We are doing our part to try and spread the word about GMOs, (genetically modified organisms) but we’re not the only ones. Multiple public figures, scientists and researchers have been speaking out about GMOs for a number of years. For example, not long ago a former Canadian Government Scientist at Agriculture Canada, Dr. Thierry Vrain (one of many) spoke out against GMOs.
Jeddo Tunnel focus of mine pollution program Standard Speaker JAMIE PESOTINE/Staff Photographer Amy Wolfe, Trout Unlimited Director of Easter Abandoned Mine Program and Eastern Brook Trout Habitat Initiative, talks about the success of watershed...
Up to 2.5 million British homes could be powered by Tunisian sunshine by 2018 under an £8bn plan to build a giant solar farm in the Sahara desert and ship the electricity to Europe through a 450km (280 miles) submarine cable.
Genetically modified organisms (GMOs), particularly genetically modified crops, have been getting a lot of attention in the news recently. Unfortunately, several people have some pretty tangled-up misconceptions about their use. Here we weed through five of the major ones. 1. Genetically altered foods are a new thing While a genetically modified organism is one that has undergone …
Monica S Mcfeeters's insight:
Here is an article from a serious Princeton student and researcher in molecular biology. Many of these statements are valid in pointing out true dangers on the non-GMO organic side of the debate. The article is somewhat soft and general when it comes to the genetically modified history and potential dangers. This is likely due to the fact that this type of genetic alteration has a very short history in how it affects humanity and other life on the planet. The horizontal transfer of genes is a man induced technique and is very new in terms of how life on the planet has transferred genes whether assisted by man or not. There is a huge question as to whether the scale of this experiment, involving hundreds of millions of acres without public awareness for several decades, much less scientist on site collecting data from people and other species that such potential (but to date have not shown up) observing scientist don't even know or have record of is a valid large scale experiment. This is really happening in large and totally uncontrolled environments but is highly profitable for the owners of GMO patents. How can one report outcomes of results of changes made to plants and animals that enter ones diet or environment without those participating even being made aware of these changes or having anyone observing these events in a controlled situations?
How can they know to report a negative or even positive result if of doing "A" which likely caused "B" outcome if they are not ever aware of "A" alteration to begin with? Once I ate an apple and my throat began to itch and close, later when I tried them again I stopped eating as soon as my mouth itched or tingled....Naturally I just stopped eating all apples for years...Then I tried organic, because apples when I was young and had to fight a worm for them never bothered me. Now I eat apples again...organic apples mostly or pealed apples. I had to nearly stop drinking milk as my intestines became increasingly unable to handle it for some reason...I switched to organic and I have no trouble with milk any longer and have started having milk again. Something added or changed in those products caused me problems I eventually figured out. To this day I have no idea what so still avoid the products with unknown changes or additions, such as perhaps too many sprays or that might be fed or done to animals that obliviously some I might react to. Not knowing what these are specifically I avoid all that do not use time tested organic.
There is also a strong argument that all this horizontal transfer of genes is far more about money and short term profit then long term health or life. Here is different article that gives strong reason to think that profits could be the stronger reason for taking this type of horizontal genetic transfers prematurely and unscientifically controlled into the market place without proven, long term observed outcomes. http://www.palgrave-journals.com/jcb/journal/v16/n3/full/jcb20104a.html
The largest experiments with GMOs are very unscientific based on even my 8th grade teacher's instructions on how true valid experiments work. That is that they are to be conducted using very precise, controlled observational groups vs. other groups that are not controlled (natural) or have different variables to compare.
Human experiments are also legally required to seek informed permission and consent in developed nations. Even though when it comes to medical experiments it would appear that the subjects are really not so well informed to exact details and outcomes as they required sign off on the right to sue to allow experimentation with their bodies acknowledging the known and unknown risk. Most people do this for two reasons that are the same.....Both are desperate reasons. Some sign on desperate to find a solution and willing to experiment out of that desperation. The others sign on for a desperate need of money or basic treatments in many poor countries and even in the USA. Those that have no insurance and little funds and have illness often have little choice but to be part of an experiment as an alternative way to get any kind of treatment for free or in some cases for pay.
When it comes to trying GMO alterations they have not informed the public other than journals mainstream folks don't read or investment literature mainstream consumers also don't read. They never put anything specific on the label of the products or the fields this happens in and just say don't worry be happy, this is just the same as every non-genetically modified apple or corn accept it allows us to own a patent and that is the main difference. The public is mad like any woman that might have had a date rape drug slipped into her drink and was told you afterwards she really wanted to be raped last night and it was good for her. One either has informed consent or they do not and the biotech industry have now a well-established tract record of for decades being a sneak that slips mickeys into everyone guts and environment. That is not the record of real scientist but of "Mad" scientist. Most people that know how money makes things happen these days are increasingly aware of the industries that need objective research data gather about their products or procedures are also now funding University research which introduces a conflict of interest problem for objective research.