HealingWell
Search Close Search
☰

Nice overview on GMO and the role that glyphosate plays in chronic disease.

Support Forums
>
Ulcerative Colitis
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply
1 2
❬ ❬ Previous Thread |Next Thread ❭ ❭
Posted 11/11/2013 4:26 PM (GMT 0)
I think all we can strive for is reduction - elimination seems impossible to me -
Posted 11/12/2013 12:20 AM (GMT 0)

fruitgirl said...
Bt doesn't "bother" me, in terms of being dangerous to humans, given how it's used and the doses at which we might ingest it.

Also, it's used in organic farming. So you'll likely not avoid it by eating non-GMO, organic food.


Exactly, it's used in organic farming. From my understanding, it is not genetically engineered into the food, it is simply sprayed on. But it's still there, and consumers don't know it. Just another example of Big Ag deceiving and lying to the consumer, being that most "Organic" food is actually grown from the very same companies that grow the conventionally related products.

I can't help but see a correlation between the mechanism of action of Bt on the insects and the increased incidence in gut problems in the United States.
Posted 11/12/2013 12:30 AM (GMT 0)

soystud said...
I think all we can strive for is reduction - elimination seems impossible to me -


We need to get back to growing our own food. You cannot trust big companies to grow food for you. They are doing EVERYTHING possible to extend the shelf life, and increase yield by any means possible. They are just trying to make money. It's sickening. Absolutely sickening what these people are doing, and these so called "responsible scientists". There are ZERO, I repeat, ZERO peer reviewed scientific studies that show these GMO's to be safe. And this stuff is on our food supply? And they act like it's such a big deal to get it freakin labeled for consumers???!! In my opinion these people need to be thrown into jail.
Posted 11/12/2013 1:26 AM (GMT 0)
I don't think this is realistic. There are tons of people around the world going hungry and we should strive to do whatever we can to increase yields to feed the hungry and the poor everywhere. Science is not the enemy. Why is it that anyone in business trying to make money are declared evil and working for the devil? If we put everyone out of business who grows food and distributes it for profit (we're talking about regular Joe and Jane farmers here to folks) none of us would have any food to eat. It's not realistic to think that everyone should have to fend for themselves and grow their own food. People live in cities and apartments and we are also talking about senior citizens, etc. If something is truly dangerous we should do something about it if at all possible but we can't just eliminate the whole food chain. It's ridiculous to declare 90% of all food should be eliminated, the farmers, the grocery stores, and everything else in between.
Posted 11/12/2013 3:43 AM (GMT 0)

garylouisville said...
I don't think this is realistic. There are tons of people around the world going hungry and we should strive to do whatever we can to increase yields to feed the hungry and the poor everywhere. Science is not the enemy. Why is it that anyone in business trying to make money are declared evil and working for the devil? If we put everyone out of business who grows food and distributes it for profit (we're talking about regular Joe and Jane farmers here to folks) none of us would have any food to eat. It's not realistic to think that everyone should have to fend for themselves and grow their own food. People live in cities and apartments and we are also talking about senior citizens, etc. If something is truly dangerous we should do something about it if at all possible but we can't just eliminate the whole food chain. It's ridiculous to declare 90% of all food should be eliminated, the farmers, the grocery stores, and everything else in between.


You don't need Big Agriculture/Big Business to feed the world. It's quite the opposite actually. The only way we can feed the world is by not having to rely on huge corporations for our food supply, and start going back to local farming practices. Science is fine but when it results in people getting sick then IT NEEDS TO BE REEVALUATED. When it's not proven to be safe it needs to be reevaluated. When scientists are voicing legit concerns about GMO's, the food supply needs to be reevaluated. I consider myself a free market person, but if there is one area that needs to be STRICTLY REGULATED. It is the freakin food supply. You can't have half of Monsanto's ex employees working for the FDA. You MUST NOT under estimate the power of money.

http://redgreenandblue.org/2012/02/02/monsanto-employees-in-the-halls-of-government-part-2/

Post Edited (Poppysocks) : 11/11/2013 8:48:40 PM (GMT-7)

Posted 11/12/2013 3:07 PM (GMT 0)
You make it sound so simple and it is not. We're talking about global implications and logistics here. There are many parts of the world, including in the US itself, where you cannot really grow either some things, or in some cases anything. Food imports and exports have been a way of life since B.C. and it is totally irrational to think that these parts of the world can just grow all their own food without having farmers, mass production, imports, and exports. Like it or not there is a food chain from the farmers through distribution to the grocery stores and their are zillions of jobs around the world connected to all this. Do we just tell all the farmers to go out of business, and just grow enough for themselves and tell all of the people who have non-farm jobs to quit their source of income and become their own farmers and fend for themselves (including senior citizens and the disabled)? No more retail stores, malls, doctors, lawyers, truck drivers, or anything? Every person in the world turns into their own farmer? Do we just relocate billions of people who live in poor areas where you can't grow anything such as colder climates and deserts?

There is also a difference between legit concerns and fact. A concern implies possible worries but not cold hard facts. Just because there is a concern about something does not mean that those concerns will wind up being justified in the end. Also, like it or not, the power of money has been around since the dawn of time and isn't going away anytime soon. Wanting to make a buck isn't always a bad thing. In fact it is usually a good thing. You can't condemn everyone making money as being the devil when it is only a small percentage who take it to the extreme level and turn it into greed.
Posted 11/12/2013 3:19 PM (GMT 0)
As someone who grows some vegetables I know we would starve fast depending on either what we or surrounding local farmers could grow, this is in Florida where things grow 12 months of the year along with voracious insects. Food would become unaffordable to 99% of the population if it weren't grown by mega-companies with pesticides and terrible overuse of water.

What can we do about it? Insist that labeling tells us what we are eating and then consciously choose what to eat. Understand that a low price food is not always what is good for our bodies. Make sure that mega-corps don't pollute or misuse natural resources that belong to future generations not just us. And most of all VOTE when the time comes to elect people who will protect us and nature from those who lay waste to it.
Posted 11/12/2013 3:34 PM (GMT 0)
The development of GMOs was sold on the premise that it will increase yield greatly and be able to feed to world. Some experts are now saying that it does not increase yield as original thought. If this is the case then there is not much need to continue with GMOs. They won't stop of course because then they will have to admit they were wrong. No one knows the long term effects of GMOs. Glyphostate goes hand in hand with GMOs and is scary stuff.

Good suggestions Ima.

Posted 11/12/2013 11:23 PM (GMT 0)

garylouisville said...
You make it sound so simple and it is not. We're talking about global implications and logistics here. There are many parts of the world, including in the US itself, where you cannot really grow either some things, or in some cases anything. Food imports and exports have been a way of life since B.C. and it is totally irrational to think that these parts of the world can just grow all their own food without having farmers, mass production, imports, and exports. Like it or not there is a food chain from the farmers through distribution to the grocery stores and their are zillions of jobs around the world connected to all this. Do we just tell all the farmers to go out of business, and just grow enough for themselves and tell all of the people who have non-farm jobs to quit their source of income and become their own farmers and fend for themselves (including senior citizens and the disabled)? No more retail stores, malls, doctors, lawyers, truck drivers, or anything? Every person in the world turns into their own farmer? Do we just relocate billions of people who live in poor areas where you can't grow anything such as colder climates and deserts?


The whole issue here is whether or not GMO's are toxic to humans. I'm not ready to say they are definitely the cause of gut problems in the western world, but THEY ARE DEFINITELY NOT PROVEN. In fact, there is probably plenty of evidence to have them culled out of our food supply. That is the whole issue here. Are you fine with people getting sick in the name of "feeding the world", which is not even proven? Secondly, I'm not saying every individual needs to quit their job immediately and start growing their own food. I'm pretty sure that would result in mass starvations. But we have to gradually start moving away from the mega companies, the mega grocery stores, etc. We have to start spending our money on local farmers, and start getting to know where our food is coming from. There are so many benefits to this. The huge benefit of locality is consumers have more power. More choices on which farmers to get there food from. If food from a certain farmer is making you sick, you can switch to somebody else. You cannot do that right now. All of our food is really coming from only a few places. So when something is making you sick, people really have no choice because there's only one place to get the food. And there are only a few government bodies (FDA, USDA) which actually regulate the food supply. Monsanto has multiple former employees working in the FDA. Do you not see the conflict of interest here?

garylouisville said...

There is also a difference between legit concerns and fact. A concern implies possible worries but not cold hard facts. Just because there is a concern about something does not mean that those concerns will wind up being justified in the end. Also, like it or not, the power of money has been around since the dawn of time and isn't going away anytime soon. Wanting to make a buck isn't always a bad thing. In fact it is usually a good thing. You can't condemn everyone making money as being the devil when it is only a small percentage who take it to the extreme level and turn it into greed.


Money has not been around since the "dawn of time". Before money was invented people used to barter with goods and services. "Wanting to make a buck isn't always a bad thing". I don't disagree. But don't you see a conflict of interest when the FDA hires a high amount of former Monsanto employees?
Posted 11/13/2013 12:24 AM (GMT 0)
This all boils down to supply and demand, the free market, evolution, etc.. We are where we are today because that is the way the Earth evolved, meaning this is the way people want it. We drive around in cars instead of riding horses because that is the way people want it. We have airplanes to take us great distances in short amounts of time because that is the way we want it. We have McDonalds and Burger King because that is the way we want it. We also have Subway because people want a healthier choice than McDonalds. We have large farms and large grocery stores because that is the way people want it. We have learned how to mass produce food and other things to import and export because that is the way people want it. We are also having places like Fresh Foods or Whole foods emerging because that is the way people want it. None of this is the result of greed and uncaring businesses. Businesses adjust to changing times and give people what they want. McDonalds are very busy because they give people what they want. We don't need a police state dictatorship telling us what we should have and what we shouldn't. In the end, times will have changed again and who knows where we will be but the bottom line will be this - people will have what they want and not what a small percentage of the population wants to cram down our throats, whether we like it or not.

As you said, there is no absolute proof that GMO's are the cause of gut problems in the Western World. The fact is they have studied these things to death and some have been approved. Many have not. I'm not sure where ex-Monsanto employees fit into all this. I really don't know that much about it to make an informed decision on the matter. Maybe it is a conflict of interest, maybe it is not. I mean the FDA has a right to hire people into positions that have the kind of experience necessary to perform their jobs. Maybe you are right about that but there are all kinds of positions open and hired for in all kinds of different areas of the economy and the businesses need to hire someone that is knowledgeable in the areas they will be working. You could go crazy and say that there is a conflict of interest in hiring anyone from a similar background to do a similar job. Maybe we should hire cashiers and waitresses to work for the FDA. Do you actually have any proof of wrong doing due to these Monsanto workers working for the FDA? I mean for all you know these ex-employees would like to stick it to Monsanto and more apt to be prejudiced in the opposite direction than what you propose.
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply
12