Greenpeace and GMO

2»

Comments

  • oftenreadingoftenreading Victoria, BC Posts: 12,845
    JC29856 said:

    Interesting article about GMOs written by an organic farmer. The basic premise is that those who oppose GMOs are focusing on the wrong issue; there's no proof that consumption is harmful to health. Rather, the potential harms are related to the other management techniques that tend to go along with them. I have been skeptical of the anti-GMO movement for some time since I've never seen credible evidence of harms to health, but I can agree with this reasoning. Of course, the answer doesn't necessarily need to be no GMOs; it could easily be better management practices where herbicides and the like are not the default.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/brent-preston/gmo-has-no-benefits_b_13203826.html

    Agri-business and FDA: whatever doesn't kill you instantly is generally safe.
    Ex. Glyphosate
    If you know anything about the FDA you know they are generally criticized for being too cautious and taking too long to approve medications/products. Not too many people accuse them of being too quick to give approval, so congrats on that angle.
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • JC29856JC29856 Posts: 9,617

    JC29856 said:

    Interesting article about GMOs written by an organic farmer. The basic premise is that those who oppose GMOs are focusing on the wrong issue; there's no proof that consumption is harmful to health. Rather, the potential harms are related to the other management techniques that tend to go along with them. I have been skeptical of the anti-GMO movement for some time since I've never seen credible evidence of harms to health, but I can agree with this reasoning. Of course, the answer doesn't necessarily need to be no GMOs; it could easily be better management practices where herbicides and the like are not the default.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/brent-preston/gmo-has-no-benefits_b_13203826.html

    Agri-business and FDA: whatever doesn't kill you instantly is generally safe.
    Ex. Glyphosate
    If you know anything about the FDA you know they are generally criticized for being too cautious and taking too long to approve medications/products. Not too many people accuse them of being too quick to give approval, so congrats on that angle.
    I can't see these criticisms you mention. Any reference?

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_Food_and_Drug_Administration
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 13,576
    JC29856 said:

    Interesting article about GMOs written by an organic farmer. The basic premise is that those who oppose GMOs are focusing on the wrong issue; there's no proof that consumption is harmful to health. Rather, the potential harms are related to the other management techniques that tend to go along with them. I have been skeptical of the anti-GMO movement for some time since I've never seen credible evidence of harms to health, but I can agree with this reasoning. Of course, the answer doesn't necessarily need to be no GMOs; it could easily be better management practices where herbicides and the like are not the default.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/brent-preston/gmo-has-no-benefits_b_13203826.html

    Agri-business and FDA: whatever doesn't kill you instantly is generally safe.
    Ex. Glyphosate
    Just wait and see what happens when your boy gets his hands on the FDA!
    He plans to gut it and leave us to fend for ourselves.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559

    JC29856 said:

    Interesting article about GMOs written by an organic farmer. The basic premise is that those who oppose GMOs are focusing on the wrong issue; there's no proof that consumption is harmful to health. Rather, the potential harms are related to the other management techniques that tend to go along with them. I have been skeptical of the anti-GMO movement for some time since I've never seen credible evidence of harms to health, but I can agree with this reasoning. Of course, the answer doesn't necessarily need to be no GMOs; it could easily be better management practices where herbicides and the like are not the default.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/brent-preston/gmo-has-no-benefits_b_13203826.html

    Agri-business and FDA: whatever doesn't kill you instantly is generally safe.
    Ex. Glyphosate
    If you know anything about the FDA you know they are generally criticized for being too cautious and taking too long to approve medications/products. Not too many people accuse them of being too quick to give approval, so congrats on that angle.
    the FDA in the US is just the approval arm of big multi-nationals ... this is the agency that approved rgbst ...
  • FreeFree Posts: 3,562
    The FDA approves foods for Americans that are banned in other countries...
Sign In or Register to comment.