/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #14331303

98KiB, 920x708, monsanto.jpg

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 13:54:56 2022 No.14331303 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>14331322 >>14331391 >>14331439 >>14331443 >>14331802 >>14331817 >>14331984 >>14332442 >>14332450

Is GMO REALLY that bad for you?
Everyone seems to be whining how the veggies nowadays are le bad and falls for the ""bio"" meme, but is that really the case?
Arent technically all the crops that we've been growing for the past few hundred years "GMO" too? People have been modifying plants for thousands of years

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 13:59:33 No.14331322 Report

Quoted By: >>14331400

>>14331303
No

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 14:28:34 No.14331391 Report

Quoted By: >>14331400

>>14331303
No. Gmo itself is not bad. Gmo can sometimes enable other bad practices though, like higher herbicide/pesticide use, and monocultures. On the other hand, GMO can allow food with more nutrients or less synthetic pesticides in many cases.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 14:34:59 No.14331400 Report

Quoted By: >>14331407 >>14331574

>>14331322
>>14331391
what about nutritional values?
theres this understanding among people, that GMO selects for bigger/better looking fruits that will sell easier, but with lowered nutritional values compared to regular ones

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 14:37:44 No.14331407 Report

Quoted By:

>>14331400
Sometimes organic has more nutrients because the literal shit they use as fertilizer has more minerals and microbes and stuff in it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 14:50:58 No.14331439 Report

Quoted By:

>>14331303
>Arent technically all the crops that we've been growing for the past few hundred years "GMO" too?
There's only so much you can do to seriously fuck up a vegetable without direct genetic modification, and when you do accomplish it, the resulting vetegables will typically look hideous. There's also a safety margin in the slow and incremental process of cultivation. So, how much do you trust le heckin' experts?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 14:52:35 No.14331443 Report

Quoted By: >>14331458 >>14331482

>>14331303
aids grapefruit is very bad for you. monsanto devoped it then tried to dirstubute it to 4 different nations and was forced to have america take it in after they tried selling it to china. 2 midwestern states got hit hard and western europe was hit because poland kept reselling it to western europe

its like the worst crop ever. then after that monsanto was forced to burn all seeds of it and destroy all research papers. germany then buys monsanto and gets pissed that they dont have aids grapefruit formula and demands america buy it back which it does

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO aids-grapefruit.png, 392KiB, 988x843

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 15:03:13 No.14331458 Report

Quoted By:

>>14331443
>aids grapefruit is very bad for you
Do you have a peer reveiwed source on that, chud?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 15:12:24 No.14331482 Report

Quoted By:

>>14331443
>aids grapefruit
this some gay slang?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 15:48:57 No.14331574 Report

Quoted By:

>>14331400
Nutritional values have gone down mainly because the breeds we use have higher yields, what was in 1 potato planted in the 60's is now spread over 3 potatoes now. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/soil-depletion-and-nutrition-loss/# It's basic dilution

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 16:01:15 No.14331599 Report

Quoted By: >>14331764

Depends on which GMO. Transcribing roundup ready gene is pretty shite. Transcribing genes to make vitamin A and/or carotenes is pretty good.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 16:57:48 No.14331764 Report

Quoted By: >>14331777 >>14331825

>>14331599
>Transcribing roundup ready gene is pretty shite
quick rundown?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 17:03:00 No.14331777 Report

Quoted By:

>>14331764
enough with the antisemitism anon
enough

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 17:10:37 No.14331802 Report

Quoted By: >>14331827

>>14331303
>Is GMO REALLY that bad for you?
GMO stands for "Genetically Modified Organism". It is description of technology. Technology can be used for various purposes, from modified bacteria which uses methanlol as feedstock to produce lysine, which is later used in animalfeeds, to modified bacteria/fungi for creation of drugs of insulin, to modified basedbeans which are more tolerant to certain pesticides.

As analogy could ask: are cars with manual transmission bad for you? Well, it depends. If those are manufactured in India or China with way relaxed safety standards, then yes, survivability will be lower.

If OP is still highschooler and curious about his future employment, GMO might bring some interesting career options. Like, to participate in project of developing genetically enhanced catgirls, it would be dream for hundreds of dudes.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 17:14:58 No.14331817 Report

Quoted By: >>14331832 >>14331961 >>14331974

>>14331303
gmos are fine. the same people against roundup ready are against antibiotics in animals. ZERO correlation between these convenience mechanisms and the health of people who eat these products. Heck, and plants can't even get us sick anyway. Completely different genome.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 17:16:06 No.14331825 Report

Quoted By:

>>14331764
Makes plants resistant to glyphosate, a toxic herbicide which can lead to cancer in high doses.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 17:16:45 No.14331827 Report

Quoted By: >>14331858

>>14331802
>GMO stands for "Genetically Modified Organism". It is description of technology. Technology can be used for various purposes
The purpose of this particular technology is to replace gradual, incremental, organic changes with rapid ones. By definition, it opens up the door to a million things that can go horribly wrong, and we already know the scientists involved are Dunning-Kruger poster boys funded by psychopaths.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 17:17:47 No.14331832 Report

Quoted By:

>>14331817
>ZERO correlation between these convenience mechanisms and the health of people who eat these products
Said the corporate lobbyists.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 17:24:59 No.14331858 Report

Quoted By: >>14331875

>>14331827
>The purpose of this particular technology is to replace gradual, incremental, organic changes with rapid ones

Yes and no. I can't imagine reason, why would there be some evolutionary pressure to create bacteria which generates insulin which human body can easily absorb. I mean, in a timeframe when humans as a specie exists. May be hundreds million years ago was such bacteria, but at that time we did no existed as a specie.

> By definition, it opens up the door to a million things that can go horribly wrong

That is purpose of that technology. Identify desirable outcome, and then try, and try and try until it is achieved. There is reason, why modern GMO required hundreds of millions to develop: for each successful, there was thousands unsuccessful ones.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 17:29:47 No.14331875 Report

Quoted By: >>14331911

>>14331858
I guess I wasn't clear enough the first time, so I'll point this out again: there is safety in the gradual, incremental and organic method of fucking around with organisms that's completely thrown out of the window when Dunning-Kruger poster boys start fucking around with DNA directly, and there is nothing to protect you from potential consequences, since every study is funded by and for the same people who produce this crap.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 17:38:38 No.14331911 Report

Quoted By: >>14331938 >>14331985

>>14331875
OP question was "Is GMO REALLY that bad for you?" And short answer to that question is "it depends". Yes, classic cultivar creation techniques are more safe and way, way cheaper. But in same time, those have greater limitations too. Few months ago was announcement of surgery, when for one guy there was used GMO pig heart as heart transplant. Because of his poor health status, he likely would not qualify for human heart transplant, but he managed to participate in this experiment, and to get pig (with some genetic alterations to reduce probability of tissue rejection). How long it would take to use conventional selection to gain those traits in pigs, who knows. May be still decades.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 17:43:47 No.14331938 Report

Quoted By: >>14331975 >>14332294

>>14331911
>OP question was "Is GMO REALLY that bad for you?" And short answer to that question is "it depends"
But the underlying question is "is GMO food really that much less safe than regular food", and the answer is "yes".

>Few months ago was announcement of surgery, when for one guy there was used GMO pig heart as heart transplant
Well, he's dead, but you know what? There's a case to be made for such desperate measures if you're going to die anyway without it. No case to be made for GMO'd food except corporate profits.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 17:47:20 No.14331961 Report

Quoted By:

>>14331817
Show us a video of you drinking roundup if its so safe faggot.

You're as bad as that fucking roundup salesman who says "it's so safe you can drink it!" but than refused to do it when someone in the crowd offered him a glass.

also using the word "heck" instantly disqualifies you since you're a onions drinking science shill that can't think for themself.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 17:49:19 No.14331974 Report

Quoted By:

>>14331817
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWM_PgnoAtA&ab_channel=CBCNews%3ATheNational

This is you faggot, kys, fucking soi drinking shill.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 17:49:35 No.14331975 Report

Quoted By: >>14331985

>>14331938
>But the underlying question is "is GMO food really that much less safe than regular food", and the answer is "yes".

If you are about s.o.y.b.e.a.n.s then most likely yes. Not so much because of that genetic engineering part, as it will get digested by stomach acid anyway. More, because there are frequent tendency to over-spray them with glyhposphate, and that herbicide might have undesirable effect on human health.

>Well, he's dead, but you know what?
No, I didn't knew that.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 17:51:14 No.14331984 Report

Quoted By:

>>14331303
Hey I used this pic for my final project back in high school :D

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 17:51:16 No.14331985 Report

Quoted By:

>>14331975
>If you are about s.o.y.b.e.a.n.s then most likely yes
It was a general point about the nature of this technology, that you've already conceded:
>>14331911
>Yes, classic cultivar creation techniques are more safe

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 19:24:33 No.14332294 Report

Quoted By:

>>14331938
>Well, he's dead
He was already dead when they put it in him

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1620807096063.jpg, 58KiB, 508x840

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 20:10:41 No.14332442 Report

Quoted By: >>14332463 >>14332467

>>14331303
Yes

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 20:13:37 No.14332450 Report

Quoted By:

>>14331303
the only "bad" (more like risky) thing about GMOs is their effect on ecosystems as wildlife will interact with GMO plants and there might be interbreeding/seed might spread

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 20:17:12 No.14332463 Report

Quoted By:

>>14332442
Brainlet post

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 20:17:46 No.14332467 Report

Quoted By:

>>14332442
>tumor prone mices get tumors
woah... really makes you think

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Mar 2022 20:25:48 No.14332482 Report

Quoted By:

Ask this: why do corporations really want to push the idea that GMO food is safe when they care more about profit than health?

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches