So What's the concern about GMP foods anyway?

So what's everyone's concern about eating GMO foods?

WikiPedia Defines GMO as:

A genetically modified organism (GMO) is any organism whose genetic material has been altered using genetic engineering techniques (i.e. genetically engineered organism). GMOs are the source of medicines and genetically modified foods and are also widely used in scientific research and to produce other goods.The term GMO is very close to the technical legal term, 'living modified organism', defined in the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, which regulates international trade in living GMOs (specifically, "any living organism that possesses a novel combination of genetic material obtained through the use of modern biotechnology").
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_organism

Click to expand...

This makes the proteins, lipids, and amino acids that comprise GMO foods not any less 'natural' in composition than those of any other foods.

The human digestive tract breaks down these proteins, lipids, and amino acids into their constituent parts and absorbs what it can use for nutrition, with the rest being passed through and eliminated in the normal manner.

So what's the worry? If your body can't use something in the GMO foods it won't absorb it, and it's passed out.

eohrnberger said:

So what's everyone's concern about eating GMO foods?

WikiPedia Defines GMO as:


This makes the proteins, lipids, and amino acids that comprise GMO foods not any less 'natural' in composition than those of any other foods.

The human digestive tract breaks down these proteins, lipids, and amino acids into their constituent parts and absorbs what it can use for nutrition, with the rest being passed through and eliminated in the normal manner.

So what's the worry? If your body can't use something in the GMO foods it won't absorb it, and it's passed out.

Click to expand...

I think it's a fear of the unknown. Are GMO potentially harmful? Probably not, but no one knows for sure. If a plant can be modified to resist insects, for example, does that plant do so by producing a substance that could be toxic to humans as well? If there are no immediate ill effects, what are the long term results of consuming it? No one really knows.

That said, if you ask a random sample of people whether foods with DNA are harmful, you'd get quite a few positive responses.

eohrnberger said:

So what's the worry? If your body can't use something in the GMO foods it won't absorb it, and it's passed out.

Click to expand...

Because it is silly to hide something from the consumer if there is nothing to worry about.

I'll agree that not all GMOs are a problem, but we still should know what we are consuming.

eohrnberger said:

So what's everyone's concern about eating GMO foods?

WikiPedia Defines GMO as:


This makes the proteins, lipids, and amino acids that comprise GMO foods not any less 'natural' in composition than those of any other foods.

The human digestive tract breaks down these proteins, lipids, and amino acids into their constituent parts and absorbs what it can use for nutrition, with the rest being passed through and eliminated in the normal manner.

So what's the worry? If your body can't use something in the GMO foods it won't absorb it, and it's passed out.

Click to expand...

The problem is it's copyrightable material and GMO companies can control the food market with it.

eohrnberger said:

So what's everyone's concern about eating GMO foods?

WikiPedia Defines GMO as:


This makes the proteins, lipids, and amino acids that comprise GMO foods not any less 'natural' in composition than those of any other foods.

The human digestive tract breaks down these proteins, lipids, and amino acids into their constituent parts and absorbs what it can use for nutrition, with the rest being passed through and eliminated in the normal manner.

So what's the worry? If your body can't use something in the GMO foods it won't absorb it, and it's passed out.

Click to expand...

People are often afraid of the new, funny as it might seem. But here in Europe it has mostly been a question of protectionism and the libbies that incited the fear.

Dittohead not! said:

I think it's a fear of the unknown. Are GMO potentially harmful? Probably not, but no one knows for sure. If a plant can be modified to resist insects, for example, does that plant do so by producing a substance that could be toxic to humans as well? If there are no immediate ill effects, what are the long term results of consuming it? No one really knows.

That said, if you ask a random sample of people whether foods with DNA are harmful, you'd get quite a few positive responses.

Click to expand...

We are finding out that fast food and XXL sweet drinks not only fed the poor, but made them obese. Anything can be bad down the road.

joG said:

We are finding out that fast food and XXL sweet drinks not only fed the poor, but made them obese. Anything can be bad down the road.

Click to expand...

Practically anything can be harmful if you over do it. Those sweet drinks used to come in 8 ounce bottles, not in 32 ounce cups.

eohrnberger said:

So what's everyone's concern about eating GMO foods?

WikiPedia Defines GMO as:


This makes the proteins, lipids, and amino acids that comprise GMO foods not any less 'natural' in composition than those of any other foods.

The human digestive tract breaks down these proteins, lipids, and amino acids into their constituent parts and absorbs what it can use for nutrition, with the rest being passed through and eliminated in the normal manner.

So what's the worry? If your body can't use something in the GMO foods it won't absorb it, and it's passed out.

Click to expand...

So does a fish gene in a tomato allow a fish disease to cross species through the food supply?

If GMOs were supervised by Jedi I would have no problem.

But its "supervised" by the amorally greedy.

And that's why I am suspiscious.

And like the pro patriot act guys said, if you're not doing anything wrong what do you have to hide?

Why all this effort to NOT allow the market to decide?

OrphanSlug said:

Because it is silly to hide something from the consumer if there is nothing to worry about.

I'll agree that not all GMOs are a problem, but we still should know what we are consuming.

Click to expand...

1) It would be more important to know what health care treatment animals or pesticides crops had had. Have you ever noticed that the chicken, s antibiotics history was posted?
2) Almost every processed food you can buy including the bio and veggie stuff contains genetically improved components at some stage of the production chain. It is almost impossible to find anything else and usually it is a lie, when vendors claim otherwise.

Haven't humans been genetically modifying foods for thousands if not millions of years. To cross breed plants to create a more favorable yield has been done going back as far as recorded history. Probably going back to the beginning of farming. We have been genetically changing farm animals by cross breeding since we first started herding and tending flocks. Nature has been genetically modifying since the first living organism appeared on this planet. Otherwise none of all the living things around us would exist. Can genetic modification be bad for us as well as good? Absolutely. That has been going on for over a billion years. Most of the plants we eat today were almost inedible in their original forms. It was selective breeding for more favorable species that makes up most everything we eat today.

The issue with GMO's is the potential danger they represent to our ecosystem. It's why companies that produce them, make them incapable of yielding "offspring", or seeds. Some decry this as monopolization, and in many ways, it IS.


Take seedless watermelons, for instance. Those things cannot progenate. When is the last time you saw SEEDED watermelons at the store? I haven't, in years. Not even at farmers markets. Because no one wants to carry them, because no one wants to buy them...they want the seedless. Only, I, personally, DON'T. I LIKE seeded watermelons...they taste better. Yeah, the seeds are annoying, but I typically just swallow those suckers anyway. But it's moot, because the market has all but made the seeded watermelon "extinct". It means two things...I can't grow my own anymore, unless I grow the seedless, the seeds for which only have very limited sources (monopolization), and I can only buy seedless at the stores, which only have very limited sources (monopolization).

That's just one example.




But I will agree with a previous poster. We've been genetically engineering our food since....like....forever.

KevinKohler said:

The issue with GMO's is the potential danger they represent to our ecosystem. It's why companies that produce them, make them incapable of yielding "offspring", or seeds. Some decry this as monopolization, and in many ways, it IS. Take seedless watermelons, for instance. Those things cannot progenate. When is the last time you saw SEEDED watermelons at the store? I haven't, in years. Not even at farmers markets. Because no one wants to carry them, because no one wants to buy them...they want the seedless. Only, I, personally, DON'T. I LIKE seeded watermelons...they taste better. Yeah, the seeds are annoying, but I typically just swallow those suckers anyway. But it's moot, because the market has all but made the seeded watermelon "extinct". It means two things...I can't grow my own anymore, unless I grow the seedless, the seeds for which only have very limited sources (monopolization), and I can only buy seedless at the stores, which only have very limited sources (monopolization). That's just one example. But I will agree with a previous poster. We've been genetically engineering our food since....like....forever.

Click to expand...

You can get 'heritage' or 'heirloom' seeds which is what I do with tomatoes. You can also buy corn, for example, from plants that existed many centuries ago.

Because tomatoes, in my example, have been adapted for transport and appearance the flavor has been lacking. Heritage seeds which put flavor first have become a very popular business, so both pro and con on this issue is being served.

This random site is just one of hundreds. Watermelon, Ancient | Baker Creek Heirloom Seed Co

joG said:

1) It would be more important to know what health care treatment animals or pesticides crops had had. Have you ever noticed that the chicken, s antibiotics history was posted?
2) Almost every processed food you can buy including the bio and veggie stuff contains genetically improved components at some stage of the production chain. It is almost impossible to find anything else and usually it is a lie, when vendors claim otherwise.

Click to expand...

What matters most is we generally go out of our way to ensure the consumer knows what they are buying, with a few exceptions of course. The issue here is the Food Industry is looking to conceal just about everything they can from the consumer. Where meats come from, what contains GMO ingredients, etc.

It is a well established pattern of trying to conceal the operation of the Food Industry, I tend to think foods should be looked at as other products where the consumer knows what they are consuming. Then let the chips fall where they may on consumer response.

The FDA can clear much of this up with proper message and documentation on GMO products, if they were obligated to do so.

Dittohead not! said:

I think it's a fear of the unknown. Are GMO potentially harmful? Probably not, but no one knows for sure. If a plant can be modified to resist insects, for example, does that plant do so by producing a substance that could be toxic to humans as well? If there are no immediate ill effects, what are the long term results of consuming it? No one really knows.

That said, if you ask a random sample of people whether foods with DNA are harmful, you'd get quite a few positive responses.

Click to expand...

Unless the GMO species actually create something toxic to humans, which is rather doubtful for one, and surely not allowed into the food supply for a second, I'm not seeing a great danger here.

OrphanSlug said:

Because it is silly to hide something from the consumer if there is nothing to worry about.

I'll agree that not all GMOs are a problem, but we still should know what we are consuming.

Click to expand...

Assuming that the consumers are equipped to make a sensical decision about it. Seems that they aren't. In the proteins are proteins, and can either be broken down and used by the human digestive tract or not, in which case they are simply passed.

joG said:

People are often afraid of the new, funny as it might seem. But here in Europe it has mostly been a question of protectionism and the libbies that incited the fear.

Click to expand...

A case when the left end of the spectrum is spreading FUD and is being anti-science.

PIPEWRENCH said:

Haven't humans been genetically modifying foods for thousands if not millions of years. To cross breed plants to create a more favorable yield has been done going back as far as recorded history. Probably going back to the beginning of farming. We have been genetically changing farm animals by cross breeding since we first started herding and tending flocks. Nature has been genetically modifying since the first living organism appeared on this planet. Otherwise none of all the living things around us would exist. Can genetic modification be bad for us as well as good? Absolutely. That has been going on for over a billion years. Most of the plants we eat today were almost inedible in their original forms. It was selective breeding for more favorable species that makes up most everything we eat today.

Click to expand...

Good point there. Humans have been genetically modifying a great many species through selective breeding, all the way back to the Monks and their experiments on peas (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregor_Mendel)

KevinKohler said:

The issue with GMO's is the potential danger they represent to our ecosystem. It's why companies that produce them, make them incapable of yielding "offspring", or seeds. Some decry this as monopolization, and in many ways, it IS.


Take seedless watermelons, for instance. Those things cannot progenate. When is the last time you saw SEEDED watermelons at the store? I haven't, in years. Not even at farmers markets. Because no one wants to carry them, because no one wants to buy them...they want the seedless. Only, I, personally, DON'T. I LIKE seeded watermelons...they taste better. Yeah, the seeds are annoying, but I typically just swallow those suckers anyway. But it's moot, because the market has all but made the seeded watermelon "extinct". It means two things...I can't grow my own anymore, unless I grow the seedless, the seeds for which only have very limited sources (monopolization), and I can only buy seedless at the stores, which only have very limited sources (monopolization).

That's just one example.




But I will agree with a previous poster. We've been genetically engineering our food since....like....forever.

Click to expand...

Agreed, that breeding GMO let lose on the ecosystem is not something that should be allowed, as there's no telling what mother nature's going to do with that, nor it's eventual impact.

eohrnberger said:

Assuming that the consumers are equipped to make a sensical decision about it. Seems that they aren't. In the proteins are proteins, and can either be broken down and used by the human digestive tract or not, in which case they are simply passed.

Click to expand...

So you need the government to protect the Food Industry from the choice of the consumer that you do not agree with?

OrphanSlug said:

So you need the government to protect the Food Industry from the choice of the consumer that you do not agree with?

Click to expand...

I was leaving that out on purpose.

I know that earlier this week, the Senate was unable to establish a consensus on a GMO labeling law. Perhaps it's because of the law and what was written in it, or perhaps it was something else. I admit I don't know the specifics of the bill, nor why is was not supported or defeated.

GMO foods probably should have labels, as much as any other foods, as to what they contain or don't.

eohrnberger said:

I was leaving that out on purpose.

I know that earlier this week, the Senate was unable to establish a consensus on a GMO labeling law. Perhaps it's because of the law and what was written in it, or perhaps it was something else. I admit I don't know the specifics of the bill, nor why is was not supported or defeated.

GMO foods probably should have labels, as much as any other foods, as to what they contain or don't.

Click to expand...

I've seen the debate several times over.

To leave this to the States means subjecting the Food Industry to multiple label standards with little to no assurance they would consider anything from the FDA.

I still think no matter how uninformed the consumer may be, they should know what is in the foods they consume. The FDA has plenty of means to publish all they need to concerning GMO ingredients, and what we know of the various means that foods and ingredients are altered.

What the Senate did was just appease the Food Industry, who wants no GMO labels. Just like they want no country of origin labels, or really any other label that informs the consumer.

The Food Industry is doing exactly what I offered to you in the form of a question, the Food Industry needs the government to protect them from the consumer no matter if informed or not. And as usual, that is a significant problem.

eohrnberger said:

I was leaving that out on purpose.

I know that earlier this week, the Senate was unable to establish a consensus on a GMO labeling law. Perhaps it's because of the law and what was written in it, or perhaps it was something else. I admit I don't know the specifics of the bill, nor why is was not supported or defeated.

GMO foods probably should have labels, as much as any other foods, as to what they contain or don't.

Click to expand...

Exactly. Label them, and let the consumer decide. Consumers don't always know whether a particular innovation might be harmful or not, as you said, but then, neither does the government. I'd go with personal choice over choices made by the government whenever possible.

PIPEWRENCH said:

Haven't humans been genetically modifying foods for thousands if not millions of years. To cross breed plants to create a more favorable yield has been done going back as far as recorded history. Probably going back to the beginning of farming. We have been genetically changing farm animals by cross breeding since we first started herding and tending flocks. Nature has been genetically modifying since the first living organism appeared on this planet. Otherwise none of all the living things around us would exist. Can genetic modification be bad for us as well as good? Absolutely. That has been going on for over a billion years. Most of the plants we eat today were almost inedible in their original forms. It was selective breeding for more favorable species that makes up most everything we eat today.

Click to expand...

Fish have never ****ed plants. But fish genes are now in plants.

Genetic modification and selective breeding are completely different methods.

Further, they are patented but fertile. Which means by simple life cycles the patent holders will eventually be able to claim title to ALL food crops as their patented tech pollinates existing crops.

I suspect that's why they resist labeling so much. So they can slip it up in us while we're sleeping. If we knew we might not purchase it so we wouldn't be funding our subjection.

It is very telling that if your neighbors' GMO corn contaminates your organic crop YOU are in violation of THEIR patent. Like you stole their pollution.

Its also suspiscious that the same companies that sell "suicide seeds", seeds that produce plants that don't produce seed of their own, sell fertile GMO seeds.

eohrnberger said:

So what's everyone's concern about eating GMO foods?

WikiPedia Defines GMO as:


This makes the proteins, lipids, and amino acids that comprise GMO foods not any less 'natural' in composition than those of any other foods.

The human digestive tract breaks down these proteins, lipids, and amino acids into their constituent parts and absorbs what it can use for nutrition, with the rest being passed through and eliminated in the normal manner.

So what's the worry? If your body can't use something in the GMO foods it won't absorb it, and it's passed out.

Click to expand...

Nothing is wrong with GMO Foods!!!! We have been doing this for years and indeed centuries!!! Nature even creates their own genetically modified crops for survival if the environment gets out of wack due to human or natural causes. It is a fear and a conspiracy theory that is all.

My story is, I was never much of a Anti-GMO-er. Then about a year ago, I started getting really sick and bad stomach aches, diarrhea, and really horrible uncontrollable bloating. Due to my debunking ways, I usually stayed away from those types of alternative sites that promoted Foods with no GMOs. However, I was thinking I might have to change that way of thinking if my stomach cramps got much worse, and they did.

So what did I do? I went to the doctor to get allergy tests for milk, wheat, and sugar. All came back negative. So that meant I likely wasn't lactose intolerant which is what I thought. However, the doctor recommended that I try a gluten-free, lactose free diet for two weeks and then slowly put foods I like back into my diet. Yeah I went to Whole Foods to buy my foods and I felt like a hippie-- completely out of place. However, once I narrowed down the main ingredient I was allergic too. It made me realize that most people probably don't do this much research into what they are eating. Sure they advocate for labels to be put on the foods, but they won't read them if they succeed in the act.

Ironically, the ingredient I was allergic to is commonly used in Gluten-free foods!!!!!! It is called Xanthan Gum, most commonly found in pastries EG: Donuts, cookies, and pop tarts and even salad dressing. So obviously one would think they were lactose intolerant or allergic to wheat if this is the ingredient that doesn't settle well with their bodies and that may be all they need to hear. Oh crap, I am lactose intolerant now. Da*n those food companies poisoning us! Then they go on those alternative food websites and get suckered into the cause. Without really finding out what they are allergic to.

Now needless to say, I am sure there are those that are legitimately lactose intolerant and allergic to gluten. However, the alarming rise in the people claiming that they are these things just make absolutely no sense. Especially now that the Anti-GMO companies are rivaling the regular food stores for counter shelf space! Maybe at one time it was legitimate when it was a smaller movement of growers and farmers, but now it's a feel good bandwagon movement. The people jump onto this particular bandwagon because they feel lost and with good reason. The conspiracy theories on the sites that promote anti-GMO feelings are largely nonsense. It can range anywhere from GMO is causing cancer to GMO companies have the cure for cancer but are slowly killing us so they can make profit off of our pain... I mean seriously... And you know what their silly solution to this horrible and evil conspiracy is? Putting labels on foods that already have labels on them that they don't read!!!!...

OrphanSlug said:

What matters most is we generally go out of our way to ensure the consumer knows what they are buying, with a few exceptions of course. The issue here is the Food Industry is looking to conceal just about everything they can from the consumer. Where meats come from, what contains GMO ingredients, etc.

It is a well established pattern of trying to conceal the operation of the Food Industry, I tend to think foods should be looked at as other products where the consumer knows what they are consuming. Then let the chips fall where they may on consumer response.

The FDA can clear much of this up with proper message and documentation on GMO products, if they were obligated to do so.

Click to expand...

Its the fundamental mechanism by which free markets are supposed to reward bad actors and punish bad actors, for craps sake.

How can the consumer side decide what they do and don't want if the seller side denies them the information.

It flies in the face of conservative thought.

Which generally resists rapid, reckless change specifically to AVOID unintended consequences. Or at least that's what they tell us more comfortable with change. All the time.

Seems funny they are OK with completely secret massive changes to the entire food supply.

(The GMO guys gave us that rice that yeild twice as much rice that is only half as nutritious. WTF was that about? So they can starve on a full belly?

OrphanSlug said:

What matters most is we generally go out of our way to ensure the consumer knows what they are buying, with a few exceptions of course. The issue here is the Food Industry is looking to conceal just about everything they can from the consumer. Where meats come from, what contains GMO ingredients, etc.

It is a well established pattern of trying to conceal the operation of the Food Industry, I tend to think foods should be looked at as other products where the consumer knows what they are consuming. Then let the chips fall where they may on consumer response.

The FDA can clear much of this up with proper message and documentation on GMO products, if they were obligated to do so.

Click to expand...

Uh what are they trying to conceal??? I figured out what was put in my foods quiet easily when I started getting stomach cramps and figured out what I was allergic to. So Are you telling me the labels on current foods aren't big enough??? What else do you want??? Manuals on how the steak was cut and packaged? The life story of the cow it came from? Chances are you just agree to terms and conditions on websites right?

Dittohead not! said:

Exactly. Label them, and let the consumer decide. Consumers don't always know whether a particular innovation might be harmful or not, as you said, but then, neither does the government. I'd go with personal choice over choices made by the government whenever possible.

Click to expand...

As I've asked before:

Since the bananas you see in the grocery store do not remotely resemble their natural state:

1) Should I be able to call them bananas?
2) Should I be forced to label them "GMO?"

Deuce said:

As I've asked before:

Since the bananas you see in the grocery store do not remotely resemble their natural state:

1) Should I be able to call them bananas?
2) Should I be forced to label them "GMO?"

Click to expand...

Given the definition in the OP:

"any living organism that possesses a novel combination of genetic material obtained through the use of modern biotechnology".

Click to expand...

it seems to me anyway that the organisms that have been modified by artificial selection wouldn't fit the definition.

Of course, all plants and animals we use as food have been modified by artificial selection. Probably none of them would even survive in the wild any more. But, unless "modern biotechnology" is extended to mean selective breeding, the bananas aren't GMOs, neither are hogs or Holsteins.

What if...? said:

Fish have never ****ed plants. But fish genes are now in plants.

Genetic modification and selective breeding are completely different methods.

Further, they are patented but fertile. Which means by simple life cycles the patent holders will eventually be able to claim title to ALL food crops as their patented tech pollinates existing crops.

I suspect that's why they resist labeling so much. So they can slip it up in us while we're sleeping. If we knew we might not purchase it so we wouldn't be funding our subjection.

It is very telling that if your neighbors' GMO corn contaminates your organic crop YOU are in violation of THEIR patent. Like you stole their pollution.

Its also suspiscious that the same companies that sell "suicide seeds", seeds that produce plants that don't produce seed of their own, sell fertile GMO seeds.

Click to expand...

Seems to me the solution to this is to fix the convoluted mess that IP rights are in this country.