Guy Incognito
DP Veteran
- Joined
- May 14, 2010
- Messages
- 11,216
- Reaction score
- 2,846
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
Haha. I get it. You're trolling. Any reason you're being abnormally obtuse and combative?
The irrational opposition to GMOs deserves no respect.
Okay...call me when you're back to normal.
Anybody who oppose GMOs in even the slightest way does so based on irrational fears and ignorance. But as I said earlier, the pro-labelling crowd is not merely ignorant, but dangerous. It is a disgusting thing to allow irrational prejudices and fears take hold to the extent that they actively do harm to an emerging scientific field that can do so much good for so many people who are in need.
It is far beyond mere ignorance, it is despicable, monstrous, horrible to support a labeling requirement.
Well, then, that settles it. The government... that which is utterly free from corporate and lobbying influence, and is as honest and pure as the day is long... has deemed them worthy. I feel much better now. :neutral:So you know of every plant that does exist or will ever exist as a result of natural processes?
GMO's have been studied and approved. That people cannot differentiate between temporal correlation and actual causation is no reason to disrupt the food supply. This isn't a war for health--it is a war against corporate farming. Here is a clue--the insulin used by diabetics is **gasp** genetically modified. Those people clearly would be better off if there were no GMO's :slapme:
Identification of a Brazil-Nut Allergen in Transgenic Soybeans
The New England Journal of Medicine: Identification of a Brazil-Nut Allergen in Transgenic Soybeans
"...an allergen from a food known to be allergenic can be transferred into another food by genetic engineering."
The anti labeling crowd is making GMO's look awful. They don't even realize labeling do nothing except increase consumer knowledge.
Ok, let's pretend that GMO foods are completely safe, though the longer duration of any study the more bad effects are uncovered, but for the sake of argument let's ignore those studies (which the pro-GMO crowd does anyway).
Do you really think its prudent to create a situation where a company could have a monopoly over food??
Really?? So, wanting a label to know if your food was created in a lab is akin to eating babies (or something equally horrible)?
Label... and let the market decide.
Look, that's just bull****. GMOs are completely safe, we don't have to assume anything. So, it's not the pro-GMO crowd, it's the pro-science crowd.
That sounds like a IP issue, not a GMO safety issue.
Yup. It's irrelevant information. Only an ignorant fool would care to know it. No reason to make a law forcing manufacturers to put labels with irrelevant information on them.
What you are asking for is the coercive labeling of irrelevant information that only matters to prejudiced fools.
You are basically saying that if some idiot wants to know the race of the person who grew the tomatoes, it should be forcibly labeled.
Well, tough **** if that matters to you because you don't have a right to know irrelevant information like that.
It makes no rational difference, and businesspeople don't need to kowtow to ignorant bigots like racists and anti-GMO kooks.
No. There is no obligation to put a label on a perfectly safe product to satisfy an irrational prejudice.
But you know that given the choice; NOBODY would buy it...
Why are you against providing information on food sourcing... We include that for many additives that are equally regarded as "safe".
But you know that given the choice; NOBODY would buy it...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?