The Big Picture: Feeding Edge

Recommended Videos

Talvrae

The Purple Fairy
Dec 8, 2009
896
0
0
Good video Bob i have been trying to explain that to some poeples around me for years
 

Baldr

The Noble
Jan 6, 2010
1,739
0
0
The whole panic started in early 1990s when it came down to wanting to take the amount of chemicals out out of foods. Organic farming had been going on since the 1970s, then came along a couple scientist that were looking at making vegetables resistant to glyphosate. This chemical was thought to be harmless to humans, but almost killed any plant, which could make it a good herbicide and less dangerous than most herbicides that were used in commercial farming.

This threatened the organic movement although not new, was picking up steam from a new wave of healthy movements taking over the country at the time. That is when the mud started flinging. The sad part is that organic food has the potential to be a lot worse than anything GM foods. It has lead to several documented breakouts of salmonella. The problem is that if the animal dropping contain the salmonella are used as fertilizer, if they are not pasteurized to a high enough temperature, the bacteria can transfer to the food and machinery used to process the food. Peer-reviewed study after study has shown there is no health benefit to organic food, just an increased price, and worst of all it requires more land to generate the same yield of crops for organic vs non-organic.

GM-Foods are no saints either. New studies find glyphosate is not as harmless as once thought, and weeds growing next to these crops are starting to become resistant, making the herbicide useless.

Oh the actual way they make GM foods is they take the genetic material from a plant they want, and smear in on tungsten and shoot it into a seed and grow the plant and test it, no chemicals added, no viruses, no other things that people made up to scare other people.
 

Addendum_Forthcoming

Queen of the Edit
Feb 4, 2009
3,646
0
0
Well actually bob ... GM Foods are somewhat scary due to researchers and produces of certain GMF Co's (Such as Santos) has tried to control their use by creating seeds that lose their fertility in the time it takes to develop a good harvest.

See in the olden times fafrmers could reduce their dependane on buying seed by refraining from the complete sale of their harvest and just use the harvested grain to create the seeds necessary for the next harvest.

Not so with GM Foods co's like Santos.

The scary thing is that cross pollination of some plants means that if your nextdoor neighbour has GM food seeds for something like, grain (corn, wheat, etc), and you don't? Well kiss the viability of your own seeds right there bucko.

So with GM foods alot of the time you aren't given a choice bob ... one farmer caves and decides to use "transgenic maize" and the entire community is completely fucked.

The company then controls your future harvests ... forever ... without hope for change. There's a reason why people are scared of GM food ... and not all of those reasons are idiotic.

Oh ... and other point .. .defibrillation doesn't work on a non-beating heart ... that why they use epinephrine before hand in order to chemically induce heart muscle movement.

'Defib' only works on a patient going into intensive, life threatening tachy/brady/cardia. But once the person is quite literally dead nothing can bring them back. This is why they don't keep shocking them over and over for 5 minutes after the patient doesn't respond to chemical stimulants.
 

Ashoten

New member
Aug 29, 2010
251
0
0
I see a lot of people saying that the guys in lab coats manipulating genes is not the same as selective breeding. Im gonna disagree with them. Just because the techniques are far more advanced then they were 1000 years ago doesnt mean its not the same thing.

Example: I think guns are an offense to nature cause they aren't made of natural materials like bows were. Bows are made of wood, stone, and animal sinew. Those are all naturally occurring ingredients and the bows are forged by hand. Guns are made of unnaturally obtained metals that are dredged up from the ground and manipulated in a furnace.

See how ludicrous that example was? A gun is essentially a better much more sophisticated and powerful bow. Now if someone was purposefully engineering animals and vegetables to cause harm to the public then that would be analogous to gun makers selling firearms to criminals who plan to use them for evil. But the techniques of manufacturing a produce is morally separate from how they are used.
 

thethingthatlurks

New member
Feb 16, 2010
2,101
0
0
Excellent video mate, truly excellent! Few things are more retarded than fear of GMOs, and most of them consist of dietary choices like raw-food vegan. But one thing I would like to add: there are mad scientists, and I am one of them!
MWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Igor, more lightning! And bring me another corpse. And some tea.
 

Negatempest

New member
May 10, 2008
1,003
0
0
Geek_DR said:
Hello escapist and Movie Bob,

Long time watcher/reader, first time commenter.

While I do find the fear tactics about GMOs annoying and eat them all the time without concern for myself, I think you addressed the argument very poorly. There are actual concerns about GMOs and you didn't address any of them, sticking to the "science = good" argument.

For example, health concerns aside, GMOs do damage the diversity of the ecosystem and the plant species in particular. This means that all of the crops can be wiped out by a single disease. (see Irish potato famine.) Secondly as a crop, GMOs mean that a corporation can claim ownership of a species of food (like trademarking carrots).
Wait, this is the potato famine of 1840's right? Where the irish grew dependent on a specific crop and once it was nearly wiped out alot of people starved? Doesn't that have less to do with GMO and more to do with NOT depending on one specific crop and having more diversity?

As for the trade marketing of foods....we have trade marks on nearly every noun and that has more to do with economics that GMO. They are similar but completely different. Heck we as people pay for everything that would keep us alive except air.
 

Addendum_Forthcoming

Queen of the Edit
Feb 4, 2009
3,646
0
0
Negatempest said:
Geek_DR said:
Hello escapist and Movie Bob,

Long time watcher/reader, first time commenter.

While I do find the fear tactics about GMOs annoying and eat them all the time without concern for myself, I think you addressed the argument very poorly. There are actual concerns about GMOs and you didn't address any of them, sticking to the "science = good" argument.

For example, health concerns aside, GMOs do damage the diversity of the ecosystem and the plant species in particular. This means that all of the crops can be wiped out by a single disease. (see Irish potato famine.) Secondly as a crop, GMOs mean that a corporation can claim ownership of a species of food (like trademarking carrots).

Wait, this is the potato famine of 1840's right? Where the irish grew dependent on a specific crop and once it was nearly wiped out alot of people starved? Doesn't that have less to do with GMO and more to do with NOT depending on one specific crop and having more diversity?

As for the trade marketing of foods....we have trade marks on nearly every noun and that has more to do with economics that GMO. They are similar but completely different. Heck we as people pay for everything that would keep us alive except air.
How about the fact that GMF Co's are now making it impossible for farmer's gm crops to be reused in their next hjarvest? Traditionally farmers wouldn't need to buy seeds for their harvests ... with GM foods they have to keep buying from Santos each and every year ... and due to patents there is no cheap alternative.

Not only this but if your farmer uses gm foods and you don't? Well the cross pollination process will take care of that! So instead of one farmer with gm crops in an entire community, within one harvest all farmers downwind of the bastard will have to start using them too, or sell up their land.

Tell me again how this is a good thing?

Bob does a pisspoor way of presenting the problem by not even addressing the problem ... As well as not understanding the basics of medicine, yet conveniently talks about defibrillation despite the fact that no amount of joules from a defib is going to help a non-beating heart beat once more ....

But w/e ... people can make mistakes ... but GM foods are noot like animal husbandry ... afterall animal husbandry was about fertility ultimately, GMF co's are about infertility ... making it necessary to buy only the company's seeds.

This will drive up prices, not reduce them ... and frankly nothing good can come from it.
 

jamhammer

New member
May 13, 2009
11
0
0
you sold have mentioned corn. corn use to be small, with kernals smaler then peas, then they keepedselectively breeding them to the size we have today.
 

darthzew

New member
Jun 19, 2008
1,808
0
0
As the guy with the House avatar, I have to make the following comment:

Defibrillators can't actually bring someone back from the dead. In fact, once a patient has flat-lined (or no heart rhythm at all), there's nothing left to do. And once a patient is pronounced dead, a defibrillator can't do anything. What a defibrillator CAN do, however, is give the heart a boost. Say, if the heart has slowed and is on the brink of death, a defibrillator can give the heart the necessary jump to get back to normal.

You see defibrillators are these miracle Lazarus devices on TV and movies, but they really quite that potent.
 

thereverend7

New member
Aug 13, 2010
224
0
0
Funny thing is, I recently grew a patch of "Kaleidoscope Carrots" (yes thats the actual name) in my vegetable garden. The colors include white, orange, purple, and yellow. They all taste the same to me though.
 

dragonburner

New member
Feb 21, 2009
475
0
0
GMO's aren't just produced by selective breeding or switching traits on and off. Some GMO's have traits added to them like tomatoes with antifreeze. WTF is that? Is that good for you? I'm not sure, but I don't think I want to risk it at all. Selective breeding isn't exactly the reason I am worried about GMO's. I am worried about shit being added to my food.
 

Necromancer1991

New member
Apr 9, 2010
805
0
0
Hey modified food is all well and good, but I have my doubts about modified beef (for all I know I'm eating mutated cow)


The thing is I grew up on a farm eating food that I know came out of the ground, the main reason people get sketchy about this is the fact that they don't really know what "Genetically Engineering" food entails. That being said I always test food with my hamster (and yes that my poor justification for the following video)

 

Crazy_Dude

New member
Nov 3, 2010
1,002
0
0
Thank you moviebob this will help a lot in arguments with my father or mother. Who thinks their "biological" food is way better then those foods that are tempered with in the lab. While in reality its just speeding up the process. Instead of taken tens of years and hundreds of generations they just activate/deactive a few genes and grow new crops. This will take (A wild guess) a week to do.

Its just saving time and in result our foods are a lot healther for you. The media as always stirs things up about pointless discussions. Its better for you its not bad and you have already been eating it all your life.
 

SunyiNyufi

New member
Sep 4, 2010
9
0
0
It's in middle of the night here...and I don't have any carrot at home...damn you Bob, give me your carrot!! >_<
 

Negatempest

New member
May 10, 2008
1,003
0
0
PaulH said:
Negatempest said:
Geek_DR said:
Hello escapist and Movie Bob,

Long time watcher/reader, first time commenter.

While I do find the fear tactics about GMOs annoying and eat them all the time without concern for myself, I think you addressed the argument very poorly. There are actual concerns about GMOs and you didn't address any of them, sticking to the "science = good" argument.

For example, health concerns aside, GMOs do damage the diversity of the ecosystem and the plant species in particular. This means that all of the crops can be wiped out by a single disease. (see Irish potato famine.) Secondly as a crop, GMOs mean that a corporation can claim ownership of a species of food (like trademarking carrots).

Wait, this is the potato famine of 1840's right? Where the irish grew dependent on a specific crop and once it was nearly wiped out alot of people starved? Doesn't that have less to do with GMO and more to do with NOT depending on one specific crop and having more diversity?

As for the trade marketing of foods....we have trade marks on nearly every noun and that has more to do with economics that GMO. They are similar but completely different. Heck we as people pay for everything that would keep us alive except air.
How about the fact that GMF Co's are now making it impossible for farmer's gm crops to be reused in their next hjarvest? Traditionally farmers wouldn't need to buy seeds for their harvests ... with GM foods they have to keep buying from Santos each and every year ... and due to patents there is no cheap alternative.

Not only this but if your farmer uses gm foods and you don't? Well the cross pollination process will take care of that! So instead of one farmer with gm crops in an entire community, within one harvest all farmers downwind of the bastard will have to start using them too, or sell up their land.

Tell me again how this is a good thing?

Bob does a pisspoor way of presenting the problem by not even addressing the problem ... As well as not understanding the basics of medicine, yet conveniently talks about defibrillation despite the fact that no amount of joules from a defib is going to help a non-beating heart beat once more ....

But w/e ... people can make mistakes ... but GM foods are noot like animal husbandry ... afterall animal husbandry was about fertility ultimately, GMF co's are about infertility ... making it necessary to buy only the company's seeds.

This will drive up prices, not reduce them ... and frankly nothing good can come from it.
Good thing? Far from it. Never is this a good thing, but at the same time this isn't new. Chances are most of the stuff we have now is because of old promises, patents, paperwork or whatever you want to call it, of the the past. But again I notice what angers you and quite a few of us as well isn't the Genetics side of the issue but the economics of it. In short, be mad at the law/government not the scientists.

Should I blame the woman who now owns the sun or the ****ing government that allowed her to own it?
 

V Gray

New member
Feb 13, 2010
24
0
0
all though I'm not one of those people who are bitching about this. my philosophy on food is, the less humans had to do with it the better. Were not masters of our domain as we like to believe, we're way to new at genetic engineering, and companies always screw with quality if it means it'll save them a few bucks. In short Humans are Fuck Ups.
 

SinisterGehe

New member
May 19, 2009
1,456
0
0
John the Gamer said:
Yay! We (dutch) made carrots! Also: BEWARE! Be nice to us or we'll make all foods orange!
I think the carrots are not orange enough, you did lazy job. Now do it all again!

Back to topic...

This sums up what I been telling people for ages.
Now I cna just refer them to this video, tell them to close that greenpeace webpage and shut up until they have something proper to say.

"I is bad because of the capitalism, corruption in governm..." You stop it right there, show me a picture of some government official genetically manipulating carrots to cause addiction to kids so they would eat more vegetables or shut up...