Spooby
Member
How angry does this make you? For those of you who are educated on GMO's and not firmly planted on the pro-organic bandwagon?
MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
Russia/GMO any fellow scientists here?
- Thread starter Spooby
- Start date
How angry does this make you? For those of you who are educated on GMO's and not firmly planted on the pro-organic bandwagon?
This would never happen if Monsanto was a russian company.
Monsanto should have a great next 4 years, Trump and Hillary both are a big win for monsanto.
Monsanto should have a great next 4 years, Trump and Hillary both are a big win for monsanto.
Spooby
Member
I don't feel that politicians should even have the authority to dictate any field of science... fucking infuriating that such a large powerful country is banning GMO's. Do they not understand what a GMO is?!
I do understand what a GMO is. It's a government granted monopoly, a license to steal, and indemnity against damage to persons or property. The Russian government, as well as its economy, is better off without GMO than it would be honoring GMO IP laws.
You are just mad because you keep serving 15 day sentences every time you go there.
Spooby
Member
The tinfoil is real... @flenser do you think "chemtrails" are real too? And vaccines give people autism? GMO'S have been around since humans began growing crops. Only recently we've developed the technology to do so by different means. Which I might add, is much more beneficial, since we can isolate genes we want from the rest. And what about climate change? Do you think that's some government conspiracy too? Because it's not. And Russia is going to have a Hell of a time growing crops when their climate changes, all because they made it a priority to dictate a field of science they're too stupid to understand, or even attempt to in the first place. It's a damn shame. BUT, maybe I picked the wrong board to try and have this conversation.
Spooby
Member
Oh and please, show me a shred of evidence suggesting organic food is safer than anything GM. This is one of the most rigorously studied subjects in the world.
Based on your previous response, I don't think you even read my post.
Spooby
Member
I did but I haven't had my coffee yet. I'll come back to this
Spooby
Member
Okay. I do agree that the government themselves may be better off presently, as well as their economy, but in the long run, if they don't get with the program, (hopefully seed patents will mean fuck all in this world and Monsanto will release everything) the entire population of Russia is in trouble. They are going about this the wrong way. I'm thinking it's another US/Russia "my dick is bigger than yours" stand off.
Monsanto isn't going to release anything, ever. It employs far more lawyers than actual researchers. That's not an accident, but by design.
Russia also doesn't have nearly the same pest problems as growers in other areas/climates, so they would not profit as much from those kinds of enhancements. They can afford to use more traditional growing techniques, and for whatever reason organic foods command a higher value than foods soaked in Roundup.
But yes, these kinds of bans are essentially dick measuring contests between competing governments. Mercantilism is alive in well in the new millennium.
Spooby
Member
Very true. They pander to the ignorant, which is currently the majority. Hence, millionsf of people following that ass clown David wolfe and the food babe chick. Where there's money to be made, you'll always find some Shepard rounding up the sheep... I hope it comes to an end while I'm still alive. It'd be a wonderful sight to see scientific thought as a majority rather than what is currently happening... thanks for your input and sorry about the morning attitude
just needed a couple valium and a cup of black coffee
We cant assume that all GMO's are equal in regards to being safe to eat.
Crossing a peach and a plumb is not the same as inserting the DNA of a fungus into soybeans, and spraying the shit out of them with roundup.
Crossing a peach and a plumb is not the same as inserting the DNA of a fungus into soybeans, and spraying the shit out of them with roundup.
Spooby
Member
Not that they intend on releasing a dangerous GMO before testing the shit out of it. Different approaches can and will come to the same result in many cases. Though, the traditional way was by random chance, with some favorable and some undesirable characteristics... in a lab, that is no longer the case. I'm at a loss to why it's such a hot topic among many people, though. I've caught more flack from pissing off an anti-gmo activist than I have a religious bigot. They're usually over-opinionated, far left leaning teenagers who just hop on the most recent rebellion... whether it be logical or not...
Spooby
Member
Also, in regards to round up... "dose makes the poison" remember that. Too many fallacious claims when it comes to that product.
Sometimes its dose X time that makes the poison, and who's to say that many of the things that the USDA, FDA and Monsanto tell us are perfectly safe will later be found to be toxic.
I served at Ft McClellan army base in the 80's.... needles to say I do not have much faith in the govt or Monsanto keeping me safe from toxins.
Spooby
Member
I can respect that. I share a similar view, though I'm not prior military... and yes, point taken, knowing that long term studies on many substances are non-existent...
It pisses me off knowing AAS is an extremely well studied field, endocrinology to be specific... there is plenty of money to be made if the gates were opened... fucking irritating. It amazes me how the majority of people voting for cannabis decriminalization are just your typical pot head,, and can form a more organised cause than the hard working AAS user community. Actually Idk whether to laugh at the irony or just sit in wonder. I can't think of a time I've tempted to organise for legalization, considering the stigma that the general public here holds about it... the more I think about it the angrier I get
Not that I agree with all of the WHO's carcinogen classifications, but this is typical legal maneuvering from Monsanto's army of lawyers.
Monsanto Is Suing California For Telling People The Truth About Its Chemicals
Claire Bernish March 3, 2016
Monsanto is suing the State of California for its intent to include glyphosate — the main ingredient in its wildly popular herbicide, Roundup — on its Proposition 65 toxic chemicals list.
California’s decision came after the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as a “probable carcinogen” in March 2015. Researchers discovered “limited evidence” of a link between the weedkiller and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma in humans, as well as “convincing evidence” of its link to other forms of cancer in rodents. Thus, IARC decided unanimously that glyphosate is “probably carcinogenic.”
California announced in September it would include glyphosate among the noxious chemicals under Prop 65, which “mandates notification and labeling of all known to cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive harm, and prohibits their discharge into drinking waters of the state,” Alternet summarized.
Monsanto has pushed back against the classification by the IARC from the beginning. Glyphosate-laden Roundup remains the most heavily used herbicide on the planet — despite an ever-widening list of nations implementing whole or partial bans on the substance.
Indeed, Center for Food Safety believes the addition of glyphosate to the Prop 65 list is so imperative, Alternet reports the organization filed a motion to intervene in the Monsanto lawsuit on Wednesday:
“CFS was one of the first public interest organizations to raise awareness about how the use of glyphosate in Roundup Ready crop systems fosters herbicide-resistant weeds and increases the use of the herbicide and the detrimental effects associated with it, and has repeatedly sought to prevent the planting and approval of glyphosate-resistant, genetically engineered crops through federal litigation.”
Echoing concerns of an increasingly knowledgeable public, CFS believes in transparency and the right to be informed of risks from being exposed to toxic substances. Monsanto’s lawsuit to block such labeling belies its indifference to harming the world’s population and contaminating the planet — or, worse, its intent to profit despite such harm.
Should Monsanto be victorious in this court battle, it would represent a major defeat for the people’s right to know when they could be harmed. Worse, it would be a victory for an already aggressively arrogant industry bent on profit at any and every cost.
Monsanto Is Suing California For Telling People The Truth About Its Chemicals
Claire Bernish March 3, 2016
Monsanto is suing the State of California for its intent to include glyphosate — the main ingredient in its wildly popular herbicide, Roundup — on its Proposition 65 toxic chemicals list.
California’s decision came after the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as a “probable carcinogen” in March 2015. Researchers discovered “limited evidence” of a link between the weedkiller and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma in humans, as well as “convincing evidence” of its link to other forms of cancer in rodents. Thus, IARC decided unanimously that glyphosate is “probably carcinogenic.”
California announced in September it would include glyphosate among the noxious chemicals under Prop 65, which “mandates notification and labeling of all known to cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive harm, and prohibits their discharge into drinking waters of the state,” Alternet summarized.
Monsanto has pushed back against the classification by the IARC from the beginning. Glyphosate-laden Roundup remains the most heavily used herbicide on the planet — despite an ever-widening list of nations implementing whole or partial bans on the substance.
Indeed, Center for Food Safety believes the addition of glyphosate to the Prop 65 list is so imperative, Alternet reports the organization filed a motion to intervene in the Monsanto lawsuit on Wednesday:
“CFS was one of the first public interest organizations to raise awareness about how the use of glyphosate in Roundup Ready crop systems fosters herbicide-resistant weeds and increases the use of the herbicide and the detrimental effects associated with it, and has repeatedly sought to prevent the planting and approval of glyphosate-resistant, genetically engineered crops through federal litigation.”
Echoing concerns of an increasingly knowledgeable public, CFS believes in transparency and the right to be informed of risks from being exposed to toxic substances. Monsanto’s lawsuit to block such labeling belies its indifference to harming the world’s population and contaminating the planet — or, worse, its intent to profit despite such harm.
Should Monsanto be victorious in this court battle, it would represent a major defeat for the people’s right to know when they could be harmed. Worse, it would be a victory for an already aggressively arrogant industry bent on profit at any and every cost.
