/ck/ - Food & Cooking

You already eat GMO chickens and vegetables.

Except now we're scientific about which genes we actually modify.

FRANKENFISH IS COMING FOR YOU

>>4369778

veggies i am okay with

genetically modifying chickens to grow so big that their own limbs become crippled and they can't walk, now that is fucked. i'm sure they'll modify the salmon and other animals to the point they can't move and suffer organ failures too.

Every domestic animal is genetically modified. I see no problem with it.

>>4369798
Go be a peta fag somewhere else. Nobody here likes you.

>>4369801

A huge percentage of consumers are against genetically modifying animals, especially if it results in their suffering. It's called empathy, dude.

>>4369812
>A huge percentage of consumers are against genetically modifying animals
No. A small group of brain dead faggots are.

>>4369798
Except we did that just fine with selective breeding. GMO stuff just lets us get to that end result much faster and more efficiently.
Of course, this way we could maybe cut down on the antibiotics and shit added to their feed to speed that growth even more.

>>4369833
Of course the ideal way of producing meat for all parties is lab-grown muscle-fibers independent of living animals, but that's still a long way away.

>>4369817
>Doesn't care about animal welfare

So edgy, dude.

>>4369870
Like I said, go be a peta fag somewhere where the intelligence level is a bit lower. I'm sure your beliefs will wow them.

>>4369907
>Uses term "petafag"
>Thinks knows anything about animal rights or welfare

>>4369923
>animal rights
lol, I can smell the patchouli from here.

What's wrong with genetically modified foods (from a health perspective to the person eating it)?

>>4369934

not much testing is being done on the GMO salmon to determine if they're safe to consume, that's the worry of many

it's just being pushed straight into the market for $$

>>4369938
What exactly would make them unsafe?

>>4369938
I mean GMO foods in general, not salmon in particular.

>>4369944
scary corporations, man

>>4369938
But that's wrong you stupid asshole. GMO foods are under extremely strict scrutiny. Most of the time there is more testing on GMO foods than non GMO foods.

>>4369944
An implanted gene that makes them grow twice as fast might also make them carcinogenic and nobody would know due to a lack of testing.

>>4369956
A theory that sounds completely insane based on what?

>>4369961
GMO's are evil and want to kill us all to make more money....oh...nevermind

>>4369956
You have absolutely no idea how genetics works. There is no gene that makes something grow twice as fast.

GMO food receives years of testing before ever hitting the market to prove it is safe. Here is an article that goes over some of the testing that GMO foods undergo

http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/safety/human_health/41.evaluation_safety_gm_food_major_undertaking.html

>>4369934
>>4369946

>>4369955

But we have been testing normal foods, for basically all of human existence. As long as we prepare these foods properly and don't contaminate them, we know that, at heart, they're safe.

GMO foods are only safe in theory; in practice, things tend to go wrong, as with all things.

The other argument is that there's no practical need / it's owning life, but that's not health related. There's also the environmental argument, which is very strong with respect to GMO plants because . . . well, they don't work well.

GMOs should just be labelled so people can make their choices, really. Some GMOs can do great good, theoretically (iirc, GM mosquitos).

>>4369976
There is nothing inherently wrong with GMO food. The only argument that people can come up with is so heavily reliant on logical fallacy and outright lies that no one in the industry will take them serious.

GMO foods are just as safe, and in many cases safer than nonGMO foods. People are just afraid of change.

>>4369961
>>4369969
not the guy you're responding to but the addition of extra growth genes or cofactor protein complexes actually do have the possibility to change the function of other genes. whether or not these genes are harmful does require long term testing.

>>4369980
Stop that strawman shit. You are blatantly disregarding the point of my statement.

Find me a single case of someone dieing as a result of GMO food. Not food allergy, not contamination, but GMO foods introducing unintended toxins into the food supply.

>>4369956
Farmer Joe's natural strain of corn could also be 10 times more carciogenic than Farmer Bill's natural strain of corn. Why don't you test them? If anything GMO is more safe, because at least they try to figure out how the genes work before putting it in there, natural mutation just does it randomly.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/jeffrey-smith/genetically-modified-soy_b_544575.html

>>4369987
>>4369988
Both of you are so fucking scientifically illiterate it hurts me. You're basing this off what, your grade 11 biology class?

>>4369987
what about cancer/obesity/malnutrition???

ya they won't kill you overnight, they'll just produce the kind of unhealthy shit-tier society we have in USA today

>>4369985
You can't assume a gene has a carciogenic effect until you confirm it doesnt. Then you wouldn't be able to eat anything. "it might have carciogenic bi-effects" is just as true about any natural mutation. You have no reason to believe GMO is more dangerious.

>>4370000
I have a bachelor degree in evolutionary biology

>>4369982
>no one in the industry will take them serious

stopped reading right there. gtfo corporate shill. this is for discussing food, not a platform for you to garner support for maximizing profits by manipulating gov't policies and lying to consumers

>>4370007
wow
Don't you have a drum circle to report to?

>>4370006
so you have the social science version of biology. cool man

>>4370006
oooh, a bachelor's degree. Why I think that qualifies you study the evolution of potatoes into french fries in a McDonalds.

>>4369988
>being this retarded

>>4370019
>I don't know what evolutionary biology is

Not even that guy, but you dumb.

>Hippie crap about GMO again

Jesus christ you're worse than /pol/
Go fucking live in the forest if you hate progress so much

>>4370010
nope. not into that sort of thing. i do have an orchestra call in a couple hours, though. what's your point?

OH ya, your point is that I must be a crazy, tinfoil hat conspiracy psycho (insert-buzzword-the-tv-told-you-here)

>>4370037
love progress. certainly wouldn't call gmo foods "progress"

>>4370031
finishing up second year biochem. I know that program

>>4370051
>scientific advancement isn't progress
>increasing food production isn't progress

Did you type that out between bong hits?

>>4370051
>Increased yields
>Feeding more people with less resources
>Not progress
Eat shit.

When there is solid evidence between GMO and.. well... anything negative, I'll give a fuck.

Until then, I'll take my cheaper scientifically improved meat.

>>4370002
>Cause a known mutation
>Thinks we don't have to check it

The reason we don't bother to scan the genome of every crop is because there is no evidence of harmful genes in them. But when you fuck around with a organisms DNA you don't think we need to do a little screening and testing first? Glad you're not in charge of anything

>>4370084
see
>>4369991

Just because it's not on the six o'clock news doesn't mean it isn't real. Do your own research.

>>4370084
>mfw they ban GMO foods two years later because they caused irreversible super powers like shooting beams of raw intellect out of your eyes and firing rocket fists at your enemies

>>4370073
>>4370078

wow, you statists just can't get past the stereotypes.

i don't smoke weed, rarely even drink these days.

you guys can't see the simple logical fallacies in your spoon-fed, regurgitated responses?

>increase quantity
>progress

NOT NECESSARILY TRUE.

If you could make a million times as much food, but that food only had one millionth the nutritional value, is that really progress?

what the fuck do you think has happened in USA with corn?

>>4370093
>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/jeffrey-smith/genetically-modified-soy_b_544575.html
>Genetically modified soy linked to infant mortality and sterility... in hamsters

Eh... not convincing enough. Of course, the counter argument that feeding GMO is still better than the cost of rising food prices that will outright starve others.

>>4370104
Okay. The goal of economics is essentially the distribution of limited resources or wealth.

If GMO is increasing food yields, more people will have access to said foods even if they are GMO. Therefore, GMO is creating economic progress as it works towards a post scarcity world.

>>4370073
>>4370078
>>4370037
>>4370010
>>4369987
>>4369982

PUT DOWN THE TV. For your own good, for all of us, for the love of god, put down the tv.

>>4370113
>economic progress
>not just one, very limited metric

could you be more flawed in your arguments?

>>4370105
Alright man, do what you need to. Just try and think what we're going to have to explain the generations after us. It scares me.

>>4370131
Honestly? I don't think this is a large enough of a concern.

Essentially, we've already greatly genetically modified all the domesticated species on earth to suit us, but at a much lower rate. I also imagine this kind of stink was raised back when we started using industrial fertilizers.

Granted, pharmaceuticals get taken down every week, cigarettes are now the devil, heroin was once used in cough drops..

>>4370001
>cancer
It's not that hard to test a compound or mixture for mutagenic properties
>/obesity/malnutrition
How does this vary from testing a cake or other cooked food for nutritional content?

>>4369772
I am vegetarian so I don't eat fish but I have no problem with GMO food. GMO food is progress, people arguing against it are usually doing it for naturalistic, religious or other obscurant reasons.

>>4369982
Right. I figured. Thanks.

Anti-GMO'rs: Why do you believe it's unsafe?

wth just read the thread the amount of trolling and retardism on here is unbearable

fuck this shit

>>4370174
Read the thread.

>>4370173
>>4370183
> I know nothing at all about the GMO debate

>>4370174
Basically, everything is dangerous until proven otherwise.

We all know how dangerous microwaving food makes it.

>>4370195
if it's covered/contained in certain plastics, absolutely

>>4370186
>Obesity?

That's bullshit. You will never get fat eating GMO broccoli all day.

>Cancer?

Impossible to prove. And who cares? We all die someday. It's a part of life. Eating non-GMO foods won't keep you alive forever.

After ~30 life just keeps getting worse anyway. If you die at 65 from GMO foods, who gives a shit? And again, no way to prove it was GMO foods that caused it. Could be anything.

>>4370174
Well for starters the main point of GMO's is to allow greater yields of food through rampant pesticide use. While that sounds great it also means incredibly high amounts of that pesticide are present in the crops. It's a teratogen, carcinogen and a mutagen. Essentially you put the farmer ahead of the well being and general health of the consumer. Which is bad business practice, and also shady as fuck because nothing is going to be labelled anymore so we no longer have a choice.

>>4370195
Well I haven't used one in years, but I doubt it makes a difference (assuming you don't >>4370202).

I stopped because I thought it was bad, but now I just like the taste a lot more when I use the oven. And one less thing to own/store.

>>4370203
0/10

>>4369944
Evil science.

>>4370207
Too bad it doesn't kill us instantly. We have the option of organic in most every grocery nowadays, but it's so much more expensive.

And again who gives a shit if you live to be 60 instead of 70. After ~30, it's all shit anyway, and gets exponentially worse with age. So we're better off dying sooner.

>>4370222
again 0/10
filtered

>>4370210
There's a microwave where I'm living now, and I use it to steam veggies or heat frozen peas/beans/shit like that.

>>4369812
so they are against modifying them if they suffer, but they arent against the normal suffering these animals have had for years?

>>4370207
GMO's aren't solely increasing yield through pesticide resistance and pesticide resistance doesn't mean it's more widely applied. You're either poorly-informed or an extremely shitty farmer.

>>4370238
Yeah thats not their sole purpose but that's the main reason in GMO soy. Go ahead, Google away

I'm just scared that some of these are going to escape and create an unstoppable force eradicating all other fish. It could happen.

The quality of the modified salmon's mean is probably fine and tasty too. I also doubt there is any problem with animal welfare.

We should be scared for the ecosystem, these modified salmons will probably outperform all other native fish.

>>4370246
> mean

I meant meat.

Consume my GMO-free balls.

This is why i'm going to build my house in the country and raise my own chickens. I'll hunt and eat meat sparingly, and grow my own shit. Fuck this gay earth

>>4370238
Yes, the popular GMOs on the market are Roundup Ready soy/corn. They are resistant to glyphosate which means more glyphosate can be applied to the field without concern for the crop being damaged.

This is literally the reason for the top GMO crop sales in N. America. It has caused an increase in glyphosate usage.

>>4370251
make sure you get your seeds from a reliable source.

and guys, if gmo is gmawesome then why is it a big deal to label the package? Why can't they just disclose it and let the consumer buy with confidence.

>>4370246
I don't have any problem with GMO just in virtue of it being modified, I mean hell we've been doing selective breeding for millennia and that's pretty much the same. My issues with it are what this anon brings up, about potential ecological issues, and the social/economic issues around how being GMOs are presently being used (sterile so you have to repeatedly buy them, lawsuits against farmers, etc etc all that good Monsanto stuff. If there was ever a real-life evil corporation Monsanto would be pretty close to it.

>>4370279
> If there was ever a real-life evil corporation Monsanto would be pretty close to it.

IF?

Wake up, anon. There IS a "real-life evil corporation," in fact there are hundreds or thousands, and yes, Monsanto is one of the chief among them.

>>4369772

>go vegetarian
>avoid GM shit

nope

>>4370279
Exactly. And don't forget, even if the fish are sterile and cannot breed, f they escape they still live for about 5 years and during that time they will still be competing with wild fish.

>>4370244
Genetically enhanced resistance to drought, insect damage (allowing the farmer to actually skip application of insecticide), disease resistance and basically any other factor that negatively affects yield. That's what genetic modification's role is.

Another consideration since you mentioned soy is plant dimensions. Soybeans that grow really tall don't necessarily have higher production. Soybeans that are shorter and produce more pods per plant or have more beans per pod would be preferable. Wheat can be intended to produce grain or straw. It'll always produce both but wheat bred to grow shorter stalks can produce more grain. Magic.

>>4370256
Farmers who overapply glyphosate are just wasting money. Farmers who underapply are creating glyphosate-resistant weeds (retarded scumbags). RR crops allow less passes and overall less numerous chemicals to control weeds.

>>4370301
>Farmers who overapply glyphosate are just wasting money. Farmers who underapply are creating glyphosate-resistant weeds (retarded scumbags).
They are reducing weeds. Under application does not cause resistance BTW, it isn't like antibiotics and bacteria. We have created a selection pressure (glyphosate) and weeds are naturally evolving resistance.

There is also the real possibility of horizontal gene transfer.

>>4370283

Pretty easy to find non-GMO vegetables, fruit, grains and legumes, if that is your thing.

>>4370308
>Under application does not cause resistance BTW, it isn't like antibiotics and bacteria. We have created a selection pressure (glyphosate) and weeds are naturally evolving resistance.
So which is it?
Antibiotic resistance in bacteria is exactly like roundup resistance in weeds. Each pass of herbicide leaves some survivors, subsequent generations of survivors show increased tolerance to the herbicide.

>>4370246
But fuck the ecosystem.

>>4370327
>Antibiotic resistance in bacteria is exactly like roundup resistance in weeds.
No, it isn't. Antibiotic resistance in bacteria is typically mediated by plasmids and is actually easily reversible on the population level.

Glyphosate resistance is not caused by applying low levels of glyphosate in the field. Have you heard of pesticide drift?

>ITT: A informed group tries to argue with people who watch fox news.

If you hate the "socialist tree hugger government" so much why on earth do you put so much faith in the FDA? What the hell makes you think that with the giant pharmaceutical recalls that the food screening is any safer in the US.

>>4370301

>>4370327

confirmed pseudo intellectual

>>4370715
I guess some people only put faith in twisted science when they find the answer convenient.

Hey did you guys know old age and air cause cancer?

hybridization =/= GMO
selective breeding =/= GMO

I can't wait until I can eat meat I print from a 3D printer. That shit is going to be fucking whack man. No need to ever leave my house again. Want some salmon? Print that shit? A steak? Print it. Hell, I too am ready for growing meat in labs. It makes too much sense for the offal-offended American culture.

God damn the future is going to kick ass.

>>4370623
Might want to let the health care industry know that it's easy to remove antibiotic resistance from bacterial populations.
Pesticide drift is a low level application of pesticide outside of the treatment area. I should know this shit is what I do for a living as a herbicide applicator.
Continued low level exposure or sub-lethal exposures kills off those individuals that are less tolerant. Over time the population is composed only of tolerant individuals and they show higher resistance. As you increase the rate of application you are left with the individuals that have the strongest resistance.
This is exactly how the Roundup Ready gene was discovered in the first place.

Honestly, if you're already eating FARMED SALMON then you apparently don't give a fuck what you're eating or the toll it has on the environment anyway, so what's the fuss?

>>4370987
>Modify organism on a genetic level
>not genetically modified organism

but i know what you means

should be more like
>nonstandard genetic modification

adding fish genes to mah veggies is bad

>>4370049
>i do have an orchestra call in a couple hours, though.

EVERYONE STEP THE FUCK BACK
THIS GUY PLAYS IN AN ORCHESTRA

>>4370203
>After ~30 life just keeps getting worse anyway.
There is on way you're old enough to be on 4chan

Sure, sounds awesome. I might review what they're changing, though.

>>4371149
>implying you understand bioengineering

>>4371136
>adding fish genes to mah veggies is bad
nobody does that.
They don't put animal genes in anything being sold for consumption, it is just done to test things in a lab setting.

anyway
>implying people that buy farm raised salmon give a shit about where their food comes from or the quality of it

but seriously technophobes like OP need to eat shit, don't want it then don't eat it. "BUT SOON IT WILL BE IN EVERYTHING!!!" then grow your own produce. Farmers owe you nothing, you do not have a right to anything they sell, if you don't like what they offer go find it somewhere else.

>>4371302
This.

>>4370203
>After ~30 life just keeps getting worse anyway.

LOLOLOL
Are you kidding? 30 is when life starts to actually get good. I'm way older than 30, and I'd never go back to my twenties, in a million years. My friends and compadres all say the same. Youth is wasted on the young. That is the fucking truth. Your thirties are the time when you find out who you really are. Your forties and fifties are when you make the most money, are the most happy, and (for certain groups of people) have the most sexual satisfaction. I'd rather get pegged by Barbara Bush, while Paul McCartney, Adam Levine, and Lindsay Lohan stood around watching and jacking off while singing Hey Jude in falsetto harmony, than go back to my twenties.

>>4371366
i would be into that scenario regardless

>>4371366
Man I sure hope you're hope. Shit's going awful. So when do all the retards who party all day and get everything for nothing and get away with everything have to pay up? Or do I have to just keep dealing with it?

>>4371366
>I had a terrible time when I was younger

Sounds shitty bro.

>>4372820
>So when do all the retards who party all day and get everything for nothing and get away with everything have to pay up?
Why does this bother you?

If I could back in time to highschool days I would tell my younger self, "keep doing what you are doing and enjoy it, because responsibility is going to come on soon and these days will seem care-free and awesome".

Sure, having more education, money, options, higher pursuits and hobbies, etc. is awesome. But there is always an appeal when it comes to being an irresponsible youth living for the moment.

Glad I had a few reckless years before I straightened up. I feel bad for people who never knew those feelings.

I think it's wrong to manipulate animals' DNA just to benefit us.

Nothing wrong with playing God with science, but when it causes animal suffering, like us genetically modifying chickens to grow too big, a line is crossed.

>>4369772
Much of the grains you're already eating are genetically modified.

You're an idiot, unsurprising for a self-righteous vegan faggot.

Incidentally, genetically modified food is the future. More nutrients, cheaper, and more resistant to climate change.

>>4370093
>>HURRR
news sites are not sources you fucktard

>GMO Meats are bad!
>these same people ignore the fact that we have been breeding and genetically modifying organisms for the past 7000 years.

Fools, what do you think animal husbandry is? Breeding specific animals with desirable traits so that they will be more resistant to disease, hardier or provide more meat.

GM in the modern day is just a more efficient way of doing this. Of course though, all the 'organic' faggots and vegetarians will ignore this.

>modify animal so that its brain is atrophied/is incapable of feeling pain

Why has nobody done this yet? After all, how can you torture a creature that is not only unable to feel pain, but would be clinically braindead.

>>4372871

This. Anyone who thinks that there's a significant difference between maize that was selectively bred for hardiness, and transgenic maize that was spliced with soil bacteria genes to produce useful toxins, is a luddite and is literally advocating the murder of billions of poor people.

Organotards and libruls should just stop posting from their macbooks if they hate corporations so much.

You want to eat fish in the future?

Have fun with getting fish that will not be Genetically Modified in the near future.

>>4372871
Truth, right here.

I'm willing to bet all the vegafags will ignore this post.

>>4372883

We don't have that advanced of technology.

If we could create braindead animals, we would also probably have the technology to just bioprint meat.

>>4372864
>how do I find sources

>>4372871
>animal husbandry = insertion of exogenous, unrelated genes into a genome

lol okay, great argument

Tell us about dihydrogen monoxide, how everything is technically organic according to one definition, etc.

>>4372896
>people are starving in arid climates because they don't have glyphosate resistant crops

Great infographic, shows how stupid most Monsanto shills are.

I'm not a fan of GM foods simply because of a lot of issues farmers have had where seeds blow onto their property, their crops are compromised, and suddenly Monsanto is demanding they pay to use seeds they never wanted. That, and factory farming has pretty much destroyed diversity of domestic animals and as a result most of the meat in our markets is fast-growing but poor quality compared to a lot of breeds that are being pushed to extinction. A lot of my complaints are more to do with commercial homogenization than genetic modification, though.

That being said, maybe it isn't the best idea to farm genetically modified animals in open-ocean pens when you already have enough problems with displaced species getting out of your pens and hybridizing with the native salmon and spreading disease and parasites to the local fauna? Farming salmon isn't exactly like farming chicken. They're wild animals raised alongside wild animals.

>>4369772

It should not be allowed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMwXlikoFrM

>>4372921
>unrelated genes into a genome
But none of the food that people eat has anything like that in it. GMO is putting say, the genes that make african wheat hardy into american wheat in order to increase food surplus.

GMO isn't putting fish genes into crops like you tards are suggesting.

>>4372924
people shill for monsanto?
that's like shilling for communism

>>4372936
>Farming salmon isn't exactly like farming chicken. They're wild animals raised alongside wild animals.

THIS.

You want to raise genetically modified domestic tilapia in aquaponic tanks? Go for it!

You want to genetically modify wild fish and raise them in ocean pens alongside wild fish where you risk compromising the genes of wild salmon and have a proven poor track-record when it comes to environmental safety? Fuck you.

>>4370113
>post scarcity world
What the liberal actually believes. Since 1789.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEZJXI-IQS4

>>4372859
Listen. Take advice from a person who has worked in the poultry industry. Chicken and turkeys (turkeys especially) have NEVER been genetically modified in the sense that there's a geneticist in a lab changing DNA strands and creating larger animals. If they have, it has never been mainstream practice by any food supplier. Now I'm going to tell you what they do to create these larger birds. As far as turkeys go, they are selected. Selected in such a way that the largest and strongest toms progress the proprietary bloodlines. There are a few varietys of turkey that are bred. Giant White being the most prevalent. As well as a few black varieties. Giant Whites have different sub-sets of varieties as well. Toms are selected by being given a gait score, growth to feed input ratios, and breast weight to overall weight ratios. All of their food is measured. They are weighed periodically such that their food:growth ratio can be measured as well as breast weigth:overall weight ratio. Once this is determined they are given a gait score. Look at it as the turkey olympics. Turkeys with strong powerful gaits are scored top notch. This is an extremely efficient way to create a larger bird. Overall, the tom weight of the Giant White turkey line is increased by 1lbs. per year. They have been doing this since the 1950s. Now think to yourself how large these turkeys have gotten over the years. You simply don't need a geneticist in a lab creating these birds when it's much more simple and efficient to do it in my above method. These birds are not fed hormones or steroids. There is no need. Corn, soy, vitamins, minerals. That's it. Over time the consumers have preferred breast meat so they have focused on larger breasts. It's the consumer's fault that their breasts are so large. You ask, you shall have. Ask questions if you have em.

>>4373016

Do you think we'll ever see a fad for heritage turkeys, like we do with pigs?

>>4373023
there is one...
i see ads in mother earth news all the time

my parents had one last year

>>4373031

Did it taste good?

>>4373033
i guess
i didn't eat it

>>4373016
as an addendum: This selection process I've outlined is done 24 times per year with each flock being upward of 20,000 in number. 24 x 20,000. This is info from one of the 2 largest turkey BREEDERS in the world. There is a chicken division as well. Aviagen Turkeys Inc. and Hybrid Turkeys Inc. are the two main turkey breeders in North America. British United Turkeys (owned by Aviagen) is the largest in Europe. Aviagen owns most of the rest of the world's turkey breeding market.

>>4373023
People are slowly realizing how great turkeys are to raise. There are certain heritage breeds that are close to extinction. People need to keep it alive but I fear it may be too late for some of the heritage turkey varieties. People simply don't want to farm anymore. Give me turkeys over chickens any day. Turkeys have personality that chickens cannot compare to.

>>4369772
>What say you?
Don't care.

>Going to eat frankenfish?
Yeah.

>What about when all the meat is GMO a few decades from now?
So?

>Only way to avoid this shit in the future will be to go vegetarian I bet.

>implying there's anything wrong with genetically modified food.

It's called scientific progress you fucking liberal pussy.

>>4373043
>>scientific progress
>>not liberal.
fucking retarded conservatives.

>>4373042

My local farmers market has a turkey guy. Really nice guy. I should buy stuff from him more often but I can never figure out what to do with the stuff.

>>4373043
all meat is already gmo
domestication and trait selection is genetic modification

>inb4 nu uh

>>4373046
science is a jewish invention, dominated by jews

>>4373043
Disliking progress they believe is in the wrong direction, that makes them conservative. Even more so if they're trying to be responsible with the worlds resources.

>>4373049
>water is the same as uranium hexafloride
>all food is organic because carbon
>gene splicing is the same as selective breeding

What is your point.

>GMOs
>Any worse for you than regular meats
Yeah, sure thing Spiritpond Lovechild.

>>4373050
>>jews
>>invented one of the most dogmatic bullshit religions ever
>>liberal
haha oh wow.

>>4373054
my point is genetic modification is good

non standard gene splicing hocus pocus is unnatural and bad

one is massaging natural selection, the other is punching god in the face

>>4373057
it's true though
jewish doctrine states god made the world based on immutable rules, not to be changed on the whims of a pagan diety

that and the huge number of jewish nobel winners

>unless it's a kike conspiracy

>>4373047
Roasted turkey sliced thin and used as deli meat, turkey burgers, turkey salad, turkey hash (fucking excellent), and my favorite isto take a nice turkey breast and slice it thick(but not too thick less than 1/4th of an inch) bread it up with your favorite breading and fry it in some olive oil. Fucking EXCELLENT. Turkey can be as good as chicken.

>>4373053
wanting to use resources sustainable isn't conservative, the conservative ideology is different from its conventional definition, it essentially boils down to traditionalism, or whatever was done before.

The more harmful thing by far, if GMOs are even harmful, is the hormones we pump into these animals to make them grow. If we can grow animals larger using GMOs, we could ditch giving these animals synthetic hormones which DO affect us and our health.

>>4373082
>can't even read
we tried selecting humans
it's called eugenics and all the liberals got pissy about it

>>4373088
>deleting your post

embarassing

>>4373083
no, it's not. Just because the news brutalized definitions of works and bends them to suit the egos of their viewership does not make it correct or modern usage. Progressives and Traditionalists are not always the same as Conservative or Liberal. When talking about a collection of stances a group has on different issues it's best to just refer to them as the group. Rather than try to stroke your own ego and insult them simultaneously.

>>4373093
>>4373088
I did it before you even posted your reply. Because I realized I tagged the wrong post. Then realized the intended target is so far gone it's not even worth trying to convince them of anything.

>>4373105
its in the fucking dictionary, it has nothing to do with the news you moron.

>>b : a political philosophy based on tradition and social stability, stressing established institutions, and preferring gradual development to abrupt change;
c : a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties;

>>4373122
I just realized I fucked up and didn't label them as conservative for the former and liberal for the latter.

>>4373043
What's wrong with GMO is Monsanto (and their ilk, but it's not as if there are many others).

If you want there to be sane progress, then there also needs to be sane competition and property rights. Instead of Monsanto being able to sue the farmers who get contaminated by Monsanto genes out of business, the opposite should be true.

As long as Monsanto is dominating the GMO business, then GMO is evil because Monsanto is evil.

>>4373138
>>buckets are evil because monsato is evil
this is litterally how stupid you sound.

>>4373130
It's alright, but do you see how GMO meat is in direct conflict with the conservative political philosophy? Just as spending 1/3rd of the worlds gas resources on vehicles for military use is not conservative. On both it would be downright hypocritical for them to support either. So saying that someone is liberal for being against GMO meats is also in essence a flawed statement.

>>4373144
If all buckets in the world were made by Monsanto, that would be true, since buckets sold would translate into Monsanto profits.

>>4373154
yeah, I'm fairly sure you just dont care how retarded and stupid you are, have fun with that.

GMO is shit. GE is acceptable.

I mostly buy organic food anyway so.

>>4373251
>>hurrrr
wow
10/10 would wat again.

>>4372852
Because I worked my ass off all my life, get pulled over for the slightest of infractions and watch my insurance rates soar while people who I know drove drunk and crashed their car get off with a slap on the wrist from the courts and insurance never knows about the accidents.
They goofed off all their lives and complain when they get high paying jobs with good hours with easy work while I struggle to even get a seasonal position at department stores.
Some people have all the luck.

>>4369934

Humans aren't well versed enough in genetics to be messing with products we will be eating everyday.

>>4369944

A change in sequence could result in production of hormone x

etc

>>4371140

9edgy

>>4373300

Time has been too short to tell yet

>>4372946
The majority of GMO crops involve putting bacteria gene in the plant genome.

Insane to trust corporations that GMO meat is safe without even testing it.

>>4369772

will i eat it? hell. fucking. no.

I m a genetics major and I've never really understood the fear of GMOs, we've been doing it as a species for thousands of years.

There is no such thing as a non genetically modified food these days. Everything that humans produced has been selected for over the last thousand years.

>>4373646
>what are fish

inb4 natural selection is god's GMO

spare me

>>4373646

>inb4 "corn syrup is as safe as sugar"

Monsanto, GTFO

>>4373656
>>what are fish
What.

I'm not talking about natural selection, selectively breeding plants and animals is a form of genetic modification.

>>4373663
Wheres your long term study on the negative effects of corn syrup over sugar? Citation needed.

>>4373664

So what you mean is, there is such thing as non genetically modified food these days.

The real question is, are you going to join the good scientists who support Monsanto and care about their families like Mark Lynas, or the bad scientists who don't think of their families like Ignacio Chapela?

Do YOU care about your family?

If you eat anything that is farm raised, no matter gmo or nongmo, you are eating gmo food.

Anything.

The only difference is the mechanism used.

like bananas? They do not exist in the "natural" world. There are hosts of other examples as well. Your free range, no hormone, non gmo chicken gas very little to do with the jungle fowl from which they were derived.

As to gmo's ability to insert genes that "couldn't" exist in nature and therefore have potentially crazy effects, have you never heard if random mutation?

We face merely refined the.crude techniques we have used for hundreds of years.

>>4373673
>Mark Lynas
>Scientist
I thought he was just a journalist.

But anyway, GM of foods is the only way to sustain our consumption. People who fear genetic modification haven't done enough research into the topic, there is so much regulation and testing that goes into any product that will ever reach the market.

The main problem with GMOs on the market is obvious corporate bias.

The science and technique is pure, but due to Monsanto-tier corporate political dickery, and the general corruption of the FDA in general, not enough testing of the products is done on a large enough scale to ensure they're safe, that the genes have inserted into non-dangerous/threatening loci in the resultant genome, and just not examined carefully by enough sources due to company deathgrip on the "copyrighted" product.

Really, companies like Monsanto ruin PR with the public (who damn won't understand the science for the most part) by just unloading their "it works" crap onto the market and then assfucking anybody who looks/talks the wrong way about it, making public acceptance of what is a great technology nearly impossible.

/ck/ is case in point whenever GMOs are brought up. It's nearly as uneducated about them as would-be scientists on weed forums, and the sad part is, without proper research trials enough to gank problems in the bud with GMOs, the good science is drowned by bad politics.

>>4373679
>there is so much regulation and testing that goes into any product that will ever reach the market.

Sarcasm, right?

>>4373684
Depends, where do you live?

I live in Canada, our regulations are pretty decent when it comes to GMOs

Take a read for yourself.
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/sr-sr/pubs/biotech/reg_gen_mod-eng.php

>>4373693
>Canadia
Yep, that's not the US, last I checked.

>>4373693

USA's regulations for everything are a facade. Corporations control everything.

>>4373697
>>4373698
In general though, what exactly about GMOs do you fear (I m just assuming you're against it from your posts)?

>>4369812
Yeah, naturalistic fallacy, the fact that its common doesn't make it fallacious. People have died from organic food and in 60 years GMOs haven't hurt anyone.

Educate yourself, ex-anti-GMO activist apologizing about the damage his past successful campaigning has done to the world:
http://www.marklynas.org/2013/01/lecture-to-oxford-farming-conference-3-january-2013/

>>4373763

6/10, not bad but you could have done better

>>4373707
No, I'm on the side of GMOs. However, they are not properly researched enough for me.
>>4373680

>>4373768
What the fuck are you talking about? This is serious shit, anti-gmo movement is completely fallacious. Just a reactionary movement resulting from human's innate tendency place arbitrary value in purity in things.

>>4373777

yeah guys! because corporations under the guise of profit have NEVER done anything unsafe to the general public! just grab those ankles ... it's for your best!

>>4373777
>This is serious shit, anti-gmo movement is completely fallacious. Just a reactionary movement resulting from human's innate tendency place arbitrary value in purity in things.
Yes, it's crazy.
Why would you want to keep bacterial and fish DNA out of traditional food crops of vast importance to mankind that have been developed over thousands of years?

>>4373804
Because by doing so they improve crop growth, yield, reduce cost, and reduce difficulty to grow?

>>4373797
>HURRRRR OGGUBY
Yeah there should be good, smart and efficient regulation on new GMOs and private corporations shouldn't be able to influence legislation using campaign contributions, I agree. But to think that GMOs are inherently bad is extremely fallacious.

>>4373804
Take your 2nd grade science somewhere else. Nobody is introducing these fish into the wild.

>>4373813
>Nobody is introducing these fish into the wild.
That doesn't mean it's in the realm of impossibility. In fact, they've discussed several scenarios, describing what exactly would happen if one of the fish did make it into the wild, and how it would decimate the wild fish populations.

Considering Monsantos crazy covetous copyright laser eyesight, I would expect that scenario to very likely actually play out, because one of their fish "accidentally" made it out into the wild.

>>4373811
>Because by doing so they improve crop growth, yield, reduce cost, and reduce difficulty to grow?
hahahaha
by which you mean cause total dependence on the chemical products of big multinationals to grow a successful crop and massive overuse of those same chemicals. yeah, that's worth permanently polluting the gene pool of food crops that took 1000s of years to develop.

>>4373813
>Take your 2nd grade science somewhere else. Nobody is introducing these fish into the wild.
hurr durrr. i love the cunty attitude of pro-GMO people who assume that they are in possession of all the knowledge and anyone who disagrees with them is a Luddite. sorry, stupid, but i know more about the science behind GMOs that you do. genetic pollution of GMO genes into non-GMO crops is already happening. that's a fact. go to any rural area and you can find GMO canola and alfalfa escaped from fields and freely interbreeding with wild plants.

>>4373813
>Nobody is introducing these fish into the wild.
Because nothing unintended EVER happens when you're dealing with big business and big operations.

>>4373843
>unintended
Hahahahahahahaha

>>4373837
>chemical products of big multinationals to grow a successful crop and massive overuse of those same chemicals.
What chemicals are you talking about? GMOs REDUCE the amount of chemicals needed to grow crops by introducing genes which can produce natural proteins reduce the need of pesticides and additional environmental factors needed to grow.

If you think I'm wrong, give me a specific chemical compound, I'm curious.

>yeah, that's worth permanently polluting the gene pool of food crops that took 1000s of years to develop.
"develop" there was no "developing", evolution threw stuff to the wall and saw what stuck. There are tons of proteins that only make sense for plants to have yet they don't, making them harder to grow or maintain, by adding these genes we're not deviating that much from the original at all.

>>4373837
>chemical
That's the point retard, eating chemical pesticides is bad, GMOs reduce pesticide usage.

>polluting gene pool
nigga, do you even genetics? 97% of all DNA is junk DNA that are remnants of other shits that's not at all being used. 20% of which is from viruses permanently giving us their DNA over hundreds of millenia.

>>4373837
Tell me exactly what's wrong with those genes sitting in wild plants? How is it any different than viruses planting their own DNA over the lifetime of the plant naturally?

>>4373854
>What chemicals are you talking about? GMOs REDUCE the amount of chemicals needed to grow crops by introducing genes which can produce natural proteins reduce the need of pesticides and additional environmental factors needed to grow.
>If you think I'm wrong, give me a specific chemical compound, I'm curious.
"Round-Up Ready" seeds are Monsanto's #1 seed product. So what does that mean? They are resistant to Monsanto's "Round Up" herbicide. Which means farmers will be using heavy applications of "Round Up" as part of every crop. Are you even trying?

>"develop" there was no "developing", evolution threw stuff to the wall and saw what stuck.
You are massively stunningly ignorant. I mean, seriously, go read some books, you're talking about things you know nothing of. Dismissing 1000s of years of human selection as "evolution" disqualifies you from commenting further. Have you seen what corn looked like as a result of natural evolution?
On the far left, corn as "evolution" produced.
On the right, corn after human selection.

>>4372896
>billions of people will die
>overpopulation
You know what, let's NOT increase the food supply.

>>4373887
>Round up resistant
Hey, even I have heard of those!

>>4373857
>nigga, do you even genetics? 97% of all DNA is junk DNA that are remnants of other shits that's not at all being used. 20% of which is from viruses permanently giving us their DNA over hundreds of millenia.
"nigga", you just proved to me that you get you science from tired low-brow sources. stay current, stupid. scientists have recently discovered that "junk" DNA isn't junk. human knowledge of DNA is a handful of decades old, the genome was just sequenced a few years back, but arrogant cunts think we know it all. get your ego in check.

>Tell me exactly what's wrong with those genes sitting in wild plants?
I dunno, how about because we have such a primitive understanding of genetics right now, we have no good idea of the potential consequences down the road. And because experimenting by unleashing strange genes into the environment is permanent and irreversible. This gamble is totally unnecessary and only serves the big agribusinesses' bottom line.
>How is it any different than viruses planting their own DNA over the lifetime of the plant naturally?
Because what's being done in the lab doesn't happen naturally. Explain the mechanism in nature by which a fish gene ends up in a tomato.
Waiting.

>>4369870
Meanwhile, on an organic farm...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pN485w6e3-w

>>4373887
>mfw I read the clearly monsanto-edited wikipedia article about roundup ready soybeans

>>4373903
Why the fuck did I click that?

>>4373903
something that's actually worse than mandatory circumcisions

>>4373905
How is that any different from reading a wikipedua article mostly written by antigmo activists?

You should know by now to not even load, much less read articles on wikipedia that are about controversial topics.

>>4373854
>There are tons of proteins that only make sense for plants to have yet they don't, making them harder to grow or maintain, by adding these genes we're not deviating that much from the original at all.
Wow, holy christ I had to come back and address this ignorance dressed up as knowing something.
Okay,
A: it "makes sense" for a plant to have a certain protein it evolved to have little or none of? says who? do you even understand evolution?
B. "making them harder to grow or maintain" - just no. GMO crops are the delicate primadonnas, demanding heavy chemical input and lots of water. traditional landrace crops are extremely hardy and well-adapted to the areas where they were bred.
C. "by adding these genes we're not deviating that much from the original at all" - yes, you are. the "golden rice" thing is all a bullshit smokescreen anyway. that's the sugar coating for the money-machine that is RoundUp Ready New Leaf bacterial-DNA seeds. how much golden rice is grown compared to RoundUp soybeans?

>>4373935
People are literally retarded and scientifically illiterate. They think ignorantly grasping on anything under the guise of "embracing technology" means they are progressive and intelligent.

>>4370006

Biology degrees are more worthless than English or communications degrees. You had to have been clueless if you thought some Bio degree based on a fake concept like evolution would mean anything.

On a future / political / capitalism note...
http://www.cnbc.com/id/100464458

'natural' seeds are becoming harder to find and companies are going out of their way to eliminate them.
This is just one of many stories out there.

>>4373935
>A: it "makes sense" for a plant to have a certain protein it evolved to have little or none of?
Yes, actually. Due to the randomness of evolution, it didn't keep it for several reasons, many of which we'll never know (too metabolically expensive for it to keep/nurture, sheer chance of genetic assortment into a functional gene, and just the ability of what was possible in its genome in raw nucleotide order).

This is gross oversight of evolution in that it "should" or "should not" have something. It's literally all random chance.

We can't regrow our arms like lizards that can because our evolutionary ancestors lost the ability to, simply because of the above random reasons (lost it, too expensive, etc.)

GMO is insertion of a functional gene product, making for natural selection. However, there is a problem in that we can't particularly control as well as we'd like WHERE in the genome the gene localizes, and how it affects later recombination events, necessitating further study of GMOs but not their discounting on an idea of what should/should-not be there (because evolution doesn't work that way).

Why waste millions of years for nature to achieve the same thing when we can make frankenfish. As long as it is at least just as nutritious, tasty and cheap, I will eat franken anything. If you don't like it, then choose not to buy it. Don't prevent other people from making different choices.

>>4369772
>Why not eat frankenfish.
>I already eat frankfurters.

>>4373903
Day ruined.

>>4374155
>This is gross oversight of evolution in that it "should" or "should not" have something. It's literally all random chance.
You literally don't understand evolution.
>GMO is insertion of a functional gene product, making for natural selection.
>natural selection
derp
hear that guys? genetic modification and recombination in a lab is "natural selection"