume them. Then, Where's the freaking problem against GMO?
#238 - derpyhoovezz (08/10/2013) [+] (3 replies)
I dont want to be that guy but...

It sounds like the other side of the story isnt being told, people dont usualy ban things just because its "Unatural"(Although alot of things amaze me now days, like the woman who won the lawsuit against Mcdonalds for spilling coffe in her lap)

They might have been against it becuase it might have had something in it that might cause Behavior problems or something like that(Wich is why people are trying to ban certian food dyes, they think it causes cancer/Behavior problems)

But then again, people do some amazingly stupid ******* things, and get away with it
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)