OT: Bioengineered Foods.

[UCGal]

Speaking of Monsanto – just look at rGBH – the bovine growth hormone given to cows to increase milk production.

It’s been banned in Europe and Canada. From my reading, Monsanto was involved in limiting the scope of the FDA safety trials to ONLY look to see if the milk had elevated levels of growth hormone. (It doesn’t) They didn’t look to see of cows given rGBH had other endocrine changes. Turns out they have much higher levels of adreniline, etc…

Monsanto had marketed this to dairy farmers for over 10 years before people learned of it. And their answer, when people heard about it and protested – Hey, it’s been going on for more than 10 years, so what’s the big deal.

I figure my kids don’t need to get excess hormones from their milk. So I buy my milk at Henries. (drug free cows.)

[jpinpb]

Good for you, UCGal. I’m w/you. I’m going on 20 years of trying to eat organic. I figure the cost on organic is saving me on medical.

[jpinpb]

Good for you, UCGal. I’m w/you. I’m going on 20 years of trying to eat organic. I figure the cost on organic is saving me on medical.

[jpinpb]

Good for you, UCGal. I’m w/you. I’m going on 20 years of trying to eat organic. I figure the cost on organic is saving me on medical.

[jpinpb]

Good for you, UCGal. I’m w/you. I’m going on 20 years of trying to eat organic. I figure the cost on organic is saving me on medical.

[jpinpb]

Good for you, UCGal. I’m w/you. I’m going on 20 years of trying to eat organic. I figure the cost on organic is saving me on medical.

[jimmyle]

Now I am scared.

[jimmyle]

Now I am scared.

[jimmyle]

Now I am scared.

[jimmyle]

Now I am scared.

[jimmyle]

Now I am scared.

[DWCAP]

ok, I am sooooo gonna get hated on here, but this is a bunch of fear mongering. Look, I am the grandson/nephew of many many farmers. I was actually on a combine harvesting corn and soybeans this past October. I have also spent more than one class in college on food/food production/nutrition. I am not an expert, I dont claim to be. But I know a little more about this than what I read on the internet.

1) Notice how they splice in alot of really negative words. Calling this or that a “travesty” or a “potential disaster” or whatever. Makes you scared. Puts you in a defensive position of “well, we don’t know so it must be bad.” BS. That is hardball writing to induce fear, loathing, and unbalanced reactions. Here, look:

[Quote]Some are calling the advent of GEOs a threat comparable to, or even worse than, nuclear radiation.[/Quote]

Seriously? GMO’s, which in the worst case may get a few people with very specific and rare allergies to get sick or die, is worse than nuclear radiation which in the worst case could end 95% of life on this planet? REALLY?????

or [Quote]… along with irradiated foods and those grown with reprocessed human sewer sludge.[/quote]

That wouldnt be manure would it, just from you and not a cow? What do you think happens to your feces when you flush? The ‘reprocessing’ part is to kill any bacteria or virus that may be dangerous. Perish the thought that the natural life cycle which we always think of as so ‘clean’ may actually include your bowel movements from last week. Nooooo….. Never. It magically goes away and is never seen again.
(for those of you who love talapia, find out what it eats when farmed. they have a knack of eating what other fish, umm, left behind.)

Piggs are smarter than this, I see them pick it up all the time in political writings. Are we really gonna believe greenpeace or an orginization called the ‘Alliance for bio integrity’ is the worlds expert on food production? More so than the FDA or the European equivants? Why? Cause they write scarry articles while the FDA is from the government and is therefore corrupt and stupid? Anyone who works with FDA requirments daily, as I do, knows they are not stupid and can’t be bought (easily), otherwise big pharma would never have another drug fail.

2) This seems really old. Maybe it is just an old article from the old “GMO” wars of the late 1990’s but notice how all the studies and polls are from 1990-1998. Have we learned nothing in the decade since then? I know that isnt true, so where is the newer data? If you are gonna take this challenge, please bring it (as a scientist I would actually love to see something to prove my position wrong, its fun) from a repetuable source. FDA, Science mag, USDA, etc. not “people with communication degrees hating on stuff we dont really understand cause it is scarry”.com

3) The few studies I noticed the article referencing (I just skimmed alot of it) were ‘preliminary’ and just ‘elevated’. Is that stastically elevated to a worrysome level, or just higher than? I have a feeling that since they didnt mention it, that is ‘just higher’ which is a much less compelling argument, especially since I know that preliminary studies are wrong ALL THE TIME. That is why they are preliminary.
Also, their references of scientific results are poor, at best.
If you are wondering what I am talking about look here:
[quote]Genes do not get transferred only among bacteria, as most scientists believe, or want the public to believe, says Dr. Ho. [/quote]

AS MOST SCIENTISTS BELIEVE. HUH? Publish your work and scientists will agree with you. That is if your work is worth anything. Scientist as a whole love new information. That second part about ‘or want…’ is the relm of crackpots and fear mongers. I am not saying this doesnt happen or cant happen or whatever, I am saying that scientists tend to trust the data, and not wildeyed ‘beliefs’ that we hold to like religion.

As for bacterial resistance to anti-biotics, you are far more responsible for anti-biotic resistance than food. Everytime you take anti-biotics just cause you have a cold you place a selective pressure on them to adapt. Or all the ‘anti-biotic’ soaps and such, which people generally dont use correctly. Did you know you need to let any soap sit on your hands for atleast 10-15 seconds to be effective? If you use Medical grade stuff, it is closer to a minute. Most people just soap and rinse in a second or two. If our goal is to protect our arsinal of anti-biotics from overuse, lets start with the big ones. This is small stuff.

Look, If you read this far down my post without starting your own post to jump down my throat for defending “frankenfoods” understand my argument here. These foods are feeding a growing and wealthier world in a way that ‘natural’ foods just can’t. We need proper regulation, informed consumers, and good science to determine what is proper to put into the food supply, and what isnt. We also need to realize that as with whatever humans do, it wont be perfect. Caution and prudence are virtures here, but are we really suppose to not have new and better food sources cause some people worry, with scant evidence, that they MAY have problems? Talk about sticking your head in the sand.

[DWCAP]

ok, I am sooooo gonna get hated on here, but this is a bunch of fear mongering. Look, I am the grandson/nephew of many many farmers. I was actually on a combine harvesting corn and soybeans this past October. I have also spent more than one class in college on food/food production/nutrition. I am not an expert, I dont claim to be. But I know a little more about this than what I read on the internet.

1) Notice how they splice in alot of really negative words. Calling this or that a “travesty” or a “potential disaster” or whatever. Makes you scared. Puts you in a defensive position of “well, we don’t know so it must be bad.” BS. That is hardball writing to induce fear, loathing, and unbalanced reactions. Here, look:

[Quote]Some are calling the advent of GEOs a threat comparable to, or even worse than, nuclear radiation.[/Quote]

Seriously? GMO’s, which in the worst case may get a few people with very specific and rare allergies to get sick or die, is worse than nuclear radiation which in the worst case could end 95% of life on this planet? REALLY?????

or [Quote]… along with irradiated foods and those grown with reprocessed human sewer sludge.[/quote]

That wouldnt be manure would it, just from you and not a cow? What do you think happens to your feces when you flush? The ‘reprocessing’ part is to kill any bacteria or virus that may be dangerous. Perish the thought that the natural life cycle which we always think of as so ‘clean’ may actually include your bowel movements from last week. Nooooo….. Never. It magically goes away and is never seen again.
(for those of you who love talapia, find out what it eats when farmed. they have a knack of eating what other fish, umm, left behind.)

Piggs are smarter than this, I see them pick it up all the time in political writings. Are we really gonna believe greenpeace or an orginization called the ‘Alliance for bio integrity’ is the worlds expert on food production? More so than the FDA or the European equivants? Why? Cause they write scarry articles while the FDA is from the government and is therefore corrupt and stupid? Anyone who works with FDA requirments daily, as I do, knows they are not stupid and can’t be bought (easily), otherwise big pharma would never have another drug fail.

2) This seems really old. Maybe it is just an old article from the old “GMO” wars of the late 1990’s but notice how all the studies and polls are from 1990-1998. Have we learned nothing in the decade since then? I know that isnt true, so where is the newer data? If you are gonna take this challenge, please bring it (as a scientist I would actually love to see something to prove my position wrong, its fun) from a repetuable source. FDA, Science mag, USDA, etc. not “people with communication degrees hating on stuff we dont really understand cause it is scarry”.com

3) The few studies I noticed the article referencing (I just skimmed alot of it) were ‘preliminary’ and just ‘elevated’. Is that stastically elevated to a worrysome level, or just higher than? I have a feeling that since they didnt mention it, that is ‘just higher’ which is a much less compelling argument, especially since I know that preliminary studies are wrong ALL THE TIME. That is why they are preliminary.
Also, their references of scientific results are poor, at best.
If you are wondering what I am talking about look here:
[quote]Genes do not get transferred only among bacteria, as most scientists believe, or want the public to believe, says Dr. Ho. [/quote]

AS MOST SCIENTISTS BELIEVE. HUH? Publish your work and scientists will agree with you. That is if your work is worth anything. Scientist as a whole love new information. That second part about ‘or want…’ is the relm of crackpots and fear mongers. I am not saying this doesnt happen or cant happen or whatever, I am saying that scientists tend to trust the data, and not wildeyed ‘beliefs’ that we hold to like religion.

As for bacterial resistance to anti-biotics, you are far more responsible for anti-biotic resistance than food. Everytime you take anti-biotics just cause you have a cold you place a selective pressure on them to adapt. Or all the ‘anti-biotic’ soaps and such, which people generally dont use correctly. Did you know you need to let any soap sit on your hands for atleast 10-15 seconds to be effective? If you use Medical grade stuff, it is closer to a minute. Most people just soap and rinse in a second or two. If our goal is to protect our arsinal of anti-biotics from overuse, lets start with the big ones. This is small stuff.

Look, If you read this far down my post without starting your own post to jump down my throat for defending “frankenfoods” understand my argument here. These foods are feeding a growing and wealthier world in a way that ‘natural’ foods just can’t. We need proper regulation, informed consumers, and good science to determine what is proper to put into the food supply, and what isnt. We also need to realize that as with whatever humans do, it wont be perfect. Caution and prudence are virtures here, but are we really suppose to not have new and better food sources cause some people worry, with scant evidence, that they MAY have problems? Talk about sticking your head in the sand.

[DWCAP]

ok, I am sooooo gonna get hated on here, but this is a bunch of fear mongering. Look, I am the grandson/nephew of many many farmers. I was actually on a combine harvesting corn and soybeans this past October. I have also spent more than one class in college on food/food production/nutrition. I am not an expert, I dont claim to be. But I know a little more about this than what I read on the internet.

1) Notice how they splice in alot of really negative words. Calling this or that a “travesty” or a “potential disaster” or whatever. Makes you scared. Puts you in a defensive position of “well, we don’t know so it must be bad.” BS. That is hardball writing to induce fear, loathing, and unbalanced reactions. Here, look:

[Quote]Some are calling the advent of GEOs a threat comparable to, or even worse than, nuclear radiation.[/Quote]

Seriously? GMO’s, which in the worst case may get a few people with very specific and rare allergies to get sick or die, is worse than nuclear radiation which in the worst case could end 95% of life on this planet? REALLY?????

or [Quote]… along with irradiated foods and those grown with reprocessed human sewer sludge.[/quote]

That wouldnt be manure would it, just from you and not a cow? What do you think happens to your feces when you flush? The ‘reprocessing’ part is to kill any bacteria or virus that may be dangerous. Perish the thought that the natural life cycle which we always think of as so ‘clean’ may actually include your bowel movements from last week. Nooooo….. Never. It magically goes away and is never seen again.
(for those of you who love talapia, find out what it eats when farmed. they have a knack of eating what other fish, umm, left behind.)

Piggs are smarter than this, I see them pick it up all the time in political writings. Are we really gonna believe greenpeace or an orginization called the ‘Alliance for bio integrity’ is the worlds expert on food production? More so than the FDA or the European equivants? Why? Cause they write scarry articles while the FDA is from the government and is therefore corrupt and stupid? Anyone who works with FDA requirments daily, as I do, knows they are not stupid and can’t be bought (easily), otherwise big pharma would never have another drug fail.

2) This seems really old. Maybe it is just an old article from the old “GMO” wars of the late 1990’s but notice how all the studies and polls are from 1990-1998. Have we learned nothing in the decade since then? I know that isnt true, so where is the newer data? If you are gonna take this challenge, please bring it (as a scientist I would actually love to see something to prove my position wrong, its fun) from a repetuable source. FDA, Science mag, USDA, etc. not “people with communication degrees hating on stuff we dont really understand cause it is scarry”.com

3) The few studies I noticed the article referencing (I just skimmed alot of it) were ‘preliminary’ and just ‘elevated’. Is that stastically elevated to a worrysome level, or just higher than? I have a feeling that since they didnt mention it, that is ‘just higher’ which is a much less compelling argument, especially since I know that preliminary studies are wrong ALL THE TIME. That is why they are preliminary.
Also, their references of scientific results are poor, at best.
If you are wondering what I am talking about look here:
[quote]Genes do not get transferred only among bacteria, as most scientists believe, or want the public to believe, says Dr. Ho. [/quote]

AS MOST SCIENTISTS BELIEVE. HUH? Publish your work and scientists will agree with you. That is if your work is worth anything. Scientist as a whole love new information. That second part about ‘or want…’ is the relm of crackpots and fear mongers. I am not saying this doesnt happen or cant happen or whatever, I am saying that scientists tend to trust the data, and not wildeyed ‘beliefs’ that we hold to like religion.

As for bacterial resistance to anti-biotics, you are far more responsible for anti-biotic resistance than food. Everytime you take anti-biotics just cause you have a cold you place a selective pressure on them to adapt. Or all the ‘anti-biotic’ soaps and such, which people generally dont use correctly. Did you know you need to let any soap sit on your hands for atleast 10-15 seconds to be effective? If you use Medical grade stuff, it is closer to a minute. Most people just soap and rinse in a second or two. If our goal is to protect our arsinal of anti-biotics from overuse, lets start with the big ones. This is small stuff.

Look, If you read this far down my post without starting your own post to jump down my throat for defending “frankenfoods” understand my argument here. These foods are feeding a growing and wealthier world in a way that ‘natural’ foods just can’t. We need proper regulation, informed consumers, and good science to determine what is proper to put into the food supply, and what isnt. We also need to realize that as with whatever humans do, it wont be perfect. Caution and prudence are virtures here, but are we really suppose to not have new and better food sources cause some people worry, with scant evidence, that they MAY have problems? Talk about sticking your head in the sand.

[DWCAP]

ok, I am sooooo gonna get hated on here, but this is a bunch of fear mongering. Look, I am the grandson/nephew of many many farmers. I was actually on a combine harvesting corn and soybeans this past October. I have also spent more than one class in college on food/food production/nutrition. I am not an expert, I dont claim to be. But I know a little more about this than what I read on the internet.

1) Notice how they splice in alot of really negative words. Calling this or that a “travesty” or a “potential disaster” or whatever. Makes you scared. Puts you in a defensive position of “well, we don’t know so it must be bad.” BS. That is hardball writing to induce fear, loathing, and unbalanced reactions. Here, look:

[Quote]Some are calling the advent of GEOs a threat comparable to, or even worse than, nuclear radiation.[/Quote]

Seriously? GMO’s, which in the worst case may get a few people with very specific and rare allergies to get sick or die, is worse than nuclear radiation which in the worst case could end 95% of life on this planet? REALLY?????

or [Quote]… along with irradiated foods and those grown with reprocessed human sewer sludge.[/quote]

That wouldnt be manure would it, just from you and not a cow? What do you think happens to your feces when you flush? The ‘reprocessing’ part is to kill any bacteria or virus that may be dangerous. Perish the thought that the natural life cycle which we always think of as so ‘clean’ may actually include your bowel movements from last week. Nooooo….. Never. It magically goes away and is never seen again.
(for those of you who love talapia, find out what it eats when farmed. they have a knack of eating what other fish, umm, left behind.)

Piggs are smarter than this, I see them pick it up all the time in political writings. Are we really gonna believe greenpeace or an orginization called the ‘Alliance for bio integrity’ is the worlds expert on food production? More so than the FDA or the European equivants? Why? Cause they write scarry articles while the FDA is from the government and is therefore corrupt and stupid? Anyone who works with FDA requirments daily, as I do, knows they are not stupid and can’t be bought (easily), otherwise big pharma would never have another drug fail.

2) This seems really old. Maybe it is just an old article from the old “GMO” wars of the late 1990’s but notice how all the studies and polls are from 1990-1998. Have we learned nothing in the decade since then? I know that isnt true, so where is the newer data? If you are gonna take this challenge, please bring it (as a scientist I would actually love to see something to prove my position wrong, its fun) from a repetuable source. FDA, Science mag, USDA, etc. not “people with communication degrees hating on stuff we dont really understand cause it is scarry”.com

3) The few studies I noticed the article referencing (I just skimmed alot of it) were ‘preliminary’ and just ‘elevated’. Is that stastically elevated to a worrysome level, or just higher than? I have a feeling that since they didnt mention it, that is ‘just higher’ which is a much less compelling argument, especially since I know that preliminary studies are wrong ALL THE TIME. That is why they are preliminary.
Also, their references of scientific results are poor, at best.
If you are wondering what I am talking about look here:
[quote]Genes do not get transferred only among bacteria, as most scientists believe, or want the public to believe, says Dr. Ho. [/quote]

AS MOST SCIENTISTS BELIEVE. HUH? Publish your work and scientists will agree with you. That is if your work is worth anything. Scientist as a whole love new information. That second part about ‘or want…’ is the relm of crackpots and fear mongers. I am not saying this doesnt happen or cant happen or whatever, I am saying that scientists tend to trust the data, and not wildeyed ‘beliefs’ that we hold to like religion.

As for bacterial resistance to anti-biotics, you are far more responsible for anti-biotic resistance than food. Everytime you take anti-biotics just cause you have a cold you place a selective pressure on them to adapt. Or all the ‘anti-biotic’ soaps and such, which people generally dont use correctly. Did you know you need to let any soap sit on your hands for atleast 10-15 seconds to be effective? If you use Medical grade stuff, it is closer to a minute. Most people just soap and rinse in a second or two. If our goal is to protect our arsinal of anti-biotics from overuse, lets start with the big ones. This is small stuff.

Look, If you read this far down my post without starting your own post to jump down my throat for defending “frankenfoods” understand my argument here. These foods are feeding a growing and wealthier world in a way that ‘natural’ foods just can’t. We need proper regulation, informed consumers, and good science to determine what is proper to put into the food supply, and what isnt. We also need to realize that as with whatever humans do, it wont be perfect. Caution and prudence are virtures here, but are we really suppose to not have new and better food sources cause some people worry, with scant evidence, that they MAY have problems? Talk about sticking your head in the sand.

[Author]

Posts