GMOs in Germany

[SteelCurtain]

But is there any reason to think that greater knowledge of human physiology will be more likely to reveal problems with GMOs than, say, fabric dyes or the stuff in your shampoo?

I think it's reasonable to think we are the most exposed to something when we ingest it.

I'm not saying I think gmos or other artificial food substances are bad. I'm just saying it is possible that they could be and we just don't know yet.

But that's my point. We don't know about any of the things that will turn out to be harmful to us until we do. Unless we have a reason to believe that it is more likely that GMOs will be one of those things, acting like they are is irrational.

I mean, we could find out that Acai berries are carcinogenic in 50 years. Does that mean you should, just in case, avoid acai berries?

[Catholic_Lady]

If you're going to worry about things you're exposed to in your environment, GMO's should probably be close to the bottom of the list.

Did the typing tard get the you*** right?

What should be at the top in your opinion?

---

I think it's reasonable to think we are the most exposed to something when we ingest it.

I'm not saying I think gmos or other artificial food substances are bad. I'm just saying it is possible that they could be and we just don't know yet.

But that's my point. We don't know about any of the things that will turn out to be harmful to us until we do. Unless we have a reason to believe that it is more likely that GMOs will be one of those things, acting like they are is irrational.

I mean, we could find out that Acai berries are carcinogenic in 50 years. Does that mean you should, just in case, avoid acai berries?

But it's a safer bet that most foods found in nature (and that we have been eating for hundreads or thousands of years) are probably fine. Especially those that have already been established to be healthy. I can understand someone wanting to stay away from artificial foods to be on the safe side, just in case.

[SteelCurtain]

How do you figure it is a safer bet? That seems like an emotional reaction to GMOs rather than one made with any kind of reasoning. Tobacco is just as natural as you're saying, and smoking it can cause cancer.

The banana you eat is a GMO, the corn you eat is one, too. So is nearly every fruit that you eat. Even the ones that cost more because they put a sticker with the word "Organic" on. All GMO's.

[Catholic_Lady]

I don't see how it seems emotional. As I said, I'm not an "all natural" type person and have no dog in this fight. I think it seems very reasonable to make the assumption that fruits and vegetables and meats that we've been eating for a long time are less likely to be carcinogens than relatively recent man made foods.

[SteelCurtain]

But based on what? What makes you think that it is reasonable to suspect that GMOs are more dangerous? I am not disagreeing with you, I am just trying to understand your reasoning for thinking so.

All of the 'ingredients' that are in these 'man made' products are enhancements of genes that are already there, or splicing genes from other natural substances or plants/animals. It is a more precise version of what man has been doing for centuries, which is hybridizing and selecting the best or most desirable traits.

[Mr Greene]

When they were doing crop trials it was noted that there was a decrease in biodiversity in the areas around the trials, it was recommended to halt introduction of GMOs due to concerns regarding the impact on the environment.
Link
This has led directly to the EU wide moratorium on production of GMOs and provided an excuse for the protectionist inclined European Commission to ban the importation of GMOs from outside the EU.
Link

[SteelCurtain]

When they were doing crop trials it was noted that there was a decrease in biodiversity in the areas around the trials, it was recommended to halt introduction of GMOs due to concerns regarding the impact on the environment.
Link
This has led directly to the EU wide moratorium on production of GMOs and provided an excuse for the protectionist inclined European Commission to ban the importation of GMOs from outside the EU.
Link

These are real concerns. They are essentially new crops, even though they are analogs of the ones there before, and plants/animals don't know how to ingest them.

But that is the entire point of most of our pesticide spraying and aphid resistant strains and whatnot, is to prevent animals from eating and thriving around crops. Is there evidence that the reduction in biodiversity is solely due to GMO introduction? Interesting.

[Mr Greene]

When they were doing crop trials it was noted that there was a decrease in biodiversity in the areas around the trials, it was recommended to halt introduction of GMOs due to concerns regarding the impact on the environment.
Link
This has led directly to the EU wide moratorium on production of GMOs and provided an excuse for the protectionist inclined European Commission to ban the importation of GMOs from outside the EU.
Link

These are real concerns. They are essentially new crops, even though they are analogs of the ones there before, and plants/animals don't know how to ingest them.

But that is the entire point of most of our pesticide spraying and aphid resistant strains and whatnot, is to prevent animals from eating and thriving around crops. Is there evidence that the reduction in biodiversity is solely due to GMO introduction? Interesting.

Yes the data initially came from UK government study; (Farm Scale Evaluations / FSE) which recorded significant decline in biodiversity not only among animals but plants as well which had a knock on effect on species dependent on the 'weeds'.
Link

[SteelCurtain]

So after checking out these links, the only one that is from even a remotely non-biased site is the one from the Netherlands government website. The last two are ridiculous.

[Mr Greene]

There is also this one;
Link
And this one;
Link