- On 19 May 2013
in
Non-GMO SALT now available!!! Please walk, don't run!,
donjumpsuit said:
Hold up,
A real reference, from a reputable journal, albeit not reputable authors.
Typically in this particular topic, I don't accept papers from a decade ago.
What I can do, is look at who has recently cited this paper and give that as context.
Here is one from the top of that list published in 2013
http://www.hindawi.com/isrn/biotechnology/2013/820671/
- On 19 May 2013
in
Non-GMO SALT now available!!! Please walk, don't run!,
donjumpsuit said:
mell says
You can repeat this a million times, it won't change the fact that a genetically modified organism is an organism that has had it's RNA/DNA altered in the LAB (as opposed to crossbred). How fucking hard is that to understand?
Well, since you are pulling out the swears, in my profession, people who think there is a significant difference between changing ONE SINGLE FUCKING GENE in a plant that has been engineered for centuries, and 'natural breeding' are FUCKING CUCKOO.
CUCKOO CUCKOO
An Amateur explaining to a professional what is what.
CUCKOO CUCKOO
Viruses have been inserting genes in plants, animals, bacteria, and protozoa for MILLENNIA. It is biology, evolutionary biology, and without it, we woud not be as advanced.
OVER 8% of YOUR genes. YOU. Is Virus DNA. GUESS WHAT..... YOU"RE A GMO!!!!! RUN FOR THE HILLZ!
In fact, there are two theories why humans are so much different and intellectually superior to every other animal known on earth.
One is Aliens. Aliens either inserted or breed with ancient hominoids.
Two would be that a virus rearranged the 'God Gene' and modern thought emerged.
Secretly every scientist worth his salt knows that those who complain about GMO's are CUCKOO CUCKOO.
Because we have a greater understanding of how biology works. We are not GOD. We just understand a few things about it.
SO FINALLY, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.
THIS IS CORN BEFORE HUMANS GOT AHOLD OF IT.
THIS IS WHAT HUMANS DID TO CORN
NOW PRAY TELL ME HOW MANY FUCKING GENES DID THAT TAKE?
NEXT
- On 18 May 2013
in
Non-GMO SALT now available!!! Please walk, don't run!,
donjumpsuit said:
YesYNot says
donjumpsuit says
which is toxically relevant (harmful) in a toxicology study (MSDS)
An MSDS is a material safety data sheet. It is not a toxicology study.
And herein lies the problem.
A 'GMO' has no toxicological study, it has no MSDS, it has no ties to anything that is considered a chemical, natural or synthetic.
Labeling something 'GMO' has no signifigance since it is such a broad term, nobody knows what anybody is talking about.
In the case of Bt Corn, this is a label.
You can say "This product contains Bt Corn". Bt is something for which a study has been performed upon, something that exists at a specified amount, something that has an MSDS.
And here is an example of that MSDS
(PS, real breifly as a personal note, BT, otherwise known as bonide thuricide is actually an organic pesticide, used by the organic growers association. Only when it is genetically engineered INTO a crop does it become a GMO and then Evil to everyone. Otherwise it's sprayed on Organic produce to the growers delight and force fed to everyone who wants to pay extra for "Organic Produce, GMO FREE")
http://www.domyownpestcontrol.com/msds/HY%20Thuricide%20Concentrate%2070051-65-7401%20MSDS%20_1.pdf
If you follow that link, you will find the following subsection.
So therein you see it. A study was performed where this natural compound was exposed to the typical mammals (rat, mouse, guinea pig, and rabbit. Just like every other compound that can be sold commercially and privately.
If you were to label PROPERLY, you would inform that public that this product (in the case of corn) contains a specific percentage of Thuricide. Thuricide is a natural compound produced by Bacillus that has been engineered into Corn to protect the stalks of the corn from Corn Borer damage.
Labeling it GMO does the public NOTHING. Also GMO isn't a compound, a chemical or a toxin. It has no MSDS or toxicology study that refers to it. It is a concept (as you yourself pointed out), it is not a thing, it is not a person. It is a term to describe a technology of agriculture.
