/sci/ - Science & Math

we have the technology, we might as well use it

>So tell me /sci/, what are good arguments against GMO?
pretty much none that aren't "muh feelings" or meta reasons like "mun monsanto" or "muh bag gene patent laws"

>Now, Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) are up in the media all the time
And here you are spamming this here, glad you decided to contribute your part.

>>6033272

gmos produced to yield high resistance against "badlings" (idkwtftc "schädlinge") are effectively bred to produce pesticides and repellents naturally, the human tolerance of which is debated

anti-competitive practices in current business model of GMO

poor history of independent and science-based regulation from government.

>>6033272
Because that shit ain't natural, and we have no idea how it will interact with nature. It can impact birds, insects and wildlife, as well as dominating natural plants.
It's dabbling in stuff we don't really understand, even if it's safe to eat it.

>>6033279
pests?

>>6033279
we know the toxicity of most pesticides (short term) at least. A couple of natural pesticides include caffeine and nicotine.
The dosage is so much incredibly smaller for a 200 kg male than a one gram fly.

The worst problems I've learned about are considering two specific genetically modified crops.

The first is pesticide corn. The pollen from this corn flew over to nearby milkweed plants and killed the monarch caterpillars which this is their only food source. The same pesticides used to take out weevils will kill these helpful insects too.

The second case I like to call Super-Grass, is genetically modified grass designed to be resistant to round-up. This new grass is used to completely cover golf courses and to stay nice and green throughout the season. This grass takes a lot of water to do this, and because it's resistant to weed killers like round up, it becomes a pain to kill and it can take over certain ecosystems.

>>6033287
this is totally true and needs to be fixed

Monsanto needs to stop fucking up the environment

What's all this I hear about Genetically Modified Orgasms? Back in my day, men and women did it the old fashioned way. And we liked it that way, dammit. Get the hell off my lawn.

>>6033774
>implying any of those fucks give a shit about the environment with their quadruple overdrive cars.

....what
The only reason I support GMOs is because they work as population control, which isn't a bad idea at this point.
I would link you to studies that clearly point to a degradation in the health of not only the test subjects of GMOs but also the consumers (which can also be considered test subjects)
A boom in GI issues has become very prevalent. Im pretty much a GMO child myself and for being 19 years of age, my kidneys are pretty fucked.

>>6034982
> I would link you to studies that clearly point to a degradation in the health of not only the test subjects of GMOs but also the consumers
this isn't true. We've been doing GMO since the birth of agriculture.
There may be a correlation between the price of calories and health degradation, but eating a GMO crop versus a non-GMO crop has not been found to be dangerous.
> Im pretty much a GMO child myself and for being 19 years of age, my kidneys are pretty fucked.
Sucks to be you. It has nothing to do with us modifying the genes of corn and wheat.

When talking about GMO's you should be aware of all of this
http://www.better health.vic.gov.au bhcv2/bhcarticles.nsf/pages/Genetically_modified_foods_techniques

Yeah, who cares if my GMO crop kills bees because it has genetically engineered pesticides and insecticides. (The bee argument)
http://www.global research.ca/death-of-the-bees-genetically-modified-crops-and-the-decline-of-bee-colonies-in-north-america/25950

Those same pesticides and herbicides are failing to kill some pests and weeds. Now we have more things that we don't like that are harder to kill! ("Superpest" and "Superweed" argument)
http://www.the mindfulword.org/2012/gmo-genetically-engineered-food/

Not to mention that the terminator seed idea is completely corporate and has a large disregard for the farmers that actually use their product. And for anyone who has any forsight should see infertility on the rise in GMO countries from here on in. (Studies done on lab rats. No time to look for those links right now, but this should keep you busy for the time being)

>>6033287
>Because that shit ain't natural, and we have no idea how it will interact with nature.
What isn't natural? Current GMO is basically just a gene or two from organism X expressed in organism Y and the tools used to make it like restriction enzymes and DNA pols are from nature too, and do similar things every day in nature..

>>6033272
>what are good arguments against GMO?
taking over environment due to poor restrains

passing their traits to related species, which is sort of the same as the previous one

patent laws which could led to a producer not paying royalties being sued because they did not know their crops had been hybridized with GMO patented traits (through pollination by natural vectors, such as insects and birds), which is also kind of the same of the last two

no long term effects have been found on humans, but i really must confess i dunno if long term effects on humans or other long lived animals have been studied, those kind of studies are expensive due to the length involved

>>6035062
That anon probably thinks it's unnatural because it was done by humans and not nature. Which is of course retarded.

"natural" just means natural selection which means nature selecting the genes that spreads the most

GMO are instead simply human selection.

>>6033272
Did you triy these tomatos? They dont even have taste. Did you try how real tomatos taste?

>>6035258
thank you anon. I'm sick of all the retards who are thinking of some material science shit that the tomatoes are made from plastic or something. iditos

>eat GMO food
>its designed to look amazing, but it tastes like shit
>eat organic food
>it looks like shit, but it tastes amazing

I'll eat tiny, fuzzy, expensive peaches any day over large, round, cheap ones.

look at a comparison of messing with genetic material throughout time and it should be clear things have changed. People can argue about which ones are really genetic modifications (under the broad definition they technically all are) but even if we all agree that they all fall under the same term it ignores the simple fact that they are not the same.
(I don't know the proper terms so I improvising some)
1. Selective survival: killing or preventing organisms with unwanted traits from breeding
2. Selective breeding: Actively breeding organisms wanted traits with others with wanted traits
3. Radiation mixing: exposing organisms to radiation in hopes something good will come of it
4. Advanced selective breeding: basically testing and selecting individual sperm and eggs for breeding
5. Direct genetic alterations: inserting or replacing part of a genetic structure with other genes

>>6035258
Are you brain damaged? Natural in the context of agriculture is FAR from natural selection. Every crop we use nowadays is the way it is because it's selection has been artificial and guided by humans.

GMOs does not refer to unnatural selection either, it refers to taking a virus, inserting genes into it, infecting a plant, and then using it's seeds. The genes used come from other organisms altogether. It is entirely different from crossbreeding plants or even some imaginary inter-species breeding. Genes are taken out of context and re-inserted in ways they would never be.

>>6035529
Are you new to /sci/? No one here ever makes arguments like that, go back to your shit containment board, retard.

>>6035581
I'm talking about some of the retards on this thread and people in general. Not everyone on /sci/ obviously. And chill bro why you mad?

>>6035258
so natural means rock hard kernels of corn, tiny sour apples, and non-genetically similar bananas?
we stopped being "natural" 5000 years ago.

>>6033272
The main reasons I hear people complain about GMOs are because:

>Copyright infringement trolling. Monsanto or whatever company owns the copyright for the genes they insert into crops. If one of their crops grows on your land or cross breeds with your crops (via over the air pollination or being contaminated by stray seeds or whatever) then your ass can be sued. In order to sue you Monsanto or whoever will take samples of your crops (with or without your permission, both cases have been noted) and then send them in for testing. If their gene is found then they will sue. Generally they sue the year after without letting you know so it's too late for you to do your own testing. You can settle out of court, destroy all your crops and seed vaults (even heirloom seeds), pay a huge sum, and agree not to speak about the incident; or you can opt to fight it out in court. The few people who have turned down the settlement and fought it out in court have all ended up bankrupt and on top of it have been ordered to destroy all their crops by the court and be indebted insane amounts (no one has ever won a case). It'd be like if huge music labels could contaminate the repositories of smaller competing music labels with copyrighted samples and then sue them out of business.
>Crossbreeding and hybridization is not something that can easily be controlled and in many places outside the US these genes are seen as a scourge and despite burning tons of fields it's proven very difficult to eliminate once an area is contaminated.

I should point out that there have been instances where Monsanto has accidentally contaminated farms and the farms have still been sued out of business. In one case in particular a Monsanto seed truck had it's tarp blown off due to strong winds and contaminated all the farms in it's path.

>>6035584
>I'm talking about some of the retards on this thread and people in general. Not everyone on /sci/ obviously. And chill bro why you mad?
He's wrong you fucktard. That's neither what organic food nor what GMO means.

I see a lot of retards who don't understand the issue at all and think it boils down to the type of shit that dipshit spewed.

Refer to >>6035591