View Poll Results: Your vote on this proposal would be?

Voters
44. You may not vote on this poll
  • yes

    9 20.45%
  • no

    25 56.82%
  • no, but I would vote yes on labeling

    8 18.18%
  • undecided

    2 4.55%
Page 13 of 23 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 224

Thread: The DNA Protection Act of 2013

  1. #121
    User DNAprotection's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    cali
    Last Seen
    04-19-13 @ 10:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    85

    Re: Rathi use your talent 4this project, godspeed', fly like a monarch'

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Be careful with whom you ally with.
    This thread is supported by nothing other than, "nature knows better."
    Which is a faulty premise.
    Awe but Harry, isn't it nature that in the end always has to clean up your messes because you simply don't know enough yet to know how to do so yourself?
    Just a few small examples compared to the far greater reaching and more devastating potentials of possible biotech disasters:


    The DNA Protection Act of 2013-man-made-disasters-jpg

    The DNA Protection Act of 2013-gulfoildisaster-jpg

    "Disaster unfolds slowly in the Gulf of Mexico"

    The DNA Protection Act of 2013-031511_chernobyl60-sjpg_900_540_0_95_1_50_50-sjpg-nuke-nightmare-jpg

    "The Chernobyl plant blew up at 1:23 a.m. on April 26, 1986, spewing out a radioactive cloud and contaminating much of Europe. An estimated 15,000 to 30,000 people have died in the aftermath. More than 2.5 million Ukranians suffer from health problems related to the Chernobyl blast, with 80,000 of them receiving a pension."

    The DNA Protection Act of 2013-time_bhopal-jpg
    US court absolves Union Carbide of Bhopal liability

    28 June 2012

    Press Trust of India

    NEW YORK, 28 JUNE: In a setback to 1984 Bhopal gas tragedy victims, a US court has held that neither Union Carbide nor its former chairman Mr Warren Anderson were liable for environmental remediation or pollution-related claims at the firm’s former chemical plant in Bhopal.

    US district judge Mr John Keena in Manhattan dismissed a lawsuit accusing the company of causing soil and water pollution around the Bhopal plant due to the disaster, and ruled that Union Carbide Corporation (UCC) and Anderson were not liable for remediation or pollution-related claims.

    The court ruled that it was Union Carbide India Ltd, and not its parent company UCC that was responsible for the generation and disposal of the waste that polluted drinking water, and the liability rests with the state government.

    Plaintiffs Mr Janki Bai Sahu and others had alleged that “toxic substances seeped into a ground aquifer, polluting the soil and drinking water supply in residential communities surrounding the former Bhopal Plant site”. They alleged that exposure to soil and drinking water polluted by hazardous waste produced Union Carbine India Ltd caused injuries.

    “The summary judgement record certainly indicates that UCIL consulted with UCC about its waste disposal plans and on non-environmental business matter like its strategic plan. However, nothing in the evidence suggests the necessity of UCC’s approval for the actions about which plaintiffs complain,” the court said in its order.

    “Moreover, there is no evidence in this extensive record indicating that UCIL manufactured pesticides on UCC’s behalf, entered into contracts or other business dealings on UCC’s behalf, or otherwise acted in UCC’s name,” it said.

    The industrial accident, the worst in Indian history, led to the leak of poisonous methyl isocyanate, claiming thousands of lives in the Madhya Pradesh capital.

    In his written opinion, Mr Keenan concluded that even when viewing the evidence in the most favourable light for the plaintiffs, UCC was not directly liable, nor liable as an agent of UCIL, nor liable under a veil-piercing analysis.






    Harry the list goes on and on...how could you possibly think it will be any different with biotech?
    Such a conclusion would simply be unscientific according to past data.

  2. #122
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    virginia
    Last Seen
    04-01-13 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    16,881
    Blog Entries
    19

    Re: Rathi use your talent 4this project, godspeed', fly like a monarch'

    Love canal, need I say more?

  3. #123
    User DNAprotection's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    cali
    Last Seen
    04-19-13 @ 10:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    85

    Re: The DNA Protection Act of 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    I fully support genetic engineering to produce better food supplies. I'm always shocked by the ignorance surrounding genetic engineering.
    uh ok...um...Did you not see this article that was posted by two different people in this thread:
    Regulators Discover a Hidden Viral Gene in Commercial GMO Crops
    Regulators Discover a Hidden Viral Gene in Commercial GMO Crops
    January 21, 2013 Biotechnology, Commentaries 42 Comments

    by Jonathan Latham and Allison Wilson

    "How should a regulatory agency announce they have discovered something potentially very important about the safety of products they have been approving for over twenty years?

    In the course of analysis to identify potential allergens in GMO crops, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has belatedly discovered that the most common genetic regulatory sequence in commercial GMOs also encodes a significant fragment of a viral gene (Podevin and du Jardin 2012). This finding has serious ramifications for crop biotechnology and its regulation, but possibly even greater ones for consumers and farmers. This is because there are clear indications that this viral gene (called Gene VI) might not be safe for human consumption. It also may disturb the normal functioning of crops, including their natural pest resistance."

    Or maybe you just don't digsbe the science and lack there of = ignorance..."I'm always shocked by the ignorance surrounding genetic engineering"...yes that's exactly what I was thinking as well.
    ps...you and Harry should start a science haters forum, maybe even GC123 can join up, Harry and GC123 will need a new heads first of course
    Last edited by DNAprotection; 01-23-13 at 11:24 AM.

  4. #124
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,952

    Re: The DNA Protection Act of 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by DNAprotection View Post
    uh ok...um...Did you not see this article that was posted by two different people in this thread:
    Regulators Discover a Hidden Viral Gene in Commercial GMO Crops
    Regulators Discover a Hidden Viral Gene in Commercial GMO Crops
    January 21, 2013 Biotechnology, Commentaries 42 Comments

    by Jonathan Latham and Allison Wilson

    "How should a regulatory agency announce they have discovered something potentially very important about the safety of products they have been approving for over twenty years?

    In the course of analysis to identify potential allergens in GMO crops, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has belatedly discovered that the most common genetic regulatory sequence in commercial GMOs also encodes a significant fragment of a viral gene (Podevin and du Jardin 2012). This finding has serious ramifications for crop biotechnology and its regulation, but possibly even greater ones for consumers and farmers. This is because there are clear indications that this viral gene (called Gene VI) might not be safe for human consumption. It also may disturb the normal functioning of crops, including their natural pest resistance."

    Or maybe you just don't digsbe the science and lack there of = ignorance..."I'm always shocked by the ignorance surrounding genetic engineering"...yes that's exactly what I was thinking as well.
    ps...you and Harry should start a science haters forum, maybe even GC123 can join up, Harry and GC123 will need a new heads first of course
    Like I said... The ignorance level is simply amazing. People see the word "viral gene" or "genetic modification" and completely flip out without being able to comprehend what these things mean. Why is it not safe for human consumption? All of this seems like speculation without facts because buzz words were mentioned.

    Also, encodes a "significant" portion of a viral gene? What does the viral gene code for? A harmless capsule protein? A harmless tail protein? Part of a polymerase? A single piece of a non functional viral protein isn't going to cause any serious damage (and 99.99999% chance that it does absolutely nothing and exists only to be degraded by a proteasome)... First of all, anyone versed in biology will know that if you have a partially encoded protein product you are most likely going to have a defective protein that has no activity. We have several genetic diseases in humans where there is a single point mutation changing 1 amino acid that results in a disease due to a defective/inactive protein product. Also, everything we eat pretty much contains DNA. That DNA does not get transcribed at all, it gets broken down by nucleases and the body can use the nucleotides (which are not in a sequence) and recycle them.

    I find it ironic that you think I hate science
    Last edited by digsbe; 01-23-13 at 12:22 PM.
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

  5. #125
    User DNAprotection's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    cali
    Last Seen
    04-19-13 @ 10:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    85

    Re: The DNA Protection Act of 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by DNAprotection View Post
    uh ok...um...Did you not see this article that was posted by two different people in this thread:
    Regulators Discover a Hidden Viral Gene in Commercial GMO Crops
    Regulators Discover a Hidden Viral Gene in Commercial GMO Crops
    January 21, 2013 Biotechnology, Commentaries 42 Comments

    by Jonathan Latham and Allison Wilson

    "How should a regulatory agency announce they have discovered something potentially very important about the safety of products they have been approving for over twenty years?

    In the course of analysis to identify potential allergens in GMO crops, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has belatedly discovered that the most common genetic regulatory sequence in commercial GMOs also encodes a significant fragment of a viral gene (Podevin and du Jardin 2012). This finding has serious ramifications for crop biotechnology and its regulation, but possibly even greater ones for consumers and farmers. This is because there are clear indications that this viral gene (called Gene VI) might not be safe for human consumption. It also may disturb the normal functioning of crops, including their natural pest resistance."

    Or maybe you just don't digsbe the science and lack there of = ignorance..."I'm always shocked by the ignorance surrounding genetic engineering"...yes that's exactly what I was thinking as well.
    ps...you and Harry should start a science haters forum, maybe even GC123 can join up, Harry and GC123 will need a new heads first of course
    digsbe, I suggest you gather your troops (General Custer123 & Harry) and regroup because the numbers of science and life and human nature and this thread are just simply not adding up in any consistent or justifiable way with your conclusions...in other words so far this thread shows that your teams conclusions are based in ignoring the facts not observing them...you may have accidentally enlisted, but your in the army now and your first call to duty is to somehow disprove the all powerful quote of destiny with regards to this issue...no one else on earth can, but maybe you and your headless squad can somehow pull it off?





    The bounty you seek ain't there, and while I know your conditioning has you almost involuntarily reflexing into your continued disposition, as with GMO's, dyin ain't much of a livin...





    Come on back if you must...I'll be waitin...

  6. #126
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,952

    Re: The DNA Protection Act of 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by DNAprotection View Post
    digsbe, I suggest you gather your troops (General Custer123 & Harry) and regroup because the numbers of science and life and human nature and this thread are just simply not adding up in any consistent or justifiable way with your conclusions...in other words so far this thread shows that your teams conclusions are based in ignoring the facts not observing them...you may have accidentally enlisted, but your in the army now and your first call to duty is to somehow disprove the all powerful quote of destiny with regards to this issue...no one else on earth can, but maybe you and your headless squad can somehow pull it off?





    The bounty you seek ain't there, and while I know your conditioning has you almost involuntarily reflexing into your continued disposition, as with GMO's, dyin ain't much of a livin...





    Come on back if you must...I'll be waitin...
    Um... From what I gather my "team" does not conclude facts based on psuedo science filled with buzz words or youtube videos that at best may constitute a conspiracy theory.

    You may want to address a little bit of the biology I discussed in my post instead of dismissing things and proclaiming that I'm ignorant of science and need to "regroup."
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

  7. #127
    User DNAprotection's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    cali
    Last Seen
    04-19-13 @ 10:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    85

    Re: The DNA Protection Act of 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    Um... From what I gather my "team" does not conclude facts based on psuedo science filled with buzz words or youtube videos that at best may constitute a conspiracy theory.

    You may want to address a little bit of the biology I discussed in my post instead of dismissing things and proclaiming that I'm ignorant of science and need to "regroup."
    Oh Admiral digsbe I addressed that bit in my very second post on this thread just as I addressed such in my last post and it is you that keeps parroting about what is 'known' as if that could ever be enough while you then ignore all that is 'unknown' in some kind of 'higher' edu superiority complex and pretending like if you don't know it then it is irrelevant...that's almost like genius only in the reverse...maybe dyslexia is at play in your mental physiology?
    Whatever it is its certainly not responsible thinking or scientific thinking whatsoever, it more resembles a type of thinking built on a foundation of voids and miscalculated preconceptions and the kind that can only exist in a test tube or a glass house or a vacuum sealed thinking process.

  8. #128
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,952

    Re: The DNA Protection Act of 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by DNAprotection View Post
    Oh Admiral digsbe I addressed that bit in my very second post on this thread just as I addressed such in my last post and it is you that keeps parroting about what is 'known' as if that could ever be enough while you then ignore all that is 'unknown' in some kind of 'higher' edu superiority complex and pretending like if you don't know it then it is irrelevant...that's almost like genius only in the reverse...maybe dyslexia is at play in your mental physiology?
    Whatever it is its certainly not responsible thinking or scientific thinking whatsoever, it more resembles a type of thinking built on a foundation of voids and miscalculated preconceptions and the kind that can only exist in a test tube or a glass house or a vacuum sealed thinking process.
    Believe whatever tickles your fancy. Please address these points then.

    What protein product is dangerous?

    What mechanism of action produces some kind of toxicity?

    Where did this come from?

    These should be fairly simple.
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

  9. #129
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    virginia
    Last Seen
    04-01-13 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    16,881
    Blog Entries
    19

    Re: The DNA Protection Act of 2013


  10. #130
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,952

    Re: The DNA Protection Act of 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by LiberalAvenger View Post
    Nice! A wikipedia article discussing a bacterial toxin that has absolutely nothing to do with genetically modified food!
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

Page 13 of 23 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •