From: His Highness the TibetanMonkey, ComandanteBanana and Chief of Quixotic Enterprises on 20 May 2010 17:40
On May 20, 11:59 am, "Bob F" <bobnos...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Don Klipstein wrote:
> > In <17e357b9-7bf8-43c1-b880-916fcc3d4...(a)u7g2000vbq.googlegroups.com>,
> > His Highness the TibetanMonkey, ComandanteBanana wrote:
> > (In large part bashing genetically modified food)
> > For the past 450-plus million years, Nature has been genetically
> > modifying the genes of things that animals eat, fairly randomly.
> > I seem to think that genetic modifications done by scientists who
> > know somewhat what they're doing would have a lower rate of making
> > new toxic or dangerous strains of food plants than genetic
> > modifications done randomly by cosmic rays, carbon-14, potassium-40,
> > retroviruses, and random failures of chromosomes to replicate
> > perfectly. Along with mating between different species not being
> > completely free of producing fertile offspring (an example is the
> > savana cat, a hybrid between species of 2 different genera. And
> > plants can't be convicted of bestiality for their pollen landing on
> > the pistils of flowers of plants of other species.)
> > And I certainly think that few (probably none) of the food species
> > and strains we ate 50 or 5,000 years ago are free of unmodified genes.
> As long as the food is labeled as GM, and properly tested for health risks and
> nutrition, OK.
> We have hundreds of years of knowledge about the safety of non-GM varieties. Who
> knows what the long term effect of BT corn or Roundup treated GM crops will be?
> Shouldn't we at least have the option to not buy them if we choose?
Exactly. But they consider the sheep too stupid to know the
difference, and that some may actually be scared by it.
An internal memo of Monsanto says, "We can't afford to lose one
The situation with the soybean seems particularly scary where they are
bombarded with more pesticides as the new strains have been developed
to resist pesticides. Milk is loaded too.