| Farmwithjunk - 11/30/2013 08:52
Fortunately, most of us are intelligent enough to recognize thinking like that as just what it is....Nonsense.
Then there's Chimel. and his conspiracy theory/The uni-bomber was right/"technology I don't/can't/won't understand MUST be wrong" mentality....
Your brains must be quite calcified if you can't make the difference between posting about a GMO news and not seeing that the post is actually mostly anti-GMO (the 2 different GMO news in this post). Or even between the simple reporting of a GMO news and taking positions about GMOs.
I don't know how much BT you have in your blood, but it probably pales compared to the BS content in your post. The Unabomber, really? Conspiracy theories? I certainly understand GMOs much better than you do if you just buy into whatever Monsanto sells you, and I keep studying GMOs every day with such articles. It doesn't mean that I believe everything I read, there's actually many other negative observations I made about this report, like its language, how it mentions a specific aspect of one specific type of GMO such as R/R or Bt, and then goes on saying GMOs in general are bad.
FYI, I even think that some forms of GMOs should be allowed in organic farming, especially cisgenic GMOs, where one gene from one species is introduced to another organism of the same species, for instance the stem rust resistance trait for wheat. Cross-pollination or cross-selection does not even remotely allow this kind of hybridization: First, you can't introduce a single trait, it's half the whole genome of the other organism that you introduce with such natural reproduction, meaning that 50% of the new organism won't have the new trait, and the 50% that have it will also have thousands of undesired traits that need to be regressed after several generations of intensive selection. As a result, you never ever get a new organism that is isogenic to your original organism, just with that one desired gene sequence added. GMOs certainly seem much more efficient at getting to an immediate and safe result, or at least, they have this potentiality. |
GMOs: Séralini 2-year study retracted, and gluten allergy
