Go to walmart for two hours, then come back here with that shit!!!

"actively prevented" topkek bro, ever heard of Asians? They were actively prevented from succeeding in the past. For some strange reason they're succeeding today in America while blacks are not. I woooonder why

So? Point still stands that certain races as a whole are doing better than others. And whites as a whole are still doing a lot better than Asians as a whole.

Have you seen any city? It's literally a mix of British, Polish, Indian, and hundreds of other races that all commit to the production and efficiency of the industrial, social, economic structure of the country. And yet "whites" have it the best in a long time? Nooooooooooooooooot really. We live in the 21st century, where, regardless of your skin color, you can be anything you aspire to be. It seems you're aspiring to be a cunt. Good job.

in America?

The whole world

OK let me be civilized for a moment.
"We've bred more toxic strains of anthrax, more aggressive dogs, killer bees, and unkillable invasive weeds"
That's not even related to what we are talking about, we are talking about GMOs in the food industry, what you mentioned is about creatures that are directly dangerous to humans in different ways than eating them.

"You've got poisonous mushrooms and you've got edible mushrooms. When you eat the poisonous mushrooms, it isn't the genes that directly kill you, it's the proteins the genes created."
There is no "byproducts" of genes, there are genes that are expressed, and genes that are not. Poisonous mushrooms and and edible mushrooms are not the same strains, they have a different set of genes. you see, when when we use add a genetic modification to lets say corn, to make it grow bigger, the gene that we add is most of the time is a gene from the same plant, like a growth factor, we are just over expressing it (this is a simple case) so we'll have more allels/genes translated into the same thing, amplifying their effect. their MIGHT be an effect on other genes that would make them (in the worse case imaginable, very unlikely) produce toxic materials, however these plants are tested before being grown in a wide scale, so if we gave them to a lab rat and it died, we simply don't use them. (having the bad strain destroyed or not is a different matter). So lets say the strain we made was safe on the lab rat, it still get tested for unknown compounds (which are extremely rare at this time and age) and compounds known to cause DNA damage, if there are non of those, the strain get's approved and they start giving them to test farmers.

Therefore GMOs are safe to consume, because they are 99% the same thing, even when using genes from other plants, it's extremely unlikely that they produce a dangerous strain, and even if they do, it's gets thrown out during testing. And eating GMOs have no effect on our own DNA, proteins expressed from the genes, unless toxic we already covered that, will be broken down during digestion, and they can't cause us harm, because they do not modify our own DNA. get it?

"I even got to use a DNA synthesizer a couple times in the lab"
that's like saying you drove a Ferrari once so now you're a race driver and a car mechanic. So do you want that dick with a side of fries? that was a low blow I know but I had to say it

YOU, and everyone else HAVE BEEN EATING GMOs ALL YOUR LIFE,
you know why cows produce a lot of milk? because we selected for that
why carrots are orange? because we selected for that
why corn is big? because we selected for that

And by selected for that I mean we picked the ones we like and let the rest die, THIS process it genetic modification, now we can do it much faster because of fucking science, it's the SAME exact thing, but much faster!

Holy Fuck WE, Humans, ARE NOT affected by the DNA we consume, you can pick up a cancerous tumor extracted from a cancer patient at a hospital, and FUCKING EAT IT, and you won't get cancer, you know why? because HUMANS ARE NOT AFFECTED BY THE DNA WE EAT!

To anyone who thinks GMOs are bad .. Have you studied genetics? No? Then eat a dick and don't oppose something you don't understand.

The idea that direct genetic modification and artificial selection are on the same level of play is laughable. It's like comparing tee-ball to the World Series. The potential impact of one far outweighs that of the other.

But even still, artificial selection can be problematic for humans. We've bred more toxic strains of anthrax, more aggressive dogs, killer bees, and unkillable invasive weeds. Artificial selection has proven to be potentially damaging and if it's the same thing as direct genetic modification, then direct genetic modification is potentially dangerous as well.

Furthermore, it isn't the genes themselves that cause harm, it's the byproducts of the genes. You've got poisonous mushrooms and you've got edible mushrooms. When you eat the poisonous mushrooms, it isn't the genes that directly kill you, it's the proteins the genes created.

And as a matter of fact, I have studied genetics. For the first two years in my college career I was in biomedical engineering, I even got to use a DNA synthesizer a couple times in the lab. However my particular interest was in ecology and agriculture so I was actually working with the people who best understood the potential widescale impact of the technology, especially in regards to pesticide use and abuse. I'll pass on the dick, thank you very much, and continue to advocate rigorous testing of new concepts like a real fucking scientist.

OK let me be civilized for a moment.
"We've bred more toxic strains of anthrax, more aggressive dogs, killer bees, and unkillable invasive weeds"
That's not even related to what we are talking about, we are talking about GMOs in the food industry, what you mentioned is about creatures that are directly dangerous to humans in different ways than eating them.

"You've got poisonous mushrooms and you've got edible mushrooms. When you eat the poisonous mushrooms, it isn't the genes that directly kill you, it's the proteins the genes created."
There is no "byproducts" of genes, there are genes that are expressed, and genes that are not. Poisonous mushrooms and and edible mushrooms are not the same strains, they have a different set of genes. you see, when when we use add a genetic modification to lets say corn, to make it grow bigger, the gene that we add is most of the time is a gene from the same plant, like a growth factor, we are just over expressing it (this is a simple case) so we'll have more allels/genes translated into the same thing, amplifying their effect. their MIGHT be an effect on other genes that would make them (in the worse case imaginable, very unlikely) produce toxic materials, however these plants are tested before being grown in a wide scale, so if we gave them to a lab rat and it died, we simply don't use them. (having the bad strain destroyed or not is a different matter). So lets say the strain we made was safe on the lab rat, it still get tested for unknown compounds (which are extremely rare at this time and age) and compounds known to cause DNA damage, if there are non of those, the strain get's approved and they start giving them to test farmers.

Therefore GMOs are safe to consume, because they are 99% the same thing, even when using genes from other plants, it's extremely unlikely that they produce a dangerous strain, and even if they do, it's gets thrown out during testing. And eating GMOs have no effect on our own DNA, proteins expressed from the genes, unless toxic we already covered that, will be broken down during digestion, and they can't cause us harm, because they do not modify our own DNA. get it?

"I even got to use a DNA synthesizer a couple times in the lab"
that's like saying you drove a Ferrari once so now you're a race driver and a car mechanic. So do you want that dick with a side of fries? that was a low blow I know but I had to say it

Yeah, the operative phrase is "for sure." I'm 100% in favor of GMOs, but each new strain needs to be tested like we would a new drug. There needs to be some sort of regulatory body that can give an unbiased objective determination of whether or not it's safe before bringing it to market.

But still, even if we are unaffected by the pesticides directly, they're still problematic for the environment as a whole. It still kills the nearby ecosystem and it still breeds superbugs, neither of which are good for humanity.