Jump to content

The Future of Food


TheRymanChu

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 177
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

Meh, I've seen stuff like this before. I'm not worried about it. I think that things are going to eventually come full circle as people become more and more conscious about what they eat.

 

I think that people have a responsibility to watch what they eat and make smart decisions and assume that if it's not organic or all natural or what not, then they run the risk of who knows what being in the food.

 

shopping at places like whole foods and avoiding fast food joints are easy ways to not have to deal with these type issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Meh, I've seen stuff like this before. I'm not worried about it. I think that things are going to eventually come full circle as people become more and more conscious about what they eat.


I think that people have a responsibility to watch what they eat and make smart decisions and assume
that if it's not organic
or all natural or what not, then they run the risk of who knows what being in the food.


shopping at places like whole foods and avoiding fast food joints are easy ways to not have to deal with these type issues.

 

 

Does not compute.

 

Organic doesn't mean safe by ANY means. Some scientists believe that organically grown foods may be more harmful mostly do to not being bacteria resistant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Does not compute.


Organic doesn't mean safe by ANY means. Some scientists believe that organically grown foods may be more harmful mostly do to not being bacteria resistant

 

sorry man but are you saying that the au natural version of food is MORE dangerous than the GMO version? :facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

synopsis?

 

 

A lot was covered. Major points, a handful of companies including Monsanto, Dow, Dupont, Syngenta, Archer-Daniels Midland, and Con-Agra are patenting all the species of edible plant and seed in every country they can. They are suing farmers to force them to pay to use their seeds rather than reusing old seed from crop. They are adding weird things into the genetics that haven't been tested and nobody knows the side effects. They put a suicide gene in crops so seed has to be purchased. They put test fields all over the country and nobody knows where they all are, so there is a very good chance they will cross-contaminate. There is no labeling required in this country, so nobody knows what they're eating and whether that is to blame for health effects. The total number of companies selling seeds is now four, and the species of potatoes, corn, and apples have gone from thousands a hundred years ago, to less than 10 today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I can understand the words. I don't understand your logic.

 

 

Logic? There's no logic involved, I'm simply repeating what I've heard from top scientists as the USDA where my brother works.

 

They say that organically grown food is not as safe as you think and in some instances can be more dangerous and harmful compared to "processed" food.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Logic? There's no logic involved, I'm simply repeating what I've heard from top scientists as the USDA where my brother works.


They say that organically grown food is not as safe as you think and in some instances can be more dangerous and harmful compared to "processed" food.

 

 

You really should think about this a little more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
  • Members
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

In the United States, the regulatory process is confused because there are three different government agencies that have jurisdiction over GM foods. To put it very simply, the EPA evaluates GM plants for environmental safety, the USDA evaluates whether the plant is safe to grow, and the FDA evaluates whether the plant is safe to eat. The EPA is responsible for regulating substances such as pesticides or toxins that may cause harm to the environment. GM crops such as B.t. pesticide-laced corn or herbicide-tolerant crops but not foods modified for their nutritional value fall under the purview of the EPA. The USDA is responsible for GM crops that do not fall under the umbrella of the EPA such as drought-tolerant or disease-tolerant crops, crops grown for animal feeds, or whole fruits, vegetables and grains for human consumption. The FDA historically has been concerned with pharmaceuticals, cosmetics and food products and additives, not whole foods. Under current guidelines, a genetically-modified ear of corn sold at a produce stand is not regulated by the FDA because it is a whole food, but a box of cornflakes is regulated because it is a food product. The FDA's stance is that GM foods are substantially equivalent to unmodified, "natural" foods, and therefore not subject to FDA regulation.

 

The EPA conducts risk assessment studies on pesticides that could potentially cause harm to human health and the environment, and establishes tolerance and residue levels for pesticides. There are strict limits on the amount of pesticides that may be applied to crops during growth and production, as well as the amount that remains in the food after processing. Growers using pesticides must have a license for each pesticide and must follow the directions on the label to accord with the EPA's safety standards. Government inspectors may periodically visit farms and conduct investigations to ensure compliance. Violation of government regulations may result in steep fines, loss of license and even jail sentences.

 

As an example the EPA regulatory approach, consider B.t. corn. The EPA has not established limits on residue levels in B.t corn because the B.t. in the corn is not sprayed as a chemical pesticide but is a gene that is integrated into the genetic material of the corn itself. Growers must have a license from the EPA for B.t corn, and the EPA has issued a letter for the 2000 growing season requiring farmers to plant 20% unmodified corn, and up to 50% unmodified corn in regions where cotton is also cultivated41. This planting strategy may help prevent insects from developing resistance to the B.t. pesticides as well as provide a refuge for non-target insects such as Monarch butterflies.

 

The USDA has many internal divisions that share responsibility for assessing GM foods. Among these divisions are APHIS, the Animal Health and Plant Inspection Service, which conducts field tests and issues permits to grow GM crops, the Agricultural Research Service which performs in-house GM food research, and the Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service which oversees the USDA risk assessment program. The USDA is concerned with potential hazards of the plant itself. Does it harbor insect pests? Is it a noxious weed? Will it cause harm to indigenous species if it escapes from farmer's fields? The USDA has the power to impose quarantines on problem regions to prevent movement of suspected plants, restrict import or export of suspected plants, and can even destroy plants cultivated in violation of USDA regulations. Many GM plants do not require USDA permits from APHIS. A GM plant does not require a permit if it meets these 6 criteria: 1) the plant is not a noxious weed; 2) the genetic material introduced into the GM plant is stably integrated into the plant's own genome; 3) the function of the introduced gene is known and does not cause plant disease; 4) the GM plant is not toxic to non-target organisms; 5) the introduced gene will not cause the creation of new plant viruses; and 6) the GM plant cannot contain genetic material from animal or human pathogens (see http://www.aphis.usda.gov:80/bbep/bp/7cfr340 ).

 

The current FDA policy was developed in 1992 (Federal Register Docket No. 92N-0139) and states that agri-biotech companies may voluntarily ask the FDA for a consultation. Companies working to create new GM foods are not required to consult the FDA, nor are they required to follow the FDA's recommendations after the consultation. Consumer interest groups wish this process to be mandatory, so that all GM food products, whole foods or otherwise, must be approved by the FDA before being released for commercialization. The FDA counters that the agency currently does not have the time, money, or resources to carry out exhaustive health and safety studies of every proposed GM food product. Moreover, the FDA policy as it exists today does not allow for this type of intervention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Haha holy crap are you blowing this out of proportion.


ORGANIC food is not as good for you as some people say, and in SOME instances can be worse for you than genetically modified food.

 

 

I didn't say anything about organic food. I'm talking about modifying a gene in a necessary food like corn or potatoes and then suing farmers to force them to use a seed that has to be repurchased every year, with absolutely no testing on the health effects or resistance to insect, drought, blight, etc. I'm worried about starvation and illness on a mass scale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I didn't say anything about organic food. I'm talking about modifying a gene in a necessary food like corn or potatoes and then suing farmers to force them to use a seed that has to be repurchased every year, with absolutely no testing on the health effects or resistance to insect, drought, blight, etc. I'm worried about starvation and illness on a mass scale.

 

 

Okay so what you're saying has absolutely no relation to what I said, got it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I didn't say anything about organic food. I'm talking about modifying a gene in a necessary food like corn or potatoes and then suing farmers to force them to use a seed that has to be repurchased every year, with absolutely no testing on the health effects or resistance to insect, drought, blight, etc. I'm worried about starvation and illness on a mass scale.

 

 

Just be glad that there are handfuls of farmers "washing" Monsanto's seed and getting that kill gene out of it. Of course they are being prosecuted when caught and getting their asses handed to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Does not compute.


Organic doesn't mean safe by ANY means. Some scientists believe that organically grown foods may be more harmful mostly do to not being bacteria resistant

 

 

 

 

if you stay strictly organic, your body acidity (alkaline if you do it right) would not allow bacteria to survive inside of you, therefore safe. also, coconut water will rape anything nasty living inside your body if you incorporate that into your diet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...