Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
112 user(s) are online (91 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 112

more...




Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users




(1) 2 3 »


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#72
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/7/9 11:16
Last Login :
4/15 15:15
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2741
Offline
There was a movie from the '70s where genetically altered salmon turned into human eating monsters. I think it is on Youtube. Can't recall the name.



Quote:

MidwestTransplant wrote:
Quote:

MDM wrote:

In addition Aqua Bounty announced all the eggs will be sterile females.



Yeah, that worked really well for InGen, right?

Posted on: 2015/11/24 13:33
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#71
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/10/29 21:35
Last Login :
2017/7/26 14:00
From Downtown Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 93
Offline
Quote:

MDM wrote:

In addition Aqua Bounty announced all the eggs will be sterile females.



Yeah, that worked really well for InGen, right?

Posted on: 2015/11/24 2:53
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#70
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/11/10 20:38
Last Login :
2018/2/1 3:02
From JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3071
Offline
Quote:

Frank_M wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
People like to eat animal protein, so putting aside the vegan question, what the most efficient way to get it other than hunting it, where you're not "paying for it"?


Maybe we can start by serving textured insect protein to every person who wastes good food by ordering their steaks cooked well done.


Many restaurants already deal with this appropriately. They save the crappiest pieces of meat for those who order well done.

Posted on: 2015/11/20 21:29
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#69
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
2023/7/17 17:42
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Banned
Posts: 5775
Offline
Quote:

Frank_M wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
People like to eat animal protein, so putting aside the vegan question, what the most efficient way to get it other than hunting it, where you're not "paying for it"?


Maybe we can start by serving textured insect protein to every person who wastes good food by ordering their steaks cooked well done.


I like my beef med-rare but my cricket burgers crunchy!
Resized Image



Posted on: 2015/11/20 21:16
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#68
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/4/2 11:56
Last Login :
2018/10/5 14:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 756
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
People like to eat animal protein, so putting aside the vegan question, what the most efficient way to get it other than hunting it, where you're not "paying for it"?


Maybe we can start by serving textured insect protein to every person who wastes good food by ordering their steaks cooked well done.

Posted on: 2015/11/20 21:04
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#67
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/7/9 11:16
Last Login :
4/15 15:15
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2741
Offline
Quote:

Frank_M wrote:

Do you have the faith to believe that over the course of centuries, these super-athletes won?t find their way into the natural habitat by chance or accident?


Brewster beat me to the punch. The fish grow faster, but they are poorer swimmers and from I read, have difficulty reproducing on their own. They are basically designed to do well in tanks, not open water.

In addition Aqua Bounty announced all the eggs will be sterile females. The company will make money selling eggs, not so much the actual fish (they do have a facility in Panama to grow fish).

Of course, the chance of the fish getting into the environment is not zero (there is always a chance the egg could be a fertile male and or female by accident). There is always a chance. However, the fish offer a number of advantages:

Faster growth
Less fish meal needed to get them to market size
Tank raised instead of in ocean pens. Ocean pens have pollution of fish escape issues that land based tanks to not.

So IMHO, the gains greatly exceed the risks.

Posted on: 2015/11/20 20:56
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#66
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
2023/7/17 17:42
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Banned
Posts: 5775
Offline
Quote:

Frank_M wrote:
The benefits of any potentially invasive species should be studied and weighed against the risks that come with the disruption of a natural habitat. However, perhaps we should first take a much harder look at the impact our insistence of having access to everything, everywhere, all the time, has on the species we consume and if our behavior and use of other technologies isn?t responsible for most of the problem in the first place. I dunno, maybe we should eat less salmon.


People like to eat animal protein, so putting aside the vegan question, what the most efficient way to get it other than hunting it, where you're not "paying for it"?

Resized Image


The problem with this chart is that salmon don't eat grass or farmed grain, they eat forage fish we strip mine from the ocean by the millions of tons. So if we could modify them to eat vegetable matter like catfish or tilapia do, it would be of tremendous benefit.

Posted on: 2015/11/20 17:37
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#65
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/4/2 11:56
Last Login :
2018/10/5 14:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 756
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Maybe a better question is what's the risk vs benefits? The non GM foxes that devastated Australian wildlife were introduced so English Gentlemen could pursue them on horseback just like in Jolly Olde England. That was not a good enough reason to take a risk. We have non GM non-native plants still being introduced all over the world for no better reason than decoration. I think large scale cheap healthy animal protein is a far better reason to take a far smaller risk.


Fair enough. An invasive species is an invasive species, genetically modified or otherwise.

The benefits of any potentially invasive species should be studied and weighed against the risks that come with the disruption of a natural habitat. However, perhaps we should first take a much harder look at the impact our insistence of having access to everything, everywhere, all the time, has on the species we consume and if our behavior and use of other technologies isn?t responsible for most of the problem in the first place. I dunno, maybe we should eat less salmon.

Posted on: 2015/11/20 17:05
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#64
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
2023/7/17 17:42
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Banned
Posts: 5775
Offline
Quote:

Frank_M wrote:
Quote:

MDM wrote:
Aqua Bounty's salmon was finally approved by the FDA. This means that in the coming years, raising salmon in tanks will become a lot less expensive. The salmon have about double the rate of growth, so you get the fish to market in about 18 months instead of 3+ years.


Do you have the faith to believe that over the course of centuries, these super-athletes won?t find their way into the natural habitat by chance or accident? What about irresponsible or malicious human behavior? What?s the risk to naturally occurring species if that happens and what?s the risk to the food chain?


Maybe a better question is what's the risk vs benefits? The non GM foxes that devastated Australian wildlife were introduced so English Gentlemen could pursue them on horseback just like in Jolly Olde England. That was not a good enough reason to take a risk. We have non GM non-native plants still being introduced all over the world for no better reason than decoration. I think large scale cheap healthy animal protein is a far better reason to take a far smaller risk.

Posted on: 2015/11/20 16:27
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#63
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/4/2 11:56
Last Login :
2018/10/5 14:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 756
Offline
Quote:

MDM wrote:
Aqua Bounty's salmon was finally approved by the FDA. This means that in the coming years, raising salmon in tanks will become a lot less expensive. The salmon have about double the rate of growth, so you get the fish to market in about 18 months instead of 3+ years.


Do you have the faith to believe that over the course of centuries, these super-athletes won?t find their way into the natural habitat by chance or accident? What about irresponsible or malicious human behavior? What?s the risk to naturally occurring species if that happens and what?s the risk to the food chain?

Posted on: 2015/11/20 16:03
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#62
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43
Last Login :
2023/9/5 18:27
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1980
Offline
Quote:

MDM wrote:
Quote:

JCorNYC wrote:
This is so confusing, why are some saying GMO is good others say it's bad. I thought it was the latter too..



Here is a good primer on what can be done by engineering food. The podcasts are pretty easy to listen to.

http://www.talkingbiotechpodcast.com/?p=62

I believe that Bill Nye did a very good job in explaining how his stance has changed on GMOs.

Business Insider: Here's the critical reason Bill Nye the Science Guy changed his mind on GMOs

(There are other places he talks about it, one location being StarTalk, but that was the first link that hit.)

Posted on: 2015/11/20 15:36
Dos A Cero
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#61
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/7/9 11:16
Last Login :
4/15 15:15
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2741
Offline
Aqua Bounty's salmon was finally approved by the FDA. This means that in the coming years, raising salmon in tanks will become a lot less expensive. The salmon have about double the rate of growth, so you get the fish to market in about 18 months instead of 3+ years.

Posted on: 2015/11/20 15:15
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#60
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/7/9 11:16
Last Login :
4/15 15:15
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2741
Offline
Quote:

JCorNYC wrote:
This is so confusing, why are some saying GMO is good others say it's bad. I thought it was the latter too..



Here is a good primer on what can be done by engineering food. The podcasts are pretty easy to listen to.

http://www.talkingbiotechpodcast.com/?p=62

Posted on: 2015/11/18 17:07
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#59
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/7/29 1:51
Last Login :
2016/10/1 18:03
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 402
Offline
This is so confusing, why are some saying GMO is good others say it's bad. I thought it was the latter too..


Posted on: 2015/11/18 16:56
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#58
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
2023/7/17 17:42
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Banned
Posts: 5775
Offline
Quote:

MDM wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
If NJ and JC want to look busy passing laws to protect citizens health, I've got a great one: get rid of SM MED and LG drinks at fast foods and require they be rated in ounces. I ordered a medium soda at Burger King and it was a freaking QUART! If it was Coke it would have 91g of sugar, that's 23 teaspoons. And people are hysterical about GMO labeling?



The government can't mandate good personal choices. Obesity is an unintended consequence of the fact we spend far less of our income on food that we did years ago.


Which is why I didn't say tax or restrict access, just label it in a actual informative way, rather than meaningless relative terms. Not that long ago a M drink was like 16 oz. The calorie count on the fastfood menus was a brilliant step in this direction, inform but don't dictate.

PS: we see perfectly eye to eye on GMO.

Posted on: 2015/11/18 16:54
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#57
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/7/9 11:16
Last Login :
4/15 15:15
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2741
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
If NJ and JC want to look busy passing laws to protect citizens health, I've got a great one: get rid of SM MED and LG drinks at fast foods and require they be rated in ounces. I ordered a medium soda at Burger King and it was a freaking QUART! If it was Coke it would have 91g of sugar, that's 23 teaspoons. And people are hysterical about GMO labeling?



The government can't mandate good personal choices. Obesity is an unintended consequence of the fact we spend far less of our income on food that we did years ago.

Posted on: 2015/11/18 13:29
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#56
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/7/9 11:16
Last Login :
4/15 15:15
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2741
Offline
Anti-GMO / Organic food movement is a weird religion.

Developing a plant or animal with very specific and desired traits by splicing genetic material is evil. Yet developing new foods by exposing DNA to mutating inducing levels of chemicals or radiation is fine.

Plants developed by radiation mutation breeding are even accepted as "organic" (i.e. seedless watermelons, ruby grapefruit).

Meanwhile GMO has to go through a long and expensive review process (i.e. AquaAdvantage Salmon has been under review by the FDA since 1994), radiation breeding requires no review.

The expense of getting a GMO product approved is why almost all GMO is pretty much reserved for corn, which has enough mass production to offset the cost of the bureaucratic overhead. Vegetables and fruit do not.. so the GMO products for them do not exist or are very limited (a new apple was approved recently though).

Genetic engineering by scalpel = bad

Random genetic engineering using a radioactive sledgehammer = good

This is a shame because the potential of GMO to improve the condition of the human race is huge. For example, there is a GMO wheat that requires so little water it can be grown in a desert. Other are developing food products that can be grown in salt water (yet don't uptake toxic levels of salt).

The salmon that has waited a generation to be approved will allow salmon to be grown in tanks on land, twice as fast, using less fish products (such as bunker) to feed the salmon.

Posted on: 2015/11/18 13:26
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#55
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 14:11
Last Login :
2020/10/5 21:44
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4652
Offline
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
If NJ and JC want to look busy passing laws to protect citizens health, I've got a great one: get rid of SM MED and LG drinks at fast foods and require they be rated in ounces. I ordered a medium soda at Burger King and it was a freaking QUART! If it was Coke it would have 91g of sugar, that's 23 teaspoons. And people are hysterical about GMO labeling?


+1

Tax it. Fat tax.


Another regressive tax. The poor are getting their calories in Big Gulps-will foie gras get taxed too?

Posted on: 2015/11/18 13:05
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#54
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/5/28 0:34
Last Login :
2023/5/7 3:26
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1030
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
If NJ and JC want to look busy passing laws to protect citizens health, I've got a great one: get rid of SM MED and LG drinks at fast foods and require they be rated in ounces. I ordered a medium soda at Burger King and it was a freaking QUART! If it was Coke it would have 91g of sugar, that's 23 teaspoons. And people are hysterical about GMO labeling?


+1

Tax it. Fat tax.

Posted on: 2015/11/18 8:16
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#53
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
2023/7/17 17:42
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Banned
Posts: 5775
Offline
If NJ and JC want to look busy passing laws to protect citizens health, I've got a great one: get rid of SM MED and LG drinks at fast foods and require they be rated in ounces. I ordered a medium soda at Burger King and it was a freaking QUART! If it was Coke it would have 91g of sugar, that's 23 teaspoons. And people are hysterical about GMO labeling?

Posted on: 2015/11/18 2:43
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#52
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/2/20 18:20
Last Login :
2023/11/26 22:12
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2719
Offline

Preserve labeling of genetically modified ingredients in food | Opinion

By Jersey Journal Guest Columnist
on November 17, 2015 at 6:00 PM, updated November 17, 2015 at 6:15 PM

Last week, the New Jersey Assembly Consumer Affairs Committee voted 3 -1 in a resolution to support passage of The Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2015legislation that opponents coined The DARK Act, or the Deny Americans the Right to Know Act. This resolution calls on our elected officials in Washington, D.C. to pass a bill that will oppose mandatory labeling of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) at both the state and federal level.

This will directly affect all Americans who want to see their foods labeled as containing GMOs. It is also in direct opposition to other resolutions, such as the one in Jersey City passed in June, 2014, which called for New Jersey to join three others states to pass legislation requiring mandatory GMO labeling.

Read more:  http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2 ... lly_modified_ingredi.html


Posted on: 2015/11/17 23:27
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#51
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/4/2 11:56
Last Login :
2018/10/5 14:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 756
Offline
Quote:

Conformist wrote:
This is so much bullshit, frankly. "It would be irresponsible not to ask questions", and they are answered. Science tells us, quite definitively, that there are no downsides from a human health perspective to the actual "genetically modified" aspect of GMOs. It is as unquestioned in the scientific community as evolution (and, in fact, the issues are relatively intertwined in subtle ways). Continuing to "ask questions" when your questions are answered is no different from the denialism of creationism.


Another angry wave of the hand? For an individual who claims to champion science, your perspective doesn?t reveal much in the way of critical thinking. Suggesting that science has answered all the questions related to GMOs is not a very good assessment of the technology. Forget television celebrities, scientists themselves don?t even know what questions to ask yet.

Not only is our understanding of DNA practically in its infancy, the science and technology of directly manipulating it is virtually still in the womb. We still lack the tools and understanding to predict the result of genetic manipulation with complete accuracy, and we certainly lack the tools and understanding to comprehend the long-term impact on the planet?s diverse bio system.

If the history scientific progress has taught us anything, it?s that in the not too distant future, it?s practically guaranteed that we will be able look back on certain facets of our present, incomplete understanding with amusement. And don?t forget that it isn?t scientists who are responsible for the extremely rapid adoption of proliferation of GMOs. The trend has been driven almost entirely by a series of profitable business decisions?decisions that are largely immune from scientific rigor.

When you write that, ?The wisest people are aware of what they do not know,? you?re absolutely correct, but you don?t seem to be interested in your own advice.

Posted on: 2014/6/13 13:27
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#50
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 14:11
Last Login :
2020/10/5 21:44
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4652
Offline
Just like the gun sourcing hilarity that Fulop wants, this is just another way to him to show his activist 'progressive' street cred to those who would be impressed by such bleating.

Posted on: 2014/6/13 11:37
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#49
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/8/12 18:31
Last Login :
2020/4/26 22:05
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3932
Offline
Quote:

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
How does this help the people on, say, Ocean Avenue? How about the Council not waste the taxpayer dimes on this and leave it to the Feds, as they should, and do something constructive with their time?


I couldn't agree more here. Genetically modified food is the FDA's concern, not Jersey City. The controversy here isn't the food, but the city council wasting time on something that is way out of their jurisdiction.


This. This should be solely the purview of the Federal government. And, if they refuse to take action, then maybe the State. To expect ANY and ALL companies to abide by the arbitrary rules of a municipality (one of only 250K people!) would be asinine. A true waste of time by the City Council. But, hey... it looks good on the papers. "We stood up to the big, evil corporate behemoths"

Posted on: 2014/6/13 11:19
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#48
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/8/12 18:31
Last Login :
2020/4/26 22:05
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3932
Offline
Quote:

Conformist wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
but why not allow manufacturers to label their products as "non_GMO" just like they do with organic products. If I choose to waste my money on such products, how does that concern anyone else?


Why are you under the impression that is not allowed? Companies are free to label their products as GMO free. Some already do. Prime example: Cheerios.

Also, any product labeled "certified organic" is GMO-free.


This is not true, for the record. The requirements of "certified organic" only require that 95% of the ingredients meet the "organic" qualifications. (Presumably if GMO labeling were established by law, GMO-free labeling would similarly have to have such a loophole, as demanding 100% organic or [especially] 100% GMO-free food is basically impossible.)


Oh, really? It seems like the Internet disagrees with you:

Non GMO Shopping Guide

GMO Awareness

And, the USDA!

Posted on: 2014/6/13 11:16
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#47
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/11/13 18:42
Last Login :
2022/2/28 7:31
From 280 Grove Street
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4192
Offline
Quote:

Conformist wrote:
Quote:

Frank_M wrote:
Quote:

Conformist wrote:
Science is about *scientists* asking questions. It is not about the general public's uninformed opinion and questions based in the general public's uninformed ignorance. If you have no scientific background in the particular relevant field, you have no business asking questions...


My point is that you seem to be dismissing any potential concerns with an angry wave of the hand, almost as if to say that because the popular, irrational argument is wrong, there are no questions left to ask. Again, it is important to recognize that the implications of GMOs extend far beyond the scope of just their consumption and use, and it would be irresponsible not to ask questions regardless of our backgrounds.


This is so much bullshit, frankly. "It would be irresponsible not to ask questions", and they are answered. Science tells us, quite definitively, that there are no downsides from a human health perspective to the actual "genetically modified" aspect of GMOs. It is as unquestioned in the scientific community as evolution (and, in fact, the issues are relatively intertwined in subtle ways). Continuing to "ask questions" when your questions are answered is no different from the denialism of creationism.

This is the unfortunate hallmark of our age. Everyone fancies themselves an expert on everything. The wisest people are aware of what they do not know and are willing to defer to those with actual knowledge and specialty in areas where they are unfamiliar.

There are other aspects to consider. Roundup is not necessarily great, and some GMO modifications relate to Roundup resistance and are thus tangentially related to its use. Patents on certain gene lines can allow for economic abuse. Etc. But these are not problems of GMOs inherently, or reasons to call for bans, restrictions or labels. These are other issues that the fanaticism with which the next generation of Jenny McCarthys has taken up the cause obscures and drives out public discussion, even though they are the real issues that legislators might consider addressing (not Jersey City politicians, necessarily--patent law is certainly well beyond their power to amend--but the point stands).


The research has already been done by independent scientific researchers on a multitude of food and health related products and processes - The problem is that the food industry association lobbies successfully, to have politicians shelf many of their finds.

We might vote in politicians, but its corporate America that dictates the terms ... Democracy is being high-jacketed by Capitalism.

Posted on: 2014/6/13 2:24
My humor is for the silent blue collar majority - If my posts offend, slander or you deem inappropriate and seek deletion, contact the webmaster for jurisdiction.
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#46
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/10/1 1:03
Last Login :
2023/10/30 19:51
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1280
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
How does this help the people on, say, Ocean Avenue? How about the Council not waste the taxpayer dimes on this and leave it to the Feds, as they should, and do something constructive with their time?


I couldn't agree more here. Genetically modified food is the FDA's concern, not Jersey City. The controversy here isn't the food, but the city council wasting time on something that is way out of their jurisdiction.

Posted on: 2014/6/13 2:07
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#45
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/10/15 19:58
Last Login :
2015/12/30 14:17
From Paulus Hook
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 195
Offline
Quote:

Frank_M wrote:
Quote:

Conformist wrote:
Science is about *scientists* asking questions. It is not about the general public's uninformed opinion and questions based in the general public's uninformed ignorance. If you have no scientific background in the particular relevant field, you have no business asking questions...


My point is that you seem to be dismissing any potential concerns with an angry wave of the hand, almost as if to say that because the popular, irrational argument is wrong, there are no questions left to ask. Again, it is important to recognize that the implications of GMOs extend far beyond the scope of just their consumption and use, and it would be irresponsible not to ask questions regardless of our backgrounds.


This is so much bullshit, frankly. "It would be irresponsible not to ask questions", and they are answered. Science tells us, quite definitively, that there are no downsides from a human health perspective to the actual "genetically modified" aspect of GMOs. It is as unquestioned in the scientific community as evolution (and, in fact, the issues are relatively intertwined in subtle ways). Continuing to "ask questions" when your questions are answered is no different from the denialism of creationism.

This is the unfortunate hallmark of our age. Everyone fancies themselves an expert on everything. The wisest people are aware of what they do not know and are willing to defer to those with actual knowledge and specialty in areas where they are unfamiliar.

There are other aspects to consider. Roundup is not necessarily great, and some GMO modifications relate to Roundup resistance and are thus tangentially related to its use. Patents on certain gene lines can allow for economic abuse. Etc. But these are not problems of GMOs inherently, or reasons to call for bans, restrictions or labels. These are other issues that the fanaticism with which the next generation of Jenny McCarthys has taken up the cause obscures and drives out public discussion, even though they are the real issues that legislators might consider addressing (not Jersey City politicians, necessarily--patent law is certainly well beyond their power to amend--but the point stands).

Posted on: 2014/6/13 1:48
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#44
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/10/15 19:58
Last Login :
2015/12/30 14:17
From Paulus Hook
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 195
Offline
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
but why not allow manufacturers to label their products as "non_GMO" just like they do with organic products. If I choose to waste my money on such products, how does that concern anyone else?


Why are you under the impression that is not allowed? Companies are free to label their products as GMO free. Some already do. Prime example: Cheerios.

Also, any product labeled "certified organic" is GMO-free.


This is not true, for the record. The requirements of "certified organic" only require that 95% of the ingredients meet the "organic" qualifications. (Presumably if GMO labeling were established by law, GMO-free labeling would similarly have to have such a loophole, as demanding 100% organic or [especially] 100% GMO-free food is basically impossible.)

Posted on: 2014/6/13 1:43
 Top 


Re: Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling
#43
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
2023/7/17 17:42
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Banned
Posts: 5775
Offline
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
but why not allow manufacturers to label their products as "non_GMO" just like they do with organic products. If I choose to waste my money on such products, how does that concern anyone else?


Why are you under the impression that is not allowed? Companies are free to label their products as GMO free. Some already do. Prime example: Cheerios.

Also, any product labeled "certified organic" is GMO-free.


So the question stands: Why the need to label things "contains GMO" rather than follow the standard in the rest of the marketplace where special criteria are declared by the special interest marketer. With the exception of things like lethal allergens such as nuts, no one has to declare "contains gluten", or "pesticides used".

At this point for certain American crops GMO is as standard as pesticide and petro-fertilizers. Let the market decide if people care to seek out GMO free shampoo like they'll buy cage free but not organic eggs. Regular eggs don't have to say "raised in dubious conditions".

Posted on: 2014/6/12 22:19
 Top 




(1) 2 3 »




[Advanced Search]





Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!



LicenseInformation | AboutUs | PrivacyPolicy | Faq | Contact


JERSEY CITY LIST - News & Reviews - Jersey City, NJ - Copyright 2004 - 2017