General Discussion

Orrex

(66,589 posts)

78. That would be medically unethical, and it's a false analogy

Sun Mar 15, 2015, 02:34 PM

Mar 2015

There are legitimate (i.e., well-justified) vaccine-related concerns, such as injection-site-reaction and the like, that require vaccines to be identified as such before administering them. Those concerns to not merely depend upon (and are frankly independent of) anti-vaxxers' fear or ignorance.

There is no similarly compelling reason to disclose GMO content. There is no legitimate (i.e., well-justified) health concern regarding GMO foods. Such concerns depend solely upon anti-GMO fear or ignorance.

That's why it's a false analogy: you're likening legitimate concerns about statistically plausible health complications to baseless concerns about statistically non-existent health impacts.

If anti-GMO advocates can demonstrate otherwise, I invite them to do so. However, posting a list of countries that have banned GMOs is not sufficient in this regard.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

366 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

If GMOs Are So Great, Then Label Them. [View all] sabrina 1 Mar 2015 OP

100% agree with OP, any rejection of OP is a gmo lackey..nt StopTheNeoCons Mar 2015 #1

I want a label that says, "fertilized with cow shit" Major Nikon Mar 2015 #166

cow shit Agony Mar 2015 #172

No, it's still cow shit after that Major Nikon Mar 2015 #175

... Agony Mar 2015 #214

Sure, they just sprinkle it around for shits and giggles Major Nikon Mar 2015 #218

Organic cowshit Jim Beard Mar 2015 #360

And it does work most of the time Major Nikon Mar 2015 #363

Agreed, 100%; It's a slam-dunk nikto Mar 2015 #225

Excellent and mine.. which should say "None of your Damn Business".. Cha Mar 2015 #248

Mislabeled father founding Mar 2015 #281

Agreed nikto Mar 2015 #365

I agree completely. nm rhett o rick Mar 2015 #2

Good post. greatlaurel Mar 2015 #3

Just a guess. Prepping the public... Trillo Mar 2015 #4

Good post, it's always the poorest people who end up with few choices. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #9

Pushing back against ridiculous misinformation is not the same as pushing GMOs. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #13

Such as? No one is telling pro-GMOers what to eat, they are free to eat GMOs if they wish. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #19

Bright boy, Dan Quayle. Enthusiast Mar 2015 #29

I wonder if he ever learned how to spell 'tomato' the American way? After all, wasn't it he who sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #93

Yeah. The Republicans were united in their desire to keep consumers completely in the dark Enthusiast Mar 2015 #157

And they're still working on it, it seems. And now with the help of sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #163

Oh, yes. The miscreants had to gain control of both parties. Enthusiast Mar 2015 #164

"But now we are being told what to eat" NuclearDem Mar 2015 #89

We ARE being told what to eat and we are being to just 'shut up' and eat it. Sorry, Dems don't take sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #99

So wrong. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #108

Mad Cow disease demonstrated how untrustworthy corporations are and how much regulation is needed. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #116

You clearly have no idea of the history of BSE. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #140

Yes we do have an idea of what some of the cause of BSE are. Animal feed has been identified as one sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #142

The cause is unknown, the transmission has been identified Major Nikon Mar 2015 #206

Wrong? bvar22 Mar 2015 #188

Well this is odd. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #196

LOL! At the 46 second mark! WOW. So you just don't like hearing him say that or Rex Mar 2015 #228

Notice how I didn't mention anything of the sort in the post he replied to. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #231

Try watching it again. And Europe isn't the only place where GMOs have been banned. In fact sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #233

Ho boy. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #236

Then label THEM. If they are so wonderful, what are they afraid of? sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #239

Because first of all, the organic foods industry has very successfully NuclearDem Mar 2015 #240

BS. Most people who oppose GMOs are opposed to them for good reasons, and it has nothing to do sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #243

Still waiting on those citations. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #246

Still waiting on the labels Generic Other Mar 2015 #294

Not what I was talking about. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #303

"Well let folks know whether their foods been genetically modified because Americans should know Rex Mar 2015 #229

Thanks for that. So sad, so many promises, offshore drilling, mandated insurance, GMOs sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #234

Few of which can be published without the permission of Monsanto et al eridani Mar 2015 #230

I'm going to need a citation for that claim. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #232

Well, if Scientific American is "scientidic" enough for you-- eridani Mar 2015 #261

That was a slam dunk. blackspade Mar 2015 #295

No, it wasn't. HuckleB Mar 2015 #300

I read it. blackspade Mar 2015 #302

So you haven't read the articles. HuckleB Mar 2015 #311

Nice dodge. blackspade Mar 2015 #326

So, not only did you not read them, you are offering up an ad hominem attack. HuckleB Mar 2015 #330

What are you blathering about? blackspade Mar 2015 #331

That's so cute. HuckleB Mar 2015 #332

Keep digging blackspade Mar 2015 #333

It's a good thing there's no GMO popcorn, or you'd be breaking out in hives! HuckleB Mar 2015 #334

Six year old stories tend to need updating. HuckleB Mar 2015 #299

"they cannot examine whether the genetically modified crops lead to unintended environmental side suffragette Mar 2015 #306

And very out of date information (see post 299) that also ignores that entities like the EU have ... HuckleB Mar 2015 #313

Not a word in that article about superweeds or the possible extinction of Monarch butterflies eridani Mar 2015 #320

You can't stay on topic. You put up one BS argument, and it gets slapped down, and then... HuckleB Mar 2015 #322

So GMO encouragement of far more glyphosphate use doesn't count? eridani Mar 2015 #335

So you didn't bother to read the links? HuckleB Mar 2015 #340

The links said that herbicide resistance was linked to more glyphosphate, but not eridani Mar 2015 #345

So you really didn't read the links. HuckleB Mar 2015 #362

The links said that gene transfer from GMOS was NOT an issue-- eridani Mar 2015 #364

"Only in Third World countries AND America, it appears," KamaAina Mar 2015 #312

Labeling costs a lot of money. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #75

Take everything off the label then. roody Mar 2015 #82

Careful, someone will call you a Libertarian with that line of logic. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #90

The bans on GMOs in Europe are based on something very important, they are based on what sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #216

You'd be singing a different tune if the GOP managed to ban abortion in a state in the US. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #217

I thought we were talking food. Second time someone introduced an entirely different sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #219

Actually, you did. You brought up the subject 'democracy'. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #220

Actually it is NOT a flaw in Democracy if the majority disagrees with me. That IS Democracy. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #226

Then LABEL it, and let the consumer make the choice. bvar22 Mar 2015 #317

Get that damn calorie count off my ice cream too. roody Mar 2015 #126

There is a significant cost delta in determining the caloric value of a food, versus AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #132

Cut the Corporate salaries, the bonuses, and RAISE THEIR TAXES. We are talking about sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #251

Do you understand how corporate finance works? AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #277

lolol you know what is too "uncomfortable to bear" - TBF Mar 2015 #266

Yes it does, and big companies pushing GMOS FORCED more costs on to us needing "organic" labeling... cascadiance Mar 2015 #150

More than that, labeling serves a particular purpose Major Nikon Mar 2015 #208

Monsanto Announces $1.48 Billion Profit Amid 'Monsanto Protection Act' Controversy Cha Mar 2015 #259

And every little pressure on their profitability raises their prices. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #275

Please tell me how it is going to cost much more money? Jim Beard Mar 2015 #342

That's a hell of a lot less than I was told. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #343

Doesn't it make sense? Jim Beard Mar 2015 #353

I care about what I feed my family, ergo, I grow my own produce and meats. Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #5

Yes, that is what we do. We live in a farming community so can exchange products we grow sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #7

I don't have to label. Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #8

If you're not selling your products to other people, you don't have to label them. We do not sell sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #12

No, I do not sell, I am morethan happy to give to the older generation who isn't Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #15

I grow a bit of my own food, but I live in a city in which land is extremely expensive. JDPriestly Mar 2015 #69

You realize most people can't do that, correct? nt Logical Mar 2015 #115

Can't or just chose not to, it isn't easy work. I make the sacrifice for my family. Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #117

So the person living paycheck to paycheck, a week behind on the rent, is choosing not to buy ScreamingMeemie Mar 2015 #122

Sacrifices can be made, there are community gardens, I am not rich by any means. Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #141

I live in an apartment JonLP24 Mar 2015 #201

If I lived in an apartment i would also be buying from the grocery store unless i Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #204

Excellent point! KT2000 Mar 2015 #6

Let's label all foods.. X_Digger Mar 2015 #10

That's fine with me. We grow our own. We do not use insecticides, it's not necessary. Companion sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #14

You think the food you grow isn't produced by mutagenesis? X_Digger Mar 2015 #17

Don't worry. We use our own seeds from last year. Don't tell Monsanto, they don't believe in sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #20

Lol, and the ultimate source of those seeds? (Likely mutagenesis or forced hybridization.) X_Digger Mar 2015 #44

Read Post #23 from Erich Bloodaxe BSN. You will find the answer in both of his/her posts. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #53

Ridiculous. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #68

I'm not following you. I know that nearly everything HAS been contaminated sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #74

What was in your soil when you started? AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #77

I have passed blind taste tests. It's easy when you are accustomed to eating natural food. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #79

Who administered these tests? AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #83

I'm not worried about the water. We have lived in areas where the well water was contaminated sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #92

your ridiculous questions laundry_queen Mar 2015 #346

They're not ridiculous questions and it matters precisely because I am trying to highlight the ridic AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #350

People who like to grow their own Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #23

Thank you. And yes, the taste is totally different. But Monsanto wants to take away your sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #27

Animals would agree Oilwellian Mar 2015 #86

Yeah, I believe that. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #91

Lol, I can definitely relate to the animals. They 'know things' a lot of people don't know. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #96

If I did that test in my yard, both would be stripped clean in an hour. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #106

I've done it with people. Only one was stripped clean once they had a choice. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #131

If you don't know what a double-blind test is, this is a meaningless anecdote. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #134

I don't need to know to see that when given a choice between naturally grown corn, which is sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #145

Why would the GMO corn be "dried up" again? AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #155

Have you ever tasted corn grown naturally? I have, and by comparison, commercially grown corn is sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #237

Special tires are required for vehicles that work on GMO Corn nationalize the fed Mar 2015 #242

I cannot prove but I suspect AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #272

I don't think you need to use double blind tests on squirrels. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #263

Placement? Size? Freshness? AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #276

Heritage doesn't mean it's not hybrid. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #70

Well sure. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #87

This have nothing to do with BeanMusical Mar 2015 #94

Not true. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #95

I prefer the old blind groping in the dark method right now. It tastes better. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #104

I do not. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #105

Except we don't know how much harm they are doing. And the natural way tastes a whole lot better. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #110

You keep saying it tastes better, with zero proof to back that claim up. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #118

What we grow most definitely tastes better than store bought vegetables. We are not growing food for sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #123

Yeah, I'm sure that in the 16th century they were able to BeanMusical Mar 2015 #109

Actually, I acknowledged that AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #114

Lol! BeanMusical Mar 2015 #129

I hate it when I'm wrong too. No worries. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #135

Then I'm sad to learn that you're in hating mode 24/7/365. BeanMusical Mar 2015 #151

Still waiting for you to add anything interesting to this discussion. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #153

I found his/her comments as interesting as yours. I guess you should add 'interesting to ME' since sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #221

Well, it's good you found both comments interesting, because his or hers was just an echo of mine. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #222

I generally find most comments interesting, in one way or another. I learn from what people sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #223

I don't understand why people cannot simply acknowledge that nature knows best and that sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #119

"Mass production = more money." BeanMusical Mar 2015 #125

Nature naturally creates things that are fully lethal to humans, all the time. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #128

Yes, and smart humans educate themselves so they know the purpose of those natural sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #136

Purpose implies design. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #138

You don't know 'in what sense I meant it' sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #162

It doesn't work beautifully if we don't interfere. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #170

How many species are disappearing SINCE we began 'tinkering' with nature? Honey Bees eg. And we know sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #241

Insecticides are one cause. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #274

And every time a cause is found, such as the insecticides causing the disappearance of honey bees sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #287

On that, we agree. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #291

Of course there is natural hybridization BUT Jim Beard Mar 2015 #359

I love the taste of radiated, cancer causing tomatoes. More profits. Lower quality... immoderate Mar 2015 #35

Are you talking about grafting apples? Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #21

Depends on what you graft. Just shoots? Same dna (think roses at HD w/ wild rose roots). X_Digger Mar 2015 #41

You have no idea how GMO's work. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #65

Hehe, no worries. n/t X_Digger Mar 2015 #97

Yes. As I understand it, apples need to be grafted or otherwise tampered with. JDPriestly Mar 2015 #72

Well, heck, you don't NEED to wash anything you grow... Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #158

Can you believe it? But my story is true. JDPriestly Mar 2015 #227

good idea roody Mar 2015 #130

Absolutely. If makers of GMO, God Move Over food are proud, then label the products! Easy. appalachiablue Mar 2015 #11

Just stick "may contain GMOs" on every product. Nye Bevan Mar 2015 #16

Where I come from, people do care, enough to grow their own products. In the EU an sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #22

That wouldn't satisfy the many people who HAVE voted yes on labeling laws. pnwmom Mar 2015 #33

Oh, Shush! We can trust Monanto to do the right thing. Tierra_y_Libertad Mar 2015 #18

I just look at the word 'monsanto' and it translates to 'BEWARE' to me. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #24

They gave us wonderful poisons like DDT. BeanMusical Mar 2015 #121

As a recent, not so brilliant 'philosopher' once said 'fool me once, don't fool me again' or words sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #127

I totally agree. BeanMusical Mar 2015 #133

Actually, they didn't. Lancero Mar 2015 #199

Thet didn't what? BeanMusical Mar 2015 #235

Kicked and recommended a whole bunch! Enthusiast Mar 2015 #25

Yes, let the market decide. -nt CrispyQ Mar 2015 #26

Lol, what happened to the invisible hand? sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #28

It's being manipulated. CrispyQ Mar 2015 #32

Yes, so the claim that the 'invisible hand' would take care of the market, was just as delusional sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #250

It's all such a disgusting scam. CrispyQ Mar 2015 #270

A good tangent, I agree with every word you said. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #316

The market depends on information to make correct decisions. n/t pnwmom Mar 2015 #34

Before giving vaccines, doctors should be forced to say that some people believe they cause autism. Orrex Mar 2015 #30

Not the same. Unlabelled vaccines aren't given to people. pnwmom Mar 2015 #36

They are already labelled Orrex Mar 2015 #39

They aren't labeled with GMO content.Just because their genetic differences aren't visible to the eye pnwmom Mar 2015 #43

Who's talking about "differences visible to the eye?" Not me. Orrex Mar 2015 #47

We told you. We want GMO ingredients, as defined by science pnwmom Mar 2015 #57

They are already labelled, as defined by science. Orrex Mar 2015 #62

I want GMO's, as defined by science, to be included in ingredient lists. pnwmom Mar 2015 #148

Studies have been carried out for decades Orrex Mar 2015 #176

How can scientists prove a real risk exists when the GMO producers pnwmom Mar 2015 #203

Every tree? JonLP24 Mar 2015 #210

Dude! That's totally science! SCIENCE! Orrex Mar 2015 #213

What is the problem here? We have a RIGHT to know what our food supply consists of. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #252

Let me tell you what desperation actually is: Orrex Mar 2015 #265

A long post filled with personal attacks. I wouldn't call that science, only sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #279

You don't have a leg to stand on with any of that. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #305

I stated my experience with Progmos going back years. I never met Republican who didn't argue FOR sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #308

Still waiting on those citations. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #309

I love it when I don't have to go searching for examples of what I just described. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #314

Spare me. Orrex Mar 2015 #307

I, did NOT accuse you of anything. If you have a problem with someone who did, do not sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #310

This is why it's madness to try to discuss the issue with anti-GMO types Orrex Mar 2015 #315

You eat food that has been sprayed with insecticides and you don't think that's a problem? sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #168

Again with the red herrings Orrex Mar 2015 #182

Again, "visible to the eye" is your standard, not mine. Orrex Mar 2015 #146

The difference is in the DNA. roody Mar 2015 #137

I know this, before accepting any medication from a doctor, I want to know what the side effects sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #38

"Bg Parma" is irrelevant to this discussion. Orrex Mar 2015 #46

You mentioned it. I was thinking, 'why are vaccines relevant to this thread' myself? sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #49

Anti-vaccine foolishness is directly relevant to anti-GMO foolishness Orrex Mar 2015 #50

I was just describing all the ads we are getting on TV. Are we forbidden from mentioning sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #52

Who do you think is forbidding anything? Orrex Mar 2015 #55

Does anyone recommend not telling people if a shot is a vaccine so that anti-vaxxers don't avoid it? Chathamization Mar 2015 #76

That would be medically unethical, and it's a false analogy Orrex Mar 2015 #78

Yes, I agree your analogy was poor; maybe GMO-boosters will refrain from comparing GMOs to vaccines Chathamization Mar 2015 #113

You actually went with the "I know you are, but what am I?" gambit? Orrex Mar 2015 #144

No, you compared GMOs to vaccines then followed up saying they were nothing alike; which, I agree Chathamization Mar 2015 #147

Less than 7% of the population is anti-vax and less than 7% is against GMO labeling GreatGazoo Mar 2015 #296

How do you know what a GMO is in the first place? alp227 Mar 2015 #31

The standard definition will do. Or we could use that already used in pnwmom Mar 2015 #37

And most of them taste terrible. Another reason we grow our own. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #42

It would be hard for Monsanto. They'd lose sales. pnwmom Mar 2015 #45

Not much to know. Either the food is 'altered' genetically, in which case I don't want it, or it sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #40

I don't know, because they are not labeled. I would know, if they were. So my standard for judging a sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #51

If you only want to eat food labelled as "GM free", that's entirely your right. Donald Ian Rankin Mar 2015 #48

I don't care if the label them or not. Not my product. But I won't BUY unlabeled food. I absolutely sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #56

What pathetic and vacuous comparison: "mark the religion of the grower" GoneFishin Mar 2015 #58

Lol, I noticed that. Decided it was too way out there to even try to understand. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #64

It sounds like you are saying American's have no right to know what is in our food. bvar22 Mar 2015 #193

You didn't just misunderstand me, you misunderstood genetic modification. Donald Ian Rankin Mar 2015 #258

It seems like a mostly meaningless label Bradical79 Mar 2015 #54

Europeans label them. An overwhelming number of people in those countries demanded it. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #60

Europeans label them? abelenkpe Mar 2015 #161

I'm in agreement with you customerserviceguy Mar 2015 #59

True, regarding how much attention people pay to cigarette warnings. But food is a different thing. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #63

You're right about the better foods customerserviceguy Mar 2015 #67

This message was self-deleted by its author namastea42 Mar 2015 #61

"Stop asking what's in it. Just STFU and eat it!". An immoral and dishonest business GoneFishin Mar 2015 #66

Exactly. Americans are treated like children by their own government, viewed as too 'stupid to know sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #84

Absolutely! eom whereisjustice Mar 2015 #71

I've seen the excuse people won't buy anything with long scary looking words Rex Mar 2015 #73

Because the public is too stupid. Signed, Monsanto roody Mar 2015 #80

When that is your argument you bet your ass you are dealing with crooks and villains TheKentuckian Mar 2015 #149

I would rec this 60,000 if DU would allow me. Yes, if Gmos are so fabulous, label them! Dont call me Shirley Mar 2015 #81

This 2012 PSA by Food and Water Watch remains as relevant and funny as ever, IMO. proverbialwisdom Mar 2015 #85

Perfect n/t Oilwellian Mar 2015 #98

Brilliant! +1 Tierra_y_Libertad Mar 2015 #101

FYI, the public is "moving the market" even without labels. Vote with every dollar you spend. proverbialwisdom Mar 2015 #88

Ah ha! Cha Mar 2015 #286

Message auto-removed Name removed Mar 2015 #100

Welcome to DU. Yes, you can post. Now what? Tell us about yourself, please. uppityperson Mar 2015 #102

Testing for what? Finals GP6971 Mar 2015 #111

Labeling is a scare tactic with no rational or scientific basis. NYC Liberal Mar 2015 #103

I don't agree. Labeling is more akin to 'Beware of Vicious Dog' so long as there is a vicious dog on sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #107

What nonsense - do you really believe this, or are you being paid to post it here? closeupready Mar 2015 #124

... Major Nikon Mar 2015 #167

Shills do exist. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #179

So do 4 leaf clovers Major Nikon Mar 2015 #183

I don't know about the traffic here. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #185

Here's what you have to ask yourself Major Nikon Mar 2015 #186

Yes of course. Someone disagrees with you so they must be paid. NYC Liberal Mar 2015 #180

How come the fat and calories in a pint of Ben and Jerrys roody Mar 2015 #139

Nutrition labels need to be removed; consumers can't be trusted to decide for themselves what they Chathamization Mar 2015 #143

I will actually admit that seeing calorie counts on menus has scared me out of eating Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #159

That information is quite useful in making informed decisions Major Nikon Mar 2015 #187

Because fat and calories have not been turned into scare words NYC Liberal Mar 2015 #181

Imagine if "big agra" financed an effort to label food that's been fertilized with cow shit Major Nikon Mar 2015 #169

The wonderful benefit of GMO corn is that it can be sprayed with extra glyphosate GreatGazoo Mar 2015 #267

Simple solution, don't buy un-labeled products. Like corn from the farmers market. Might be GMO. nt Logical Mar 2015 #112

I have a solution. Have some GMO company execs consume completely unlabeled food we prepare... cascadiance Mar 2015 #152

I don't, we grow our own! And we know the farmers we buy from. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #165

I'm good with that. I would happily consume GMO foods, anway. Agnosticsherbet Mar 2015 #120

And you have to pay extra for "organic" labeling and validation processes too, cascadiance Mar 2015 #154

If you have irrational fear, the burden is on you Major Nikon Mar 2015 #171

YOU and the GMO people have to prove that our fears are "irrational"... cascadiance Mar 2015 #174

Already been done. That's why it's irrational Major Nikon Mar 2015 #177

I think I'd trust "nonsense" that supports my argument published in Scientific American... cascadiance Mar 2015 #190

"The views expressed are those of the author and are not necessarily those of Scientific American." Major Nikon Mar 2015 #198

But you are only quoting YOURSELF... cascadiance Mar 2015 #200

Just so you know, as someone who has not yet delved as deeply into this sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #293

there is no GMO research not vetted for publication by Monsanto et al n/t eridani Mar 2015 #238

I just don't see how promoting nonsense helps the anti-GMO case Major Nikon Mar 2015 #278

There is no research on GMOs that is not controlled by Monsanto, et al eridani Mar 2015 #318

Perhaps not Major Nikon Mar 2015 #323

Say what? HuckleB Mar 2015 #324

They have to get the seeds from Monsanto. Monsanto has final say over publication n/t eridani Mar 2015 #337

Who else would give them the seeds? And wrong. Very wrong. HuckleB Mar 2015 #338

"only studies that the seed companies have approved ever see the light of a peer-reviewed journal" eridani Mar 2015 #344

Seralini. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #347

They are available. Agnosticsherbet Mar 2015 #189

What is available? GMO or "organic" labeling? cascadiance Mar 2015 #192

Organic labelilng is the current state of GMO free. Agnosticsherbet Mar 2015 #195

But Organic food producers should be sending GMO food producers the bill! cascadiance Mar 2015 #197

I'm noticed that while those GMO free labels are popping up in a variety of places around the store Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #160

There is no uniform law except with organic. Agnosticsherbet Mar 2015 #191

Just saw this, FYI. proverbialwisdom Mar 2015 #224

How interesting! djean111 Mar 2015 #253

Thanks, I got several useful links off that article. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #262

The products you're seeing with GMO free labels must be 10 times as expensive, since I've been told Chathamization Mar 2015 #271

So far, most of them seem to be maybe Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #280

I agree, it would be a "selling" point, greatly sought after, perfectly fine & dandy. mother earth Mar 2015 #156

Labeling GMOs would mean we're a government ''of the people.'' DeSwiss Mar 2015 #173

Pretty soon Monsanto will be bragging about helping with population control in India! cascadiance Mar 2015 #194

It's just a blip on Monsatan's radar. DeSwiss Mar 2015 #205

Oh, Vandana Shiva. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #215

Brilliant! C Moon Mar 2015 #178

Simple enough blm Mar 2015 #184

kick. midnight Mar 2015 #202

I suspect that we wont see a labeling law passed until something cstanleytech Mar 2015 #207

And if it passes, it would get overturned by TPP corporate courts if that passes! cascadiance Mar 2015 #209

Probably more than I will ever see in a lifetime even if I was lucky cstanleytech Mar 2015 #211

Almost everything we eat has been genetically modified by man, through selective breeding. cpwm17 Mar 2015 #212

Ah.... BULLSHIT. DeSwiss Mar 2015 #245

This, ladies and gentlemen, is what is called the appeal to nature fallacy. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #247

It makes so much sense. What problem do you have with it? sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #255

Still waiting on that citation. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #268

Clearly you're not a fan of science and the scientific method. cpwm17 Mar 2015 #298

What I find ironic is your choice of avatar. DeSwiss Mar 2015 #357

Every single argument on this thread that is against labeling GMO's Zorra Mar 2015 #244

It's in the water..... DeSwiss Mar 2015 #249

I don't care what anyone else eats at all but I've been caring what I eat for a long time now Cha Mar 2015 #254

I completely agree with you, Cha. I don't get it. Why the desperate resistance to simply sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #256

Yes, a very serious threat to our environment.. like the Bees.. Cha Mar 2015 #257

K&R Scuba Mar 2015 #260

Agreed KansDem Mar 2015 #264

The irony is that people put incredible amounts of crap and 'non-food' in their bodies every day. randome Mar 2015 #269

just label the products that don't have them greymattermom Mar 2015 #273

That's an excellent idea. I wonder why it hasn't been done? I just read that Hershey is sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #285

According to a post upthread. NCTraveler Mar 2015 #290

I didn't know that. Now I do so will add it to the ever growing list of products/food sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #304

That label already exists. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #288

Exactly right. blackspade Mar 2015 #282

Bingo. You ask the right question. mmonk Mar 2015 #283

K & R Petrushka Mar 2015 #284

Presidents eat organic privately but kowtow to agribusiness publicly lofty1 Mar 2015 #289

My thoughts exactly laundry_queen Mar 2015 #349

The Organic People go out of their way HoosierCowboy Mar 2015 #292

Sorry if they've been asked and answered up-thread, but my questions are whatchamacallit Mar 2015 #297

I was an art director katsy Mar 2015 #328

this should be a no brainer G_j Mar 2015 #301

Exactly. Anyone producing food with GMOs ought be be proud to label them. Vinca Mar 2015 #319

A PRINCIPLED CASE AGAINST MANDATORY GMO LABELS HuckleB Mar 2015 #321

I cannot think of a single 'principled' reason for denying the public the right to know what is in sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #325

There is no justification for labeling one seed development technology, but not all of them. HuckleB Mar 2015 #329

Let me ask you something There appears to be little doubt anymore that the disappearance of honey sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #336

You're going on and on about things that you can't support with a consensus of science. HuckleB Mar 2015 #339

Well, I gave you a chance and you blew it. I take Monsanto is ignoring the threat to our sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #341

You are spreading baseless fear mongering. HuckleB Mar 2015 #361

The labeling isn't about informing people. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #348

Yes, it is! And the people have a right to have that label, as Europeans do. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #351

Ah, I see what's going on here now. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #352

Tactic # 22. When all attempts to defend the indefensible fail, post moronic animated emoticon. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #356

That's awfully specific to be as far high on the list as 22. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #358

Interesting collection, thanks for posting! (nt) petronius Mar 2015 #354

Thanks for posting these! zappaman Mar 2015 #355

K&R Cleita Mar 2015 #327

Don't fear science behind either vaccines or GMOs HuckleB Mar 2015 #366