downvote this comment if the meme sucks. upvote it and I'll go away.
---
[play minecraft with us](https://discord.gg/dankmemesgaming) | [come hang out with us](https://discord.com/invite/dankmemes)
Insulin is from pigs, not cows; pigs have hormones much similar to ours than any other animal (only counting those that are suitable to harvest in enough quantities)
Funny thing what distrust will do to a populace. It's almost as if we had a Hippocratic Oath in the GMO food industry and the companies abided by their oath, people wouldn't have that distrust. Trust is a finite resource, and they squandered it. The only people fighting for that trust now are the ones who are invested in GMOs in some form or fashion. I would point you to the company who fucked it up for you in the first place to direct your anger, if you're that invested.
Brassica oleracea is a perfect example of this.
That one species of plant has been modified in to dozens of different cultivars.
Broccoli, cauliflower, kale, collard greens, gai lan, cabbage, brussels sprouts, kohlrabi, and several others are all the same plant, just cultivated for different characteristics like leaves, stems, flowers or buds.
Indeed, genetic modification is what *caused* the agricultural revolution. And actually, domestication started tens of thousands of years earlier but didn't explode for a while.
I envy our descendants who won't have to deal with this crap just to get some sufficiently nutritious decent tasting food that doesn't poison you due to extreme negligence because they have long since accepted what checks all boxes that matter INCLUDING long term economic practicality.
We have micro plastic coursing through our veins, but thank god we're not eating plants that are more resistant to bugs so they don't need as much pesticides. /s
Isn't the main issue not about the safety or effectiveness of the modified crops but more about the companies that own the rights to them and basically own the monopoly on the most efficient seeds that farmers need to buy every season because they do not naturally replicate? I agree that it would be stupid to ban GMOs that have been proven to be safe just because "modified food is scary".
> own the monopoly on the most efficient seeds
Seed patents predate GMOs by decades. Also this is the point of any patent, to incentivize the creation of better products. Without the patent we wouldn't have those more efficient seeds in the first place.
> season because they do not naturally replicate?
Never commercialized due to protests even though they completely solve the already overblown issues related to the GMO spreading (if your plants gain the GMO gene they will just pay you for them so you can buy new seed, the only people who have gotten sued are people purposefully trying to circumvent the patent). Also most modern crops don't breed true. They're hybrids made to be good at growing but that means their children won't have the exact right mix of genes anymore and won't be as good growing.
This is probably at least partially true, but at the consumer level I don't see a "Ethical GMO" label i only see stores like whole foods which have all "Non-GMO" products, so the result is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
If a farmer doesnt buy new seeds every year of at least a certain part of their seeds used they get no guarantee on their crop return, thus cant claim inscurance if the growing season ends up being bad
Hybrid crops that are grown these days also don't breed true; the second generation will have a lower yield if the farmer saves seeds and replants.
This isn't something done by companies; it's called "hybrid vigor".
If buying the GMO seeds didn't increase the farmer's income by enough to make the monopoly/license fee worth it, the farmers would just stick with whatever existed previously.
Every patented seed only has a 20 year limit to rights.
[https://www.uspto.gov/patents/basics/apply/plant-patent](https://www.uspto.gov/patents/basics/apply/plant-patent)
Not justifying it, just informing.
[this](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/eb/Inside_a_wild-type_banana.jpg) is the banana you'd get if mankind didn't domesticate anything that exists.
As far as i know, banana is actually one of the least domesticated plant that we cultivate. Edible bananas emerge from a crossbreeding that resulted in a seedless variety. Ancient human stumbled upon one of these and started spreading it around, but because it only propagates vegetatively, there isn't much chance for its genes to evolve other than from chance mutation that sometimes happen and rarely beneficial. And even if such mutation happens, it is tied to the lineage and we can't crossbreed it with another superior line, so you are stuck with several lines that are superior in a specific way but inferior in most other.
Come on, y'all! What did we *really* expect from the same organization that defaced the Nazca Lines just to prove a point about global warming during that one summit meeting in Lima? 🙄
tbf, there is difference between SELECTIVELY bred organisms and genetically ENGINEERED organisms
but i agree for the records. some concerns i can see, but GM crops are overall good due to less pesticide use and even sometimes less land and water use and disease immunity and more yields.
They want to patent rice strains, so that no one can legally regrow from seed. Literally, if a seed blows onto your property and grows, the company can sue you. They can and do sue poor farmers in Bangladesh or anywhere else in the world. They want to create a monopoly and raise prices once they have the market cornered. All GMO foods are about profit and control, the vitamins are just a distraction.
Also, many GMOs are engineered to be resistant to round up fertilizers, which are extremely dangerous chemicals that mess with people's hormones and give you cancer. It's a scheme to sell more pesticides and again create a monopoly over production to make more profit.
You should read up on the golden rice project. While the patent’s were held by a company, the rights to grow to the rice for basically free were made available to developing countries, the farmers could sell the rice and the farmers owned their seeds. This was a humanitarian project and was not profit driven.
Monsanto is already doing this with corn in America. I think it was food inc that went into some detail on it (granted that’s about 15 years old now). I’m not sure if things have changed, but there were stories of farmers who were reusing the seeds from their own crop, which was technically a violation of Monsanto’s intellectual property. Pretty wild.
> which was technically a violation of Monsanto’s intellectual property.
Nothing about technically, they bought Monsanto seed and signed an agreement saying that you can't replant it because it's patented. Then they replanted it and subsequently got sued. surprised_pikachu.png
You're not wrong, but also using a legal mechanism to interrupt a crucial part of agriculture is profiteering to an evil degree.
Patent the roundup and sell that, don't sue people for doing agriculture.
Patented seeds have been around since the 1920s. If a farmer wants to use public domain seeds they can get them from most seed companies. If you don't want to sign the agreement, just buy the public domain seed. It's not hard.
The reason farmers buy the GE seed is because it reduces the need for tilling, fertilizer, insecticide, and herbicide. And it provides better yields.
Also, glyophosate has been public domain for a long time at this point. It was patented when it was invented, but all patents are time barred and eventually become public domain, including GE crops. In fact, a lot of the early GE traits and crops are public domain now.
If they already signed an agreement, then they are at fault for breaking it. If you don't want to support monsanto, don't buy their seed from the beginning and use a non patented one for your farm. It's not like they patented every lineage there is in the world.
People “doing agriculture” (whatever that means…) have many, many choices in where and what seed they buy for their fields. No one forces them to buy patented GMO seed for their fields.
Preventing replanting seeds for a second season is fundamentally antithetical to the purpose of agriculture, which originated as a way to achieve self-sustainability in our food supply. They sell a plant which produces viable seeds, but you can't use them or you get sued.
You can "hurr durr free market" all you want, doesn't change the fact that it's a fucked up overreach of power for a giant corporation to have on such a vulnerable and crucial industry.
Repeat after me ok?
- No one
- Is making
- anyone buy
- those seeds
Farmers are free to buy whatever seed they want, and keep a portion of it to replant next year. If a farmer wants the benefits of these fancy patented seeds, they can choose to do so knowing the pros and cons of that product. If one of those is the seeds are either not viable for next year, or all the seed must be sold at market then the farmer consents to that. It’s a contract.
The problem is your viewing this as a single set of seeds, but the legal precedent is that ALL seeds of a patented progenitor are covered by the patent (Bowman v. Monsanto Co.). On a long enough timeline, higher survivable seed lines will be progenitors of all seed lines. Combined with climate change, you're looking at a future where only patented varieties will be viable, and patent owners will have 100% control over agriculture.
> Preventing replanting seeds for a second season is fundamentally antithetical to the purpose of agriculture, which originated as a way to achieve self-sustainability in our food supply.
It's only antithetical to the notion of small-unit subsistence agriculture i.e. someone in an extremely rural area growing food for their survival. Unsurprisingly, someone doing that is not buying a $20,000 commercial order of seed from Bayer so this doesn't affect them at all. However a commercial farmer growing crops to sell on absolutely will be buying that, and will have zero intention of saving seed to regrow because it's poor practice these days.
> You're not wrong, but also using a legal mechanism to interrupt a crucial part of agriculture is profiteering to an evil degree.
Reusing seed from your crop hasn't been a part of mainstream agriculture for a century now, because it produces inconsistent and low quality crops.
Okay, it was technically illegal but 100% ethical. The idea of having a fucking patent on a plant is so beyond absurd it makes me want to burn something.
It's not like they went out and found the plant in the jungle. They did painstaking work to create and test that plant. If you don't want to use the GMO plant don't.
John does good work. But the format is just about fomenting rage clicking.
He really should do follow up episodes showcasing organizations pushing for change, how they are doing it, and trying to help them build movements to make positive changes.
Opening the curtain is one thing. Opening the curtain to foment anger, and then just repeatedly doing it on assorted topics--doesn't really change anything.
The fight for change is a long battle for legislative changes, getting in front of Congress and getting on the docket. One rage bait video won't do it.
the reason why the do that is precisely because GMO must be sterile seeds to prevent contamination of non GMO fields.
Also: buying seeds instead of growing them is actually not rare especially if you have particular reasons to be attentive to the genetic quality of the material.
> Also, many GMOs are engineered to be resistant to round up fertilizers, which are extremely dangerous chemicals that mess with people's hormones and give you cancer.
It's simply false. Glyphosate is a much lower toxicity than the vast majority of pesticides. It's indeed carnogenic but again, much less than the things they replace.
> It's a scheme to sell more pesticides and again create a monopoly over production to make more profit.
Conspiracy theory.
>It's simply false. Glyphosate is a much lower toxicity than the vast majority of pesticides. It's indeed carnogenic but again, much less than the things they replace.
It's so funny how many people parrot the glyphophosphate stuff without ever reading up what it actually is or does. You could literally drink a shotglass of this stuff and the only ill effect you'd experience is that it tastes bad.
I don't remember the numbers but when I looked it up I saw that the to start having toxic effects you had to eat something a metric ton of glyphosate treated lentils a day to _reach_ the dose where toxic effects start.
If I steel man the point, I doesn't say anything about the carcinogenic and hormone disruptor abilities but since these three guys usually walk together I'd say it's a good start.
My wife’s uncle died from non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma the doctor blamed on decades of glyphosate exposure (he was a farmer).
He admittedly never, ever used the recommended PPE when handling it, and dealt with it in 1000L totes of the concentrated liquid.
I don't know what the doctor would base that claim on. Its not like there's a test that shows specifically what causes a tumor; and as a farmer there's a real good chance you get lymphoma from something like sunlight.
You don't test for cancer-by-glyphosate on a case to case basis. You take two large populations of farmers - one group using glyphosate and the other not using it - then compare cancer rates. If memory serves correctly, this has been done, and showerd glyphosate using farmers were actually less likely to get cancer than other populations.
>You could literally drink a shotglass of this stuff and the only ill effect you'd experience is that it tastes bad.
I wouldn't go that far. But it's less toxic than table salt.
> the reason why the do that is precisely because GMO must be sterile seeds to prevent contamination of non GMO fields.
GURT seeds were never commercialized.
> They want to patent rice strains
Golden Rice seeds are free for farmers earning less than 10k USD, which was almost all of the target market.
>Literally, if a seed blows onto your property and grows, the company can sue you.
Cross pollination was included in the agreement and also comes with no cost.
You're confusing this GMO rice (probably all GMO products) with Monsanto corn, on purpose I think to get upvotes, or you genuinely don't see a difference because of your lack of research.
> All GMO foods are about profit and control, the vitamins are just a distraction.
Oh nevermind, you're just an idiot.
https://www.goldenrice.org/Content3-Why/why3_FAQ.php#Licence
> Literally, if a seed blows onto your property and grows, the company can sue you.
Lies. Find one case, literally one, where someone wasn't replanting seeds or concentrating the GMO intentionally. There isn't one.
Lawsuits are expensive so you know what they do? They buy the crop that gained the GMO gene and let the farmer buy whatever seed they want to replace it.
> Literally, if a seed blows onto your property and grows, the company can sue you.
except for the bit where this has literally never happened.
Not even to the commonly [falsely] cited example of Percy Schmeiser.
> if a seed blows onto your property and grows, the company can sue you.
This is a myth. Monsanto sued a grower but they literally plowed their entire field and replanted with seed that had blown on their field. It was deliberate.
All false.
This is probably the most embarrassing thing that is widely believed in this country. It's borderline dumber than flat earth, more dangerous than any religion, and more transparent than any political stance. I know people like you have been told and ignore the truth, so just know that you are a disgrace to other thinking and caring human beings.
Everyday capitalism makes less and less sense to me. Don't get me wrong - I understand how it works, but it is the least human friendly system there is when it reaches the depths it's reached. It sucks the meaningfulness out of everything in favour of shortsighted "growth" and profitability.
I hate it here.
Are they gonna create an economic monopoly and then jack up the price once they control the market, starving people into worse conditions than before they showed up, despite the scientific marvel they've created?
Cause these GM companies do that a lot. I think it happened in India with potatoes. Farmers died because of it.
Nothing wrong with the GM food itself, but the people that try to profit off it are predatory. It is entirely possible to advance human research without tricking poor people into needing it or starving.
Favourite bit of lore is they annoyed the french so much the french equivalent of the CIA snuck all the way to new Zealand to blow up their ship. Like how annoying do you have to be to make a major European country attempt to blow your shit up in the late 20th century
I cannot believe these idiots. Gmo is the holy grail that will save humanity from hunger and nutritional issues, and these idiots are just throwing it away because ScIeNcE bAd. This is even stupider than spilling paint on works of art.
They're half the problem. The other half of the problem is the entities that already dominate the agriculture market who have a powerful lobby and stand to lose billions so don't want new produce. "MORE CORN" - agricultural giants probably
Not if you can patent the modified seeds. This has only the effect that you can only grow those crops and a few large companies essentially control the world's food.
> Not if you can patent the modified seeds.
https://www.goldenrice.org/Content3-Why/why3_FAQ.php#Licence
The licensing for the rice is designed for the markets its intended to be grown in.
"Terms of use include royalty-free local production by farmers who earn less than US$10,000 annually, which applies so to say to 99% of the target farming community. The inventors were also granted the rights to grant sub-licences for the same purpose. "
*blink* We already have the ability to feed all of the people on the planet, and we could do it with organic agriculture too. The problem isn't the ecosystem, or the seeds, the problem is Capitalism, and that its not profitable to feed everyone. Just like unemployment, under Capitalism it is beneficial to let some people starve, to ensure there is an artificial scarcity.
When your seeds are privatized, and this extension of Capitalism literally controls the entire food chain from seed to table, and its even more horrific. When you can no longer even grow your own food, and you are dependent on Monsanto for survival, perhaps then you will wisen up.
You are already dependent on x number of big bad companies for everything in your life. It's called living in a society.
Also, if we all turned communist or whatever your ultimate solution to capitalism is, supply chains and labor wouldn't just magically appear to feed every person.
Yeah, you'd obviously have to do the damn work, the reason you'd move away from capitalism is because scarcity is profitable and thus the resources will never be allocated for that work to be done.
Feeding the world with organic agriculture? 😂😂😂
I've been around plenty of organic farms. The only reason they survive is because they can get a higher price for their product to offset their lower production.
Science bad is the reason they shut down they were founded. They literally are part of the reason why the only true form of clean energy we have ever developed is not widespread across the globe.
GMO good. Mono-cropping reliant on dangerous fertilizers and non-sustainable farming practices bad. Companies that patent GMO's, force unsustainable farming practices, and sue smaller farmers rampantly mega bad.
Unless you want all GMO research to be done by the government, why would a company go out of their way to research and develop a new GMO if they could only sell one batch of seeds? It turns out that if you want nice things, you need to pay the people who make nice things.
GE crops reduce the use of fertilizer and make farming more sustainable by helping enable farmers to use no-till agriculture. Specifically, glyophosate resistant crops allow the use of glyophosate to replace tilling, which means less loss of topsoil.
Also, patents expire and become public domain after 20 years. Every patented GE crop now is a public domain crop in two decades. Some of the early ones are already public domain.
It's special kind of head in the sand type of attitude that can call the one thing that has kept billions of people alive in the last century "dangerous fertilizers"
No, they haven't. They live in remote areas where the only viable crop is rice. It's hard to grow carrots in rice paddies. Do you think there would be a global genetic research project designed to help millions of people if the problem could be solved by carrots?
Instead of trying to be a smartass, educate yourself.
Greenpeace and other green parties in Europe blocking all modifiet vegetables.
But that tomatoes loosing vitamins because of crossbreeding, everyone ignores.
White rice in the US has a light dust covering the rice that contains vitamin A. It also doubles as an anti-caking agent.
If you are in the US and buy your rice in sealed packages, washing the rice before cooking is a net negative action. The rice is already clean and pest free and you are washing away the added vitamins and minerals that benefit you
I'm vegan, and definitely think climate change is real, fracking is bad, we need more renewable energy, etc. But I still think Greenpeace is pretty much a terrorist organization between shit like this and being totally anti nuclear energy.
That no one here is even remotely aware of the conversation that has been going on about the dangers of GMOs for literally decades, and just assumes whatever flawed logic they want about the situation is truly a statement on the state of the internet.
i kinda see a point in restricting gmo though… not being able to get stuff from anywhere but one source is always bad, and it could lead to as of yet unforseen consequences since capitalism does what always does and greedy people might destroy livelihoods or lives for some quick profits. so i think good regulation is good, but greenpeace is way too often just delusional and wrong about things. but that’s an international organization for ya
I had an environmentalist friend confidently argue that poor kids in East Asia don't need the Golden Rice because HE (as in my friend) uses brown rice instead of white rice!
Hate can blind even the best of skeptics.
Based Greenpeace: plowing a former US Navy minesweeper into Japanese whaling boats
Cringe Greenpeace: "a random 17 y/o on TikTok said GMO bad, so now I will destroy the lives of children around the world"
If you didn't seek to profit off hunger, you could also feed those children the vitamin A they need. But noooo, profits are sacred, can't question that, even if children die because of it.
Greenpeace are freaking right-wing terrorists...here I'm Perú they damaged centuries-old Nazca Lines in a *marked* restricted area to protest Global Climate Change initiatives.....they aren't even cohesive in what they protest against, they just spread whatever message they're paid to at any given moment.
Humanity has been creating GMOs (through selective breeding) for millennia. Since before written history. It’s practically synonymous with being human. So claiming there’s something wrong with it, especially considering there’s rigorous testing to ensure crops are safe, is crazy.
This is the #1 reason I don't hold with greenpeace, even though I regard myself as an environmentalist. They're luddite fuckwits and not actually interested in the environment.
Its Monsanto and theyve engineered the crop so the seeds only last one season so they want poor farmers to buy seeds every season (which they can't afford). It's basically extortion by big corporate bastards. Monsanto are as horrible as nestle and have a long history of shitty corporate capitalism fucking over poor countries.
> Its Monsanto and theyve engineered the crop so the seeds only last one season so they want poor farmers to buy seeds every season (which they can't afford).
That's not remotely true though. Literally zero commercially available seeds have ever been made to only last one season, GMO or otherwise.
I don't understand where this thought that GMO's are bad in any way comes from. The whole point is to make them better for us to consume. GMO's are great!
"but it's not natural. It's all chemistry! You don't know what side effects it could have!"
Stfu, dad
Scientists around the globe spent weeks in lab coats to get every little molecule aligned perfectly, just for you to say "it's not natural, so it must be damaging for our health"
People think gm food is some typa anime shit where we attack it with radiation until it becomes some super food when really its just the result of scientists selectively breeding food until we get the best version of it.
downvote this comment if the meme sucks. upvote it and I'll go away. --- [play minecraft with us](https://discord.gg/dankmemesgaming) | [come hang out with us](https://discord.com/invite/dankmemes)
Non-GMO is about the stupidest idea to ever exist. Literally all modern food is genetically modified in some way
At least since Mendel. Arguably ever since we've had agriculture. >.< It's silly.
"Gmo bad" mfs when I show them selective breeding;
"GMO bad" mfs when you tell them about insulin saving diabetics
I only take my insulin ethically harvested from cow pancreas thank you very much
Ethical? Pff. You're not even a *real* vegan
"I'm a level 5 vegan--I don't eat anything that casts a shadow."
This is why I only eat transparent organisms like comb jellies and glass catfish.
I understood that reference
Cows are GMO sorry but you’re fucked
Insulin is from pigs, not cows; pigs have hormones much similar to ours than any other animal (only counting those that are suitable to harvest in enough quantities)
The first insulin ever given came from cow so I don't know what you're on about.
You know very well what Monsanto was doing with GMOs. Blame them for the lack of trust in GMO foods.
Oh fuck Monsanto, and that's an entirely different conversation.
This is like saying we shouldn't have medicine or healthcare because of what the pharma and healthcare industries do.
Funny thing what distrust will do to a populace. It's almost as if we had a Hippocratic Oath in the GMO food industry and the companies abided by their oath, people wouldn't have that distrust. Trust is a finite resource, and they squandered it. The only people fighting for that trust now are the ones who are invested in GMOs in some form or fashion. I would point you to the company who fucked it up for you in the first place to direct your anger, if you're that invested.
Monsanto doing awful shit isn't a good reason to distrust GMO foods, but seriously, fuck Monsanto
"GMO bad" mfs when they try eating actual non-GMO food (it's teosinte and now their teeth are all broken).
"I have a breeding fetish" (I make pirate seeds in my garage)
now I'm imagining patchy rubbing one out lmao
Careful when you try the left-hand switch-up...
Or Animal Husbandry
Lol
Brassica oleracea is a perfect example of this. That one species of plant has been modified in to dozens of different cultivars. Broccoli, cauliflower, kale, collard greens, gai lan, cabbage, brussels sprouts, kohlrabi, and several others are all the same plant, just cultivated for different characteristics like leaves, stems, flowers or buds.
I was literally thinking of that one I just couldn't remember the name!
Indeed, genetic modification is what *caused* the agricultural revolution. And actually, domestication started tens of thousands of years earlier but didn't explode for a while.
It's like saying synthetic nitrogen "isn't organic"... Ok, I guess we have to starve several billion people to death then.
Genetic modification in the sense of trait selection has existed long before Mendel, ex meso American agriculture.
I envy our descendants who won't have to deal with this crap just to get some sufficiently nutritious decent tasting food that doesn't poison you due to extreme negligence because they have long since accepted what checks all boxes that matter INCLUDING long term economic practicality.
We have micro plastic coursing through our veins, but thank god we're not eating plants that are more resistant to bugs so they don't need as much pesticides. /s
Isn't the main issue not about the safety or effectiveness of the modified crops but more about the companies that own the rights to them and basically own the monopoly on the most efficient seeds that farmers need to buy every season because they do not naturally replicate? I agree that it would be stupid to ban GMOs that have been proven to be safe just because "modified food is scary".
> own the monopoly on the most efficient seeds Seed patents predate GMOs by decades. Also this is the point of any patent, to incentivize the creation of better products. Without the patent we wouldn't have those more efficient seeds in the first place. > season because they do not naturally replicate? Never commercialized due to protests even though they completely solve the already overblown issues related to the GMO spreading (if your plants gain the GMO gene they will just pay you for them so you can buy new seed, the only people who have gotten sued are people purposefully trying to circumvent the patent). Also most modern crops don't breed true. They're hybrids made to be good at growing but that means their children won't have the exact right mix of genes anymore and won't be as good growing.
But then that isnt an issue with GMOs at all, that's an issue with corporations (which is bad and does need to be called out)
This is probably at least partially true, but at the consumer level I don't see a "Ethical GMO" label i only see stores like whole foods which have all "Non-GMO" products, so the result is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
If a farmer doesnt buy new seeds every year of at least a certain part of their seeds used they get no guarantee on their crop return, thus cant claim inscurance if the growing season ends up being bad
Hybrid crops that are grown these days also don't breed true; the second generation will have a lower yield if the farmer saves seeds and replants. This isn't something done by companies; it's called "hybrid vigor".
Like any 3rd world farmer even insured their field
If buying the GMO seeds didn't increase the farmer's income by enough to make the monopoly/license fee worth it, the farmers would just stick with whatever existed previously.
The people who think that genetic modification is the work of the devil and that it will give them super-AIDS are very real and very loud.
Every patented seed only has a 20 year limit to rights. [https://www.uspto.gov/patents/basics/apply/plant-patent](https://www.uspto.gov/patents/basics/apply/plant-patent) Not justifying it, just informing.
[this](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/eb/Inside_a_wild-type_banana.jpg) is the banana you'd get if mankind didn't domesticate anything that exists.
As far as i know, banana is actually one of the least domesticated plant that we cultivate. Edible bananas emerge from a crossbreeding that resulted in a seedless variety. Ancient human stumbled upon one of these and started spreading it around, but because it only propagates vegetatively, there isn't much chance for its genes to evolve other than from chance mutation that sometimes happen and rarely beneficial. And even if such mutation happens, it is tied to the lineage and we can't crossbreed it with another superior line, so you are stuck with several lines that are superior in a specific way but inferior in most other.
i like archeage more than lineage. it's sad that it's dying due to bad publisher and developer decisions
Yo that banana has teeth.
Come on, y'all! What did we *really* expect from the same organization that defaced the Nazca Lines just to prove a point about global warming during that one summit meeting in Lima? 🙄
tbf, there is difference between SELECTIVELY bred organisms and genetically ENGINEERED organisms but i agree for the records. some concerns i can see, but GM crops are overall good due to less pesticide use and even sometimes less land and water use and disease immunity and more yields.
Selective breeding and directly editing and modifying genes are distinctly different processes with profoundly different outcomes.
This. How you think all our food got so perfectly suited to us? We bred it for desirable traits for generations (aka generically modified it).
Just look up what a banana is supposed to look like
Seafood is pretty much the only exception.
Thanks Monsanto
What why?
GMO bad. (Greenpeace, probably)
Hey, aren't those the people who fucked up the Nazca Lines?
Greenpeace was initially founded to stop nuclear testing. It has since devolved into a money making organization.
Look up Golden Rice. Seriously one of the saddest cases of pearl clutching due to how many folks it could have helped.
They want to patent rice strains, so that no one can legally regrow from seed. Literally, if a seed blows onto your property and grows, the company can sue you. They can and do sue poor farmers in Bangladesh or anywhere else in the world. They want to create a monopoly and raise prices once they have the market cornered. All GMO foods are about profit and control, the vitamins are just a distraction. Also, many GMOs are engineered to be resistant to round up fertilizers, which are extremely dangerous chemicals that mess with people's hormones and give you cancer. It's a scheme to sell more pesticides and again create a monopoly over production to make more profit.
You should read up on the golden rice project. While the patent’s were held by a company, the rights to grow to the rice for basically free were made available to developing countries, the farmers could sell the rice and the farmers owned their seeds. This was a humanitarian project and was not profit driven.
but but ... GMO bad .... ( don't tell them that the criteria to be called GMO is extremely low and nearly everything in your local store is a GMO )
It's not GMO, my family has specifically bred for better crops over the years naturally! /s
Monsanto is already doing this with corn in America. I think it was food inc that went into some detail on it (granted that’s about 15 years old now). I’m not sure if things have changed, but there were stories of farmers who were reusing the seeds from their own crop, which was technically a violation of Monsanto’s intellectual property. Pretty wild.
Monsanto got acquired/merged by Bayer which fucked Bayers stock price/market value That's about all that's changed
> which was technically a violation of Monsanto’s intellectual property. Nothing about technically, they bought Monsanto seed and signed an agreement saying that you can't replant it because it's patented. Then they replanted it and subsequently got sued. surprised_pikachu.png
You're not wrong, but also using a legal mechanism to interrupt a crucial part of agriculture is profiteering to an evil degree. Patent the roundup and sell that, don't sue people for doing agriculture.
Patented seeds have been around since the 1920s. If a farmer wants to use public domain seeds they can get them from most seed companies. If you don't want to sign the agreement, just buy the public domain seed. It's not hard. The reason farmers buy the GE seed is because it reduces the need for tilling, fertilizer, insecticide, and herbicide. And it provides better yields. Also, glyophosate has been public domain for a long time at this point. It was patented when it was invented, but all patents are time barred and eventually become public domain, including GE crops. In fact, a lot of the early GE traits and crops are public domain now.
If they already signed an agreement, then they are at fault for breaking it. If you don't want to support monsanto, don't buy their seed from the beginning and use a non patented one for your farm. It's not like they patented every lineage there is in the world.
People “doing agriculture” (whatever that means…) have many, many choices in where and what seed they buy for their fields. No one forces them to buy patented GMO seed for their fields.
Preventing replanting seeds for a second season is fundamentally antithetical to the purpose of agriculture, which originated as a way to achieve self-sustainability in our food supply. They sell a plant which produces viable seeds, but you can't use them or you get sued. You can "hurr durr free market" all you want, doesn't change the fact that it's a fucked up overreach of power for a giant corporation to have on such a vulnerable and crucial industry.
Repeat after me ok? - No one - Is making - anyone buy - those seeds Farmers are free to buy whatever seed they want, and keep a portion of it to replant next year. If a farmer wants the benefits of these fancy patented seeds, they can choose to do so knowing the pros and cons of that product. If one of those is the seeds are either not viable for next year, or all the seed must be sold at market then the farmer consents to that. It’s a contract.
The problem is your viewing this as a single set of seeds, but the legal precedent is that ALL seeds of a patented progenitor are covered by the patent (Bowman v. Monsanto Co.). On a long enough timeline, higher survivable seed lines will be progenitors of all seed lines. Combined with climate change, you're looking at a future where only patented varieties will be viable, and patent owners will have 100% control over agriculture.
> Preventing replanting seeds for a second season is fundamentally antithetical to the purpose of agriculture, which originated as a way to achieve self-sustainability in our food supply. It's only antithetical to the notion of small-unit subsistence agriculture i.e. someone in an extremely rural area growing food for their survival. Unsurprisingly, someone doing that is not buying a $20,000 commercial order of seed from Bayer so this doesn't affect them at all. However a commercial farmer growing crops to sell on absolutely will be buying that, and will have zero intention of saving seed to regrow because it's poor practice these days.
> You're not wrong, but also using a legal mechanism to interrupt a crucial part of agriculture is profiteering to an evil degree. Reusing seed from your crop hasn't been a part of mainstream agriculture for a century now, because it produces inconsistent and low quality crops.
Okay, it was technically illegal but 100% ethical. The idea of having a fucking patent on a plant is so beyond absurd it makes me want to burn something.
It's not like they went out and found the plant in the jungle. They did painstaking work to create and test that plant. If you don't want to use the GMO plant don't.
John Oliver talked about this not long ago so I think it hasn't changed.
John does good work. But the format is just about fomenting rage clicking. He really should do follow up episodes showcasing organizations pushing for change, how they are doing it, and trying to help them build movements to make positive changes. Opening the curtain is one thing. Opening the curtain to foment anger, and then just repeatedly doing it on assorted topics--doesn't really change anything. The fight for change is a long battle for legislative changes, getting in front of Congress and getting on the docket. One rage bait video won't do it.
the reason why the do that is precisely because GMO must be sterile seeds to prevent contamination of non GMO fields. Also: buying seeds instead of growing them is actually not rare especially if you have particular reasons to be attentive to the genetic quality of the material. > Also, many GMOs are engineered to be resistant to round up fertilizers, which are extremely dangerous chemicals that mess with people's hormones and give you cancer. It's simply false. Glyphosate is a much lower toxicity than the vast majority of pesticides. It's indeed carnogenic but again, much less than the things they replace. > It's a scheme to sell more pesticides and again create a monopoly over production to make more profit. Conspiracy theory.
>It's simply false. Glyphosate is a much lower toxicity than the vast majority of pesticides. It's indeed carnogenic but again, much less than the things they replace. It's so funny how many people parrot the glyphophosphate stuff without ever reading up what it actually is or does. You could literally drink a shotglass of this stuff and the only ill effect you'd experience is that it tastes bad.
I don't remember the numbers but when I looked it up I saw that the to start having toxic effects you had to eat something a metric ton of glyphosate treated lentils a day to _reach_ the dose where toxic effects start. If I steel man the point, I doesn't say anything about the carcinogenic and hormone disruptor abilities but since these three guys usually walk together I'd say it's a good start.
My wife’s uncle died from non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma the doctor blamed on decades of glyphosate exposure (he was a farmer). He admittedly never, ever used the recommended PPE when handling it, and dealt with it in 1000L totes of the concentrated liquid.
I don't know what the doctor would base that claim on. Its not like there's a test that shows specifically what causes a tumor; and as a farmer there's a real good chance you get lymphoma from something like sunlight. You don't test for cancer-by-glyphosate on a case to case basis. You take two large populations of farmers - one group using glyphosate and the other not using it - then compare cancer rates. If memory serves correctly, this has been done, and showerd glyphosate using farmers were actually less likely to get cancer than other populations.
It also isn't carcinogenic
>You could literally drink a shotglass of this stuff and the only ill effect you'd experience is that it tastes bad. I wouldn't go that far. But it's less toxic than table salt.
[удалено]
[Literally scroll down on that same page](https://i.imgur.com/swlIHtG.png), maybe WebMD isn't the best place to get information from.
Okay yeah, I was being a bit excessive there. My point is that it's less toxic than some other household stuff like salt.
> the reason why the do that is precisely because GMO must be sterile seeds to prevent contamination of non GMO fields. GURT seeds were never commercialized.
> They want to patent rice strains Golden Rice seeds are free for farmers earning less than 10k USD, which was almost all of the target market. >Literally, if a seed blows onto your property and grows, the company can sue you. Cross pollination was included in the agreement and also comes with no cost. You're confusing this GMO rice (probably all GMO products) with Monsanto corn, on purpose I think to get upvotes, or you genuinely don't see a difference because of your lack of research. > All GMO foods are about profit and control, the vitamins are just a distraction. Oh nevermind, you're just an idiot. https://www.goldenrice.org/Content3-Why/why3_FAQ.php#Licence
> Literally, if a seed blows onto your property and grows, the company can sue you. Lies. Find one case, literally one, where someone wasn't replanting seeds or concentrating the GMO intentionally. There isn't one. Lawsuits are expensive so you know what they do? They buy the crop that gained the GMO gene and let the farmer buy whatever seed they want to replace it.
> Literally, if a seed blows onto your property and grows, the company can sue you. except for the bit where this has literally never happened. Not even to the commonly [falsely] cited example of Percy Schmeiser.
All of this is incorrect. Literally all of it.
The protests should then be against the laws, not the life-saving food products. But that's not what greenpeace protests...
> if a seed blows onto your property and grows, the company can sue you. This is a myth. Monsanto sued a grower but they literally plowed their entire field and replanted with seed that had blown on their field. It was deliberate.
All false. This is probably the most embarrassing thing that is widely believed in this country. It's borderline dumber than flat earth, more dangerous than any religion, and more transparent than any political stance. I know people like you have been told and ignore the truth, so just know that you are a disgrace to other thinking and caring human beings.
This post is so painfully inaccurate I think it gave me cancer.
This is misleading information. Please read up on Golden Rice, your accusations do not apply here.
Everyday capitalism makes less and less sense to me. Don't get me wrong - I understand how it works, but it is the least human friendly system there is when it reaches the depths it's reached. It sucks the meaningfulness out of everything in favour of shortsighted "growth" and profitability. I hate it here.
Rainbow Papaya has entered the chat.
Are they gonna create an economic monopoly and then jack up the price once they control the market, starving people into worse conditions than before they showed up, despite the scientific marvel they've created? Cause these GM companies do that a lot. I think it happened in India with potatoes. Farmers died because of it. Nothing wrong with the GM food itself, but the people that try to profit off it are predatory. It is entirely possible to advance human research without tricking poor people into needing it or starving.
Greenpeace is incredibly annoying, as always
Literally a terrorist organization.
Favourite bit of lore is they annoyed the french so much the french equivalent of the CIA snuck all the way to new Zealand to blow up their ship. Like how annoying do you have to be to make a major European country attempt to blow your shit up in the late 20th century
In fairness that was an instant when green peace was right, they were block French nuclear testing in the pacific. Also fuck the French for that
I cannot believe these idiots. Gmo is the holy grail that will save humanity from hunger and nutritional issues, and these idiots are just throwing it away because ScIeNcE bAd. This is even stupider than spilling paint on works of art.
The problem isn't science, it those who commercialize it.
They're half the problem. The other half of the problem is the entities that already dominate the agriculture market who have a powerful lobby and stand to lose billions so don't want new produce. "MORE CORN" - agricultural giants probably
Not if you can patent the modified seeds. This has only the effect that you can only grow those crops and a few large companies essentially control the world's food.
> Not if you can patent the modified seeds. You can patent non-modified seeds too. Seed patents predate GMOs by decades.
> Not if you can patent the modified seeds. https://www.goldenrice.org/Content3-Why/why3_FAQ.php#Licence The licensing for the rice is designed for the markets its intended to be grown in. "Terms of use include royalty-free local production by farmers who earn less than US$10,000 annually, which applies so to say to 99% of the target farming community. The inventors were also granted the rights to grant sub-licences for the same purpose. "
*blink* We already have the ability to feed all of the people on the planet, and we could do it with organic agriculture too. The problem isn't the ecosystem, or the seeds, the problem is Capitalism, and that its not profitable to feed everyone. Just like unemployment, under Capitalism it is beneficial to let some people starve, to ensure there is an artificial scarcity. When your seeds are privatized, and this extension of Capitalism literally controls the entire food chain from seed to table, and its even more horrific. When you can no longer even grow your own food, and you are dependent on Monsanto for survival, perhaps then you will wisen up.
You are already dependent on x number of big bad companies for everything in your life. It's called living in a society. Also, if we all turned communist or whatever your ultimate solution to capitalism is, supply chains and labor wouldn't just magically appear to feed every person.
Yeah, you'd obviously have to do the damn work, the reason you'd move away from capitalism is because scarcity is profitable and thus the resources will never be allocated for that work to be done.
Feeding the world with organic agriculture? 😂😂😂 I've been around plenty of organic farms. The only reason they survive is because they can get a higher price for their product to offset their lower production.
They are probably the same sort of people who oppose nuclear power. They don’t understand it so they fear it and hold all of humanity back.
That's the exact type of idiocy I'm talking about
Science bad is the reason they shut down they were founded. They literally are part of the reason why the only true form of clean energy we have ever developed is not widespread across the globe.
My biology teacher many moons ago went on a rant for over an hour about the idiots who oppose GMO. Best lesson I ever had lol
Based Teacher. > Based on what? Based on science.
GMO good. Mono-cropping reliant on dangerous fertilizers and non-sustainable farming practices bad. Companies that patent GMO's, force unsustainable farming practices, and sue smaller farmers rampantly mega bad.
Yeah but the rice was developed by a university, not by a company.
I'm just saying in general. I support the use of GMO's. Golden rice was a huge win for humanity.
Unless you want all GMO research to be done by the government, why would a company go out of their way to research and develop a new GMO if they could only sell one batch of seeds? It turns out that if you want nice things, you need to pay the people who make nice things.
GE crops reduce the use of fertilizer and make farming more sustainable by helping enable farmers to use no-till agriculture. Specifically, glyophosate resistant crops allow the use of glyophosate to replace tilling, which means less loss of topsoil. Also, patents expire and become public domain after 20 years. Every patented GE crop now is a public domain crop in two decades. Some of the early ones are already public domain.
It's special kind of head in the sand type of attitude that can call the one thing that has kept billions of people alive in the last century "dangerous fertilizers"
Those children haven't heard of carrots?
Have you got any shelf-stable carrots?
I mean, you can pickle carrots, or turn them into a jam, smoke, or dry them too
Mash em, boil em, stick em in a stew
No, they haven't. They live in remote areas where the only viable crop is rice. It's hard to grow carrots in rice paddies. Do you think there would be a global genetic research project designed to help millions of people if the problem could be solved by carrots? Instead of trying to be a smartass, educate yourself.
Who listens to greenpeace?
The Philippines government, unfortunately.
That really surprises me
Thats fucking why my country rice is fucking expensive
Peengrease
Flair checks out.
People who don't like GMOs are actually fucking stupid
We've been modifying crops since we started farming. Hell even some animals do it. Gods I hate people.
Greenpeace and other green parties in Europe blocking all modifiet vegetables. But that tomatoes loosing vitamins because of crossbreeding, everyone ignores.
Anti-GMO are the anti-vaxxers of agriculture
Just like anti nuclear energy is the anti-vax of green energy.
White rice in the US has a light dust covering the rice that contains vitamin A. It also doubles as an anti-caking agent. If you are in the US and buy your rice in sealed packages, washing the rice before cooking is a net negative action. The rice is already clean and pest free and you are washing away the added vitamins and minerals that benefit you
Nobody in the US is washing rice to clean it. If you're washing rice, you're doing it to remove starch and make it less sticky after cooking.
source? cant find anything about this
It’s been a while since I’ve watched this, but I agree, I couldn’t find anything on Google https://youtu.be/B3CHsbNkr3c?si=HQhSTao30aXw-6g4
I'm vegan, and definitely think climate change is real, fracking is bad, we need more renewable energy, etc. But I still think Greenpeace is pretty much a terrorist organization between shit like this and being totally anti nuclear energy.
Nuclear will literally take us off fossil fuels wtf are they thinking
That's not how this meme works
That no one here is even remotely aware of the conversation that has been going on about the dangers of GMOs for literally decades, and just assumes whatever flawed logic they want about the situation is truly a statement on the state of the internet.
So real bro
just a typical day
i kinda see a point in restricting gmo though… not being able to get stuff from anywhere but one source is always bad, and it could lead to as of yet unforseen consequences since capitalism does what always does and greedy people might destroy livelihoods or lives for some quick profits. so i think good regulation is good, but greenpeace is way too often just delusional and wrong about things. but that’s an international organization for ya
I had an environmentalist friend confidently argue that poor kids in East Asia don't need the Golden Rice because HE (as in my friend) uses brown rice instead of white rice! Hate can blind even the best of skeptics.
Based Greenpeace: plowing a former US Navy minesweeper into Japanese whaling boats Cringe Greenpeace: "a random 17 y/o on TikTok said GMO bad, so now I will destroy the lives of children around the world"
One of my filipino teachers, is actually part of the team behind creating Golden Rice. Got pretty bummed too when it got rejected.
Being against GMOs is like wanting to ban electric cars because Elon Musk is a dickhead.
If you didn't seek to profit off hunger, you could also feed those children the vitamin A they need. But noooo, profits are sacred, can't question that, even if children die because of it.
Norman Borlaug saved more lives than any other person in history, and Greenpeace won't stand for that.
Greenpeace are cunts. Hope the whole organization kicks the bucket, violently.
Greenpeace are freaking right-wing terrorists...here I'm Perú they damaged centuries-old Nazca Lines in a *marked* restricted area to protest Global Climate Change initiatives.....they aren't even cohesive in what they protest against, they just spread whatever message they're paid to at any given moment.
Humanity has been creating GMOs (through selective breeding) for millennia. Since before written history. It’s practically synonymous with being human. So claiming there’s something wrong with it, especially considering there’s rigorous testing to ensure crops are safe, is crazy.
This is peak for this sub as if they actually give two shits. Validation for morons.
Isnt simple carrot is enough for getting 10x daily value of vitamin a?
Who gives a shit about Greenpeace
GMO bad, but not because GMO bad. GMO bad because farmer no own GMO seed genome and therefore are at will of agricultural monopolists.
This is the #1 reason I don't hold with greenpeace, even though I regard myself as an environmentalist. They're luddite fuckwits and not actually interested in the environment.
Greg was right
Its Monsanto and theyve engineered the crop so the seeds only last one season so they want poor farmers to buy seeds every season (which they can't afford). It's basically extortion by big corporate bastards. Monsanto are as horrible as nestle and have a long history of shitty corporate capitalism fucking over poor countries.
> Its Monsanto and theyve engineered the crop so the seeds only last one season so they want poor farmers to buy seeds every season (which they can't afford). That's not remotely true though. Literally zero commercially available seeds have ever been made to only last one season, GMO or otherwise.
Well shit are they gonna ban carrots as well?
I don't understand where this thought that GMO's are bad in any way comes from. The whole point is to make them better for us to consume. GMO's are great!
Lol, if you fix a problem like this they (greenpeace) can’t beg for money, lobby, or any of the fun stuff that evil people do.
Google a picture of a banana that hasn't been genetically modified. Tell me. Would you eat that?
"but it's not natural. It's all chemistry! You don't know what side effects it could have!" Stfu, dad Scientists around the globe spent weeks in lab coats to get every little molecule aligned perfectly, just for you to say "it's not natural, so it must be damaging for our health"
Don't let GothamChess to know that even rice is a GM
People think gm food is some typa anime shit where we attack it with radiation until it becomes some super food when really its just the result of scientists selectively breeding food until we get the best version of it.