Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Brainstormy

(2,551 posts)
73. Ok, let's do this one at a time
Wed Jul 17, 2013, 11:47 PM
Jul 2013

First, the rBGH hormones initially approved for diary cattle were the first "breakthrough" genetically modified food. So that's not a "bait and switch." The hormone, a genetic manipulation of bacteria, engineered and patented by Monsanto, was sold under the trade name Prosilac. Since you seem to concede that the hormones in milk are at least suspect, I'll not belabor this point beyond saying that milk, and now, to a much greater extent, cheese, is a GE food. You concede: "There is even some real evidence that this can cause problems, but since we have been consuming milk and beef that has had hormone injections for decades now, it would seem that the impact is minimal, or possibly less than minimal. "

To return to our starting point: Where are you getting YOUR research? And how does "real evidence that this can cause problems " jive with "the impact is minimal, or possible less than minimal." The fact that every developed nation in the world besides the US has banned rBGH would seem to suggest that somebody, somewhere, thinks the risks are more than minimal.

As for your next point: "GMOs are different. Our bodies do not react to the DNA that we consume, unlike chemicals such as hormones. " You've got me here, since I have no idea what you're talking about or even what your point is. I'm open to some refinement on this topic.

Your third point is a little fuzzy for me, too. You acknowledge that the articles cited have pointed to a failure in GMO crops to deliver on some of the hyped promises of genetic engineering. (Most of these can be subsumed under the "GE crops will feed the world" hypothesis. ) But the fact that these articles suggest that these promises (crop yield, environmental damage, etc.,) appear false bothers you less than wanting to know who made such promises. Well, Monsanto, for one. But I wish I could get to the seat of your antagonism. Do you work for Monsanto?

My questions are all posed in good faith. For me, these are life or death issues and I'm eager to understand how best to communicate them.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Don't know where you're getting your research Brainstormy Jul 2013 #1
Scientific Research Databases BigL Jul 2013 #6
Who is funding the research ... LisaLynne Jul 2013 #10
Alzhieimers, MS and Parkinsons rates have skyrocketed Berlum Jul 2013 #37
Not necessarily in relation to GMOs BigL Jul 2013 #50
Nothing to add ... etherealtruth Jul 2013 #56
Welcome BigL mstinamotorcity2 Jul 2013 #64
Could you give me a version with links to studies? Taverner Jul 2013 #9
Version? Brainstormy Jul 2013 #15
That article didn't have any links to studies - that's why I asked Taverner Jul 2013 #16
Have you read any of that stuff? Motown_Johnny Jul 2013 #17
Laughable? Brainstormy Jul 2013 #22
Yes, laughable. Motown_Johnny Jul 2013 #52
Ok, let's do this one at a time Brainstormy Jul 2013 #73
The 1st rule of being a conservative, take the asshole position NightWatcher Jul 2013 #2
That's why I think they should label GMOs Taverner Jul 2013 #13
Lemme add that I think antibiotics are WAY more dangerous than GMOs Taverner Jul 2013 #14
YES, but Brainstormy Jul 2013 #18
there be might some, but I'm pretty damn sure it's not for the same reasons... KG Jul 2013 #3
That's a good point. LisaLynne Jul 2013 #12
+1 Blue_Tires Jul 2013 #32
Wow! Brewinblue Jul 2013 #4
I think we need GMO food, but we're being very irresponsible about how we're doing it. Ian David Jul 2013 #5
Agreed Taverner Jul 2013 #7
Prediction... Pelican Jul 2013 #8
Then it is our task to...DUH DUH DAH! KEEP IT CIVIL! Taverner Jul 2013 #11
you're correct Brainstormy Jul 2013 #23
I think this thread would have better potential if "conservative" were defined. Socal31 Jul 2013 #19
Why food safety, GMOs, climate change, LOTS OF LIFE AND DEATH ISSUES . . . Brainstormy Jul 2013 #24
I agree 100% with the absolute need for definitions. Today's Republicans are at best HardTimes99 Jul 2013 #61
How about government intrusions into privacy? tularetom Jul 2013 #20
I side with the Libertarians on this one too Taverner Jul 2013 #21
I'd argue that's not a "conservative" standpoint Blue_Tires Jul 2013 #30
I think we should be strict with immigration. LuvNewcastle Jul 2013 #25
That's actually a quite reasonable stance Taverner Jul 2013 #27
It's not entirely a zero sum game, though jberryhill Jul 2013 #29
I'm not an economist either, but the economic growth we've seen for LuvNewcastle Jul 2013 #41
I think we should be strict with immigration... polichick Jul 2013 #36
I don't know how much longer people can continue to breed at LuvNewcastle Jul 2013 #44
I'm with you - such selfish, ignorant people... polichick Jul 2013 #45
Free-market conservatives absolutely LOVE undocumented immigrants Blue_Tires Jul 2013 #40
Yeah, they like it as long as the peons know their place. LuvNewcastle Jul 2013 #46
opposing government domestic spy programs bowens43 Jul 2013 #26
Yep. Same here. 100% Taverner Jul 2013 #28
those are mostly libertarians (and the left), not conservatives. allin99 Jul 2013 #33
Beat me to it! polichick Jul 2013 #35
That tattoos are ugly! Now you kids get off my lawn! spooky3 Jul 2013 #31
Guns are fine Blue_Tires Jul 2013 #34
I support gun ownership. sagat Jul 2013 #38
That really isn't a wedge issue, as most people do support it. Socal31 Jul 2013 #65
Voter ID laws eissa Jul 2013 #39
Election standards are set by States and I don't care to see your State's problems Bluenorthwest Jul 2013 #70
Actually, my state is pretty awesome eissa Jul 2013 #72
Illegal immigrants Eddie Haskell Jul 2013 #42
yep, those irish and poles datasuspect Jul 2013 #63
Illegal has no ethnicity Eddie Haskell Jul 2013 #68
I can't think of anything I agree with them on. sinkingfeeling Jul 2013 #43
Surely you must think Bow Ties look neat? Taverner Jul 2013 #47
Nope, bow ties look like clown clothes. sinkingfeeling Jul 2013 #48
LOL Taverner Jul 2013 #49
Bow ties are cool. Crunchy Frog Jul 2013 #71
I suppose that I think that people have to take some measure of personal responsibility Proud Liberal Dem Jul 2013 #51
I think all parties believe in personal responsibility Taverner Jul 2013 #62
Yeah, like I said I'm not sure it's really a "conservative" thing or not Proud Liberal Dem Jul 2013 #66
I kinda support being able to eat whatever and how much you want Xyzse Jul 2013 #53
Bloomberg is an idiot and a Republican Taverner Jul 2013 #54
Agreed... Although I am also for subsidizing fruits and vegetables Xyzse Jul 2013 #55
I would be for some way for ads to list the calories of the food they sell Taverner Jul 2013 #58
That's pretty funny Xyzse Jul 2013 #60
I support the Keystone Pipeline. Nye Bevan Jul 2013 #57
I am more worried about the fracking Taverner Jul 2013 #59
Less agreement with the conservatives but more on our own blind spots. BlueCheese Jul 2013 #67
Cultural Relativism distantearlywarning Jul 2013 #69
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Issues you kinda sorta si...»Reply #73