Monsanto Vs. Vermont

[Anonymous No.5496167]

>On May 8, Vermont set history by becoming the first state in the country to require genetically modified (GMO) food to be labeled.

But one hurdle still stands in the state's way: a likely lawsuit from Monsanto, the world’s largest GMO producer.

Among Monsanto's outlandish claims is that a labeling requirement would be a violation of the company’s freedom of speech.


http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2014/06/04/monsanto-set-sue-vermont-requiring-gmo-labeling-155139

[Anonymous No.5496179]

Normally I'd be all for labeling of it because why not? People might as well know in case they care.

But the anti GMO people are almost exclusively retarded paranoid douchebags and I almost want to side against labeling for that reason.

I'm not even an edgy teenager I just hate conspiracy theorists so fucking much.

[Anonymous No.5496180]

[Anonymous No.5496183]

>>5496179
>But the anti GMO people are almost exclusively retarded paranoid douchebags and I almost want to side against labeling for that reason.
You aren't alone

[Anonymous No.5496188]

>>5496179
Being opposed to something that's harmless at its very worst because you don't like the people proposing it is dumb

It's fucking dumb

[Anonymous No.5496189]

>>5496179
Monsanto ain't a conspiracy, my friend. It's a major corporation with a monopoly.

[Anonymous No.5496198]

>>5496189

Exactly. Ok, so it's a shitty company. That doesn't mean they're trying to poison you. Just think about, it what's in it for them? WHAT'S IN IT FOR THEM TO POISON YOU? NOOOTHHHINNNNNG

These are the same people who freak out about the government "tracking their phone calls". You think they call what you're saying to your retard buddies? WHAT'S IN IT FOR THEM?

[Anonymous No.5496201]

>>5496198
Who cares what's in it for them? They have a monopoly, they can do whatever they want without repercussion. Teflon poisons people who let their pans get too hot every day. WHAT'S IN IT FOR THEEEMMMM???????

[Anonymous No.5496204]

>>5496198
I mean, do you honestly think the free market rewards corporations that look after the long term interests of their customers?

I mean, the tobacco industry? Y'know?

[Anonymous No.5496215]

>>5496204
>comparing monsanto to tobacco
>not being a drooling retard

[Anonymous No.5496216]

>>5496201

What's in it for them to poison you? Just because they theoretically "could", why? It'd just be found eventually from studies, which will harm them from a business standpoint.

>>5496204

No, but that doesn't mean that the opposite is true which is what most anti gmo people that I come in contact with seem to think

[Anonymous No.5496218]

>>5496198
Yeah, GMOs are probably not a conspiracy to kill us all, but that doesn't mean that we have to be, you know, totally uncritical about them and just accept whatever Monsanto wants to do

esp when the concerns are less "GMOs are poison" and more "Hey, maybe it's not a good idea to have one company make all the seeds"

[Anonymous No.5496223]

>>5496216
If it's cheaper and more profitable to poison us, and they know we'll keep buying it anyway because there's no other choice, then why wouldn't they? Monsanto, and other tax-dodging, legislator-buying corporations like them, care about nothing but profit. It's not that they actively want to kill us; they just don't care if they do if it means they get more money.

[Anonymous No.5496225]

>>5496218

I agree with that, and it that was what anti gmo people EVER said irl I might not have so much contempt for them.

But then I live in California so maybe we just have the extra retarded people here.

[Anonymous No.5496228]

>>5496223
lol
>we duh 99% durr

[Anonymous No.5496229]

>>5496218
>"Hey, maybe it's not a good idea to have one company make all the seeds"

Thats a very valid point. BUt how does labelling food stop that, except for getting the conspiracy theorists all worked up and making people like me and >>5496179 support Monsanto out of spite.

[Anonymous No.5496231]

>>5496228
Quite the cogent argument you've got there.

[Anonymous No.5496237]

>>5496229
>BUt how does labelling food stop that
People are starting to want to know if their food contains GMO ingredients or not. Their rationale does not matter. If consumers want this, they should get it.

I'm not sure why so many right-wing or "libertarian" Americans are pro-capitalism and pro-consumer only when it serves corporate interests. If people want additional label data, why is this a bad thing?

>and making people like me and >>5496179 support Monsanto out of spite.
Ignorant contrarians are no better than the ignorant mainstream.

[Anonymous No.5496252]

>>5496231
Why would anyone take the effort to engage in argument with glue sniffing, emotionally driven empty heads?

[Anonymous No.5496253]

>>5496237

I didn't say it was a bad thing, as I said I rationally feel like they have a right to know but they annoy me so much that I almost agree with not labeling out of spite.

And I'm not ignorant like they are, I'm not saying I'm the worlds biggest expert on GMOs but I go out of my way to actually read studies about them. Yes I know that just because we haven't found issues with them yet it doesn't mean that there are none, but I think that's a much more reasonable approach than the people who have only learned about them from naturalnews have.

[Anonymous No.5496255]

>>5496252
The ad hominem is strong in this one.

[Anonymous No.5496260]

Personally, I don't care about GMO vs Non-GMO, since your body doesn't give a shit between where the source of its amino acids, sugars and fats comes from but:

>Companies required to label shit
>Say you must label if GMO
>Whaaaaa, muuuuh free speech!

Seriously? Get the fuck over it Monsanto. It would be like Coke and Pepsi bitching that they must include that their drinks contain HFCS.

[Anonymous No.5496263]

>>5496252 see
>>5493156

[Anonymous No.5496264]

>>5496237
Sure supporting Monsanto isnt a good thing but if I vehemently disagree with idiots it is very hard not to side with their enemy

[Anonymous No.5496268]

>>5496264
>Sure supporting Monsanto isnt a good thing but if I vehemently disagree with idiots it is very hard not to side with their enemy
Your "reasoning" is why polarizing politicians are so successful.

[Anonymous No.5496274]

>>5496268

I know its not logical but that doesnt mean it doesnt happen

[Anonymous No.5496277]

>>5496253
>Yes I know that just because we haven't found issues with them yet it doesn't mean that there are none
Glyphosate resistance, encouraging low genetic-diversity monocultures, increase in phytopathogens, and a decline in lepidopteran pollinators aren't good things.

[Anonymous No.5496278]

>>5496264
This is why I've given up on humanity. You people deserve everything our government and corporations do to you.

[Anonymous No.5496280]

>>5496274
>I'm going to be stupid because they people I don't like are being stupid

You should listen to yourself.

[Anonymous No.5496283]

>>5496277
I bet most of these idiots don't realize that the chemicals these plants are resistant to are the issue at hand when it comes to poisoning us, and not the plants themselves.

[Anonymous No.5496286]

>>5496278
The fact that he is consciously aware of his is even more pathetic. A dictator would love a population with anon's mentality.

[Anonymous No.5496298]

>>5496278
But our current government is the most ant-corporate government we've ever had.

[Anonymous No.5496301]

>>5496298

[Anonymous No.5496305]

>>5496167

I think the most interesting thing about GMO foods is the way the industry went straight from Start Up to Corporate Socialist without passing Free Market Capitalist in between.

When a company gets an idea it creates a start up, a new business to develop and sell their product.

When the product is ready the company enters the free market state of it's life cycle, it has to convince customers to buy it's product and it has to compete against rival companies.

Eventually when a company gets big enough it realises it can survive far more efficiently with bigger profits by lobbying the government and politicians to change laws in their favour forcing people to buy their products and using the government to attack their competitors. This is the Corporate Socialist stage.

GMO food industries never even attempted to sell customers on the benefits of their products or compete against other industries. From the very beginning they depended on the government to force people to buy their products.

[Anonymous No.5496307]

>>549
tobacco is an agricultural product
Monsanto is a agricultural company
Monsanto = tobacco
how isn't this obvious?
GMO cigarettes cause cancer
Non-GMO cigarettes when?
Non-GMO cigarettes when?

[Anonymous No.5496309]

>>5496298
lol okay

[Anonymous No.5496310]

>>5496305
It's almost like a small group of people wants to control our food supply or something.

[Anonymous No.5496311]

>>5496216
>which will harm them from a business standpoint
No, it won't. Corporations are ruled by a Board of Directors, which is in turn beholden to the shareholders. Shareholders are after ONE THING and ONE THING ONLY. Quarterly profits. They don't give a single flying fuck what happens to the corporation next year, and neither does the Board.

[Anonymous No.5496315]

>>5496305
And now people are convinced that American food prices or food supply would be significantly affected if GMO crops were taken off the market.

It's pretty sad the Americans, who live in a country with lots of arable land and cheap plentiful food, are one of the only countries in the world who have embraced GMOs to this extent.

All it does is allow farmers to buy more glyhposate and spray their fields carelessly.

[Anonymous No.5496318]

>>5496298
Indeed it is http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/princeton-experts-say-us-no-longer-democracy

[Anonymous No.5496322]

It's important to remember that corporations have no inherent motivation for self preservation. They're not living organisms. They oftentimes actually desire being consumed by larger entities, very much unlike living organisms. If it's publicly traded, it's owners have absolutely no problems turning their stock back into cash and moving into a different corporation.

[Anonymous No.5496323]

>>5496225
When it comes to activist types you do. I'd easily classify them as the worst in the country.

[Anonymous No.5496324]

>>5496318
My only reaction to that article is "no fucking shit"

[Anonymous No.5496327]

>>5496323
>activist types
I hate people that do not accept the status quo at face value. Don't they have jobs to worry about and things to buy? I mean seriously, fucking losers.

[Anonymous No.5496334]

>>5496286
There's been more then one middle east dictatorship that exists due to this.

[Anonymous No.5496335]

>>5496323
>activist types
You mean people smarter than you who don't buy into all of the bullshit you've been led to believe? People who are actually trying to do something to make the country better for the sake of impressionable idiots like you? Hardly the worst in the country. They're just naive, and they'll eventually realize that the fight isn't worth it. You live the best life you can in this world, but this is the way things are until it collapses on its own.

[Anonymous No.5496343]

>>5496327
Oh. I agree with action to bring to light issues and try to force change when the system wont do it on it's one. But some people get so Dogmatic that whatever they are work against almost becomes religious. Anti nuclear nut wont listen to any argument and will just shout Chernobyl or 4 mile island or fukashima at you. Animal right activist will out right lie and consider it okay because it's for "the cause".

Literally all my post was saying is that there are a lot of those type of people in California.

[Anonymous No.5496349]

>>5496327
>>5496335
Jesus Christ. Can no one on fourchan use context to think about a post people they make inflammatory replies?

[Anonymous No.5496363]

GMO crops currently in use are predominately glyphosate ("Roundup") resistant cultivars or cultivars that produce Bt-toxin, a toxin that was originally discovered in a bacteria species that is specific to lepidopteran insects (butterflies and moths). The glyphosate-resistant crops allow farmers to spray the crop directly to kill weeds without worrying about hurting the crop. The Bt-transgenic crops produce a toxin that will kill or harm lepidopteran "pests", although there is evidence that pollinating butterflies/moths can also be killed.

Glyphosate has a very low LD-50 in mammals and is broken down relatively quickly in the environment, but some studies have found negative effects on amphibians. Ecological impact aside, it is easy to see why spraying food with lots and lots of glyphosate isn't a good idea.

[Anonymous No.5496369]

>>5496363
[cont]
For one, glyphosate residue is detectable in cereals (corn, wheat, etc.). Glyphosate disrupts the shikimic acid pathway in plants, which is what kills them. Mammals don't have this pathway, but fungi, bacteria, and some parasites do. Some fungi and bacteria species or strains are more resistant to the deleterious impact of glyphosate than others, therefore if you spray an area with glyphosate you will be selecting for resistant organisms.

Now that we are eating foods with more glyphosate residue, what do you think is happening to our gut flora? Who knows. The following paper is interesting, as it found that pathogenic bacteria (e.g.: Salmonella and Clostridium) in the gut of chickens are resistant to glyphosate while beneficial species (e.g.: Enterococcus and Lactobacillus sp.) were not.

The Effect of Glyphosate on Potential Pathogens and Beneficial Members of Poultry Microbiota In Vitro

Enterococcus is a natural antagonist to pathogenic bacteria such as Clostridium, and therefore protects the body. By ingesting glyphosate, you may be encouraging the "bad bacteria" and suppressing the "good bacteria", which was also found in a study with cattle:

Glyphosate suppresses the antagonistic effect of Enterococcus spp. on Clostridium botulinum

[Anonymous No.5496371]

>>5496369

[Anonymous No.5496380]

>>5496369
So you can see, we can't just judge things based on LD-50 are other out-of-date metrics for safety. Glyphosate was used for years before the mode of action was understood. Glyphosate-resistant corn and soy are now the most widely planted cultivars, leading to a rapid increase in glyphosate usage.

There was not enough research conducted prior to the widespread planting of the main GMO cultivars and no one seemed to be concerned about the potential impact of increasing glyphosate usage.

It's an example of the GRAS approach and anti-regulatory lobbies getting their way. The pro-GMO crowd seems to think their position is pro-science, yet it is anything but.

[Anonymous No.5496392]

>>5496371
why did I lol

[Anonymous No.5496397]

>>5496380
Stop posting facts in our troll thread.

[Anonymous No.5496414]

My issue is not with GMO foods as such (though I am concerned about some of their medical ramifications as >>5496369 pointed out) but rather with the fact that Monsanto is quickly turning into a food monopoly. It's well-established that in all but a few cases, an industry dominated by a monopoly will underproduce and overcharge, decreasing welfare for consumers. Since food is something that everyone must consume, a monopoly in this industry would have intensely adverse effects.

[Anonymous No.5496418]

>>5496414
>would have
You mean has.

[Anonymous No.5496429]

>>5496414
food price spikes are coming, just you wait.

One of the many reasons I am buying a few acres in a rainy warm part of the US to raise my own food. Fuck starving.

[Anonymous No.5496432]

>>5496414
This and
>>5496418
this.

[Anonymous No.5496436]

>>5496414
If you're saying I made a grammar mistake: my bad, I'm doing a bunch of other stuff right now as well. If you're saying Monsanto is already a monopoly: you're probably right, but I was trying to avoid asserting that since I'm not really qualified to say so.
>>5496429
I don't doubt it. Between Monsanto's crap and the ever-increasing instability in the global climate and market, shit's gonna hit the fan.

[Anonymous No.5496439]

>>5496436
Shit, misquoted. First line was directed at >>5496418, not at myself.

[Anonymous No.5496441]

>>5496436
Just imagine what further droughts will do to california. Lime prices skyrocketed this year, along with most food prices.

[Anonymous No.5496444]

>>5496429
>food price spikes are coming, just you wait.
>One of the many reasons I am buying a few acres in a rainy warm part of the US to raise my own food. Fuck starving.
Your food is heavily subsidized and you are not paying close to the real price it took to produce and transport it. At worst, you will be paying prices closer to what those in the EU pay.

I'm not sure why you feel the threat of starvation coming.

[Anonymous No.5496450]

>>5496441
>Lime prices skyrocketed this year
I kept hearing about this, yet in Canada I did not notice an increase.

>along with most food prices
What do you mean by skyrocketing? Give an example of an increase.

[Anonymous No.5496456]

>>5496450

not him but the price of ground beef where I live almost doubled this year, same with eggs

[Anonymous No.5496458]

>>5496444
I personally don't eat food that is heavily subsidized, so there's that. I have good farmer's markets.

>>5496450
your limes don't come from california, then. The mexican limes hardly went up

You don't buy your own food do you? Everything has gone up in the last year. Everything.

[Anonymous No.5496462]

>>5496436
Monsanto's 'crap' is the sole reason millions of people go to bed at night with a full stomach.

[Anonymous No.5496468]

>>5496280

>The world isnt totally logical
>Im going to sperg out.

Get a grip man. If you think that everyone is acting rationally, even yourself, then youve got a lot to learn about the world. Recognising ones own failings is a pretty good definition of maturity.

[Anonymous No.5496501]

>>5496462
I'm well aware. But again, GMO crops are not my issue; Monsanto as a business is what I have a problem with. The fact that they've effectively come to dominate a technology which is ostensibly one of the greatest advances for preserving human life is what doesn't sit right with me.

[Anonymous No.5496504]

>>5496501

If only the retards I deal with IRL had this stance.

"THEY'RE POISONING US, IT'S A CONSPIRACY"

thank you fellow californians for making us all seem retarded

[Anonymous No.5496508]

>>5496167
Free speech? that doesn't make any sense at all.
GMO's are linked to obseity and cancer - labels are required to state if they contain peanuts so why not label GMOS.

[Anonymous No.5496517]

>>5496508
>GMO's are linked to obseity and cancer
lolno

[Anonymous No.5496523]

>>5496508
>GMO's are linked to obseity and cancer

[citation needed]

[Anonymous No.5496529]

>>5496508

seralini please go

[Anonymous No.5496538]

>>5496523
>food contains chemicals
>people who eat food die

[Anonymous No.5496548]

>>5496538
thatsthejoke

[Anonymous No.5496550]

>>5496508
holy shit anon you are beyond retarded

[Anonymous No.5496565]

>>5496462
Do you fucking work for them or something?

Also, modern agricultural practices can feed the entire world without the extensive use of GM crops and pesticides that Monsanto pushes.

[Anonymous No.5496573]

>>5496565
>Also, modern agricultural practices can feed the entire world without the extensive use of GM crops and pesticides that Monsanto pushes.
nope

[Anonymous No.5496578]

>>5496573
Why do you believe that? Because Monsanto said so?

[Anonymous No.5496582]

>>5496573
>nope
Glyphosate and bt-resistant corn aren't what is preventing the starvation of humanity. You seem to forget that the two countries that embrace GMOs the most, America and Canada, would do just fine without them in terms of food supply.

[Anonymous No.5496586]

>>5496573
>Well our technology is -okay- right now, why bother using anything better?

[Anonymous No.5496587]

>>5496458
>You don't buy your own food do you? Everything has gone up in the last year. Everything.
I haven't noticed a significant increase, and food in Canada is a lot more expensive than that in America to begin with.

[Anonymous No.5496589]

>>5496587
Because you're in fucking Canada. Your government can't afford to let food prices go up anymore without the people rioting.

[Anonymous No.5496593]

>>5496462
>Monsanto's 'crap' is the sole reason millions of people go to bed at night with a full stomach.
>the sole reason
Describe in detail why you think this.

[Anonymous No.5496596]

>>5496587
For example, at my local grocery in the past year:

* Ground beef has nearly doubled in price
* All beef prices are up nearly 30%
* Whole chickens went from 89 cents to 1.09 a pound
* Fruit prices are up 15%ish per pound
* seafood... dear god it tripled in the last 5 years, I never buy it anymore

This is common at every grocery store I've been to with in 3 hours of me.

[Anonymous No.5496600]

>>5496589
>Because you're in fucking Canada. Your government can't afford to let food prices go up anymore without the people rioting.
No, it's because my income provides a buffer for small increases in my food bill. I spent $50+ on a block of Parmesan the other day, I'm really not aware of the price of eggs, milk, and bread to the penny.

[Anonymous No.5496602]

>>5496600
Are they heavy?

[Anonymous No.5496604]

>>5496586
>Well our technology is -okay- right now, why bother using anything better?

If the technology is better then why can't these companies sell it honestly? Why are they so firmly against honest advertising? Why do they have to resort to tricking people into eating it.

[Anonymous No.5496607]

>>5496600
I remember the prices because I have more than a 70 IQ, you tend to remember things you buy often

[Anonymous No.5496609]

People who cry about Monsanto are parrots

[Anonymous No.5496616]

>>5496604
Have you seen this thread? Idiots everywhere are opposed to it because just about anything they don't understand results in cancer.

[Anonymous No.5496617]

>>5496616
Why do you care so much about what happens to Monsanto?

[Anonymous No.5496619]

>>5496617
I don't care so much about them but the technology.

[Anonymous No.5496622]

>>5496619
What technology specifically? Are you educated in a related field?

[Anonymous No.5496626]

>>5496617
Why do you care so little about progress?

[Anonymous No.5496634]

>>5496626
>implying
I care deeply about progress. I love technology, and I'm extremely grateful for all of the advancements of the modern world. However, when that progress is for the sake of profit and not for the sake of people, it's not a positive force in the world. Why do you worship science, but neglect philosophy and ethics?

[Anonymous No.5496643]

>>5496634
My ethics don't include turning my back on millions of otherwise starving people.

[Anonymous No.5496646]

>>5496643
Why do you think they would otherwise be starving without Monsanto?

[Anonymous No.5496653]

Vermont is such a bro state. If I ever leave Canada the place I'd go is Vermont.

[Anonymous No.5496692]

>>5496596
>seafood... dear god it tripled in the last 5 years, I never buy it anymore

seriously, it's absolutely ridiculous and I've only bought it twice in the past 3 years for special occasions

[Anonymous No.5496694]

>>5496523

THE GOVERNMENT IS PUTTING THE DEADLY CHEMICAL DI-HYDROGEN MONOXIDE IN THE WATER SUPPLY! PEOPLE WHO INGEST DI-HYDROGEN MONOXIDE HAVE BEEN KNOWN TO DIE AS LITTLE AS 24 HOURS AFTER CONSUMPTION. GOD FORBID YOU GET DI-HYDROGEN MONOXIDE IN YOUR LUNGS, TOO MUCH AND YOU STOP BREATHING ALTOGETHER!

[Anonymous No.5496695]

I'm on Monsanto's side here mainly because the typically American associates GMOs with Frankenstein, cloning, and crossbreeding elephants with sunflowers. They think its some kind of dark withcraft that kills you.

[Anonymous No.5496698]

The joke is that mot people freak out when they hear scary chemical names despite not knowing that everything is chemicals.

[Anonymous No.5496702]

>>5496653
Vermontbro here; as long as you aren't from Quebec we would love to have you. Place is basically a tiny Canada with shittier health care and better beer.

[Anonymous No.5496706]

>>5496695
>crossbreeding elephants with sunflowers
>not wanting to ride an elephant, reach behind its ear and pull out a handful of delicious seeds.

[Anonymous No.5496707]

>>5496694
why do you keep hyphenating dihydrogen monoxide

[Anonymous No.5496708]

>>5496695

are you somehow implicating that monsanto's business practices are at all acceptable

are you implicating that monsanto deserves to make money

[Anonymous No.5496711]

>>5496698
Yup. I had a chem teacher that gave us a pamphlet similar to >>5496694. We all started freaking out and then felt incredibly stupid. Best lesson in fear-mongering ever.

[Anonymous No.5496713]

>>5496695
whats wrong with labeling though?

i personally dont have a problem with it and cant wait to really start genetically modifying cannabis but i dont see an issue with labeling or how it violates free speech

[Anonymous No.5496714]

>>5496707
Working Out My Pinkies, Bro.

[Anonymous No.5496731]

>>5496702
Maine here. I agree Fuck Quebec.

[Anonymous No.5496812]

>>5496707

Probably the same reason you didn't bother to capitalize the first word in your sentence. People don't stick to proper grammar on the internet.

[SadMotherfucker !!bMMLLF4HPrR No.5496824]

>>5496167

This makes me embarrassed to be a Vermonter.

Monsanto is definitely going to win the lawsuit, which the state will waste a shitload of money on.

The FDA (not to mention every major scientific body and regulatory agency in the world) has found GMO to have no health or nutrition difference from other foods.

Things are required to be on the label when they represent a health or nutrition difference -- putting "Contains GMO" on the label implies this is the case and Monsanto will win on this basis.

[Anonymous No.5496832]

>>5496824
>no health

Science... doesn't say anything blanket about GMOs. It depends totally on what was done to it.

Go back to /pol/

[SadMotherfucker !!bMMLLF4HPrR No.5496845]

>>5496832

>>5496832

http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml

fuck yourself, no proof is no proof you faggot. There are no known health risks from human consumption of GMOs, putting it on the label is just a political indulgence to anti-science hippie faggots.

[Anonymous No.5496850]

>>5496824
The problem is the chemicals sprayed on the mutant crops, not the crops themselves.

[Anonymous No.5496858]

>>5496845
There has been shit linked in this thread about the effect some of monsanto's shit has on the body, not to mention the proof of the GMO pesticides used on the bee population

Eat shit faggot

[SadMotherfucker !!bMMLLF4HPrR No.5496859]

>>5496850

the label doesn't say "sprayed with X chemical" it says "contains GMO"

[Anonymous No.5496864]

>>5496845
There's literally nothing in your link, idiot

[SadMotherfucker !!bMMLLF4HPrR No.5496867]

>>5496858

>hurr there was a link somewhere

It's bullshit.

I posted a link too, read it.

[SadMotherfucker !!bMMLLF4HPrR No.5496874]

>>5496864
>>5496867

fucking flash page, here's the real link

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2013/10/14/2000-reasons-why-gmos-are-safe-to-eat-and-environmentally-sustainable/

[Anonymous No.5496876]

>>5496867
no, the person even pasted the scientific info behind it

Your link is empty

[Anonymous No.5496877]

>>5496859
Basically all of these crops are sprayed excessively with glyophosphate. The effect would be the same.

[Anonymous No.5496887]

>>5496523
>they contain AMINO ACIDS!!! IT'S EVIL!

[Anonymous No.5496891]

>>5496887
acids dissolve things dummy

[SadMotherfucker !!bMMLLF4HPrR No.5496895]

>>5496877
Glyphosate is the most popular agricultural herbicide in the country, and the EPA doesn't consider it harmful even if a person eats nothing but food treated with it for their entire life.

So, just like GMO's, it doesn't belong on the label. It's been tested and approved by our regulatory bodies for food safety and therefore has no place in required labeling.

[Anonymous No.5497041]

Who gives a fuck if it's safe or not? Everyone has a right to know what's in their food.

[Anonymous No.5497382]

>>5496216
>It'd just be found eventually from studies, which will harm them from a business standpoint.
You don't know much about Monsanto, do you?

[Anonymous No.5497390]

>>5497382

Penn & Teller taught me everything I need to know about them. What is that black and white game anyway? Those graphics totally suck.

[Anonymous No.5497399]

>>5496859
If we're having this much of a battle over labeling of GMOs, just think of the kind of war people will fight over what they're sprayed with.

[Anonymous No.5497426]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tP4yX2rkpBc

[Anonymous No.5497537]

>>5496180
faggot detected

[Anonymous No.5497666]

>>5496380
>>5496369
>>5496363
>post something of interest in a GMO thread
>ignored
lol every time

[Anonymous No.5497677]

>>5496895
>Glyphosate is the most popular agricultural herbicide in the country, and the EPA doesn't consider it harmful even if a person eats nothing but food treated with it for their entire life.
See:

>>5497666

[Anonymous No.5497687]

>>5496167
Vermont will probably run out of money for the lawsuit, get its farm taken away, and sent to prison.

[Anonymous No.5498865]

>>5496504
But they are, though. Not because GMO is inherently poisonous, of course not, but because it's commonly used to make crops more pesticide resistant so more can be sprayed on.

[Anonymous No.5498866]

>>5496573
The problem of starving Africans cannot be solved by just making there be more food. More food = more babies = more demand for food = back where we started again. The green revolution demonstrated this. No, the problem is more complex than that.

[Anonymous No.5498867]

>>5498866
www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkgDhDa4HHo

[Anonymous No.5498982]

So I am reading through this thread and noticing a disconnect. It is not just about whether the crops themselves are dangerous to eat, but whether their use causes issues such as mono-culture species, or hiney bee die off from over use of nicotinoids. and as a matter of personal politics, whether you want to be forced into accidentally supporting a company that sues farmers for replanting seeds simply because that company succeeds by obfuscating their presence on the market shelf.

[Anonymous No.5498986]

>>5498982
btw I am from Vermont so...

saged for double post

[Anonymous No.5500175]

>>5496363
>>5496369
>ctrl-f bt-toxin
>This anon is educating the faggots in this thread who "hurr durr conspiracy theorists"

Neve r mind that all of the tests done to show that GMO were 'safe' were done for 2 months. Rats were fed GMOs. At 2 months the study terminated and they congress declared GMO safe.

In France they fed rats GMO food (and their offspring) for generations, for 2 years. The rats had cancer and other issues in high numbers.

[Anonymous No.5500280]

>>5500175
>france
hahahahahaha

[Anonymous No.5500282]

>>5500175

>seralini

those french studies were disregarded by the scientific community when they finally submitted them for peer review

[Anonymous No.5500301]

>>5500175

Seralini used rats that get in 90% of cases always a cancer, used groups of 10 animals and he actually found out that sometimes the more glyphosate and GMO he fed the rats the less likely they were to die (statistical error due to using small control groups.

He refused to submit his research for peer review for a long time. When he did, it was rejected by the scientific community.

[Anonymous No.5500453]

>>5496845
>There are no known health risks from human consumption of GMOs
Based on want studies using humans as experimental organisms?

[Anonymous No.5500463]

>>5496845

Then why did GMO corn cause cancer in mice?

(^: faggot

[Anonymous No.5500465]

>>5500463
>mice are people

[Anonymous No.5500473]

>>5500465

>GMO cause cancer in biological organisms
>Humans are not biological organisms.

Lovely brain you have there.

[Anonymous No.5500479]

>>5500473
>all biological organisms react the same to everything

[Anonymous No.5500480]

>>5500473
mice are highly prone to cancer and tumors without anything being applied to them.

They are horrible test subjects. Rhesus monkeys on the other hand...

[Anonymous No.5500487]

>>5500479

If GMO cause cancer in non human biological organisms then OBVIOUSLY it's not good for you, you stupid faggot.

[Anonymous No.5500493]

>>5500487
dogs die if they eat chocolate

BAN CHOCOLATE

[Anonymous No.5500498]

>>5500493

Yes actually chocolate has been linked to AIDS we probably should get rid of it.

[Anonymous No.5500808]

>>5496198
>That doesn't mean they're trying to poison you.
Just because they aren't trying, doesn't mean they won't. That company that made pills against headaches that lead to pregnant women birthing deformed freaks, they weren't trying to create monsters. The people who thought asbestos was a good isolation solution weren't trying to poison anybody.

See a pattern here? companies don't have to be evil, it's totally enough if they are reckless, incompetent or negligent.

>Just think about, it what's in it for them? WHAT'S IN IT FOR THEM TO POISON YOU? NOOOTHHHINNNNNG

Profit. The bottom line is how much money they are making. Of course they don't aim to poision you but they also don't care much if they accidentally do in the process of making the biggest progress.

Your well being isn't there primary concern at all. To put it in a way I hope you'll understand. WHAT'S IN IT FOR THEM TO CARE ABOUT YOUR HEALTH? NOOOTHHHINNNNNG

See? It goes both ways. They just don't give a shit one way or the other, except for the money because that's how corporations operate. That's why they are dangerous and have to be stopped.

[Anonymous No.5500853]

>>5500498
black people have aids
chocolate is black
chocolate causes aids
BAN CHOCOLATE