Posted on 12/07/2017 4:01:09 PM PST by Kaslin
Opponents of genetically modified (GM) crops raise a number of questions and objections to growing them and including them in the food supply. Although they cite scientific research to support their claims, a careful review of the literature suggests there is very little evidence to support any of the claims about harmful health effects of GM food. For this reason, combined with the many potential benefits, governments should not restrict the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs).
Opponents place a great deal of emphasis on the fact that many GM crops have been engineered to be resistant to glyphosate, the active chemical in Roundup herbicide. Glyphosate is used with genetically modified corn, soybeans, sugar cane, canola, and other crops grown in the US. Critics claim that glyphosate is an endocrine disrupter. It allegedly harms gut bacteria, and contributes to a variety of health problems including cancer, autism, allergies, obesity, and Alzheimer’s.
The claims about the negative health effects of glyphosate are not borne out by epidemiological studies of glyphosate and health outcomes or glyphosate and cancer. The most prominent arguments for the harmful health effects of glyphosate are not presented by people with expertise in relevant fields such biology, epidemiology, or chemistry. Consequently, the European Union just voted to renew the license for glyphosate use, siding with sound science against radical activists.
There is also little evidence of harm caused by consuming GM foods. Several scientific organizations including the American Medical Association and the World Food Organization have issued statements that GMOs are not likely to present risks for human health. Many scientists have rigorously tested assertions of anti-GMO advocacy groups, such as the Institute for Responsible Technology, about the health effects of GMOs, and have found little statistical evidence of toxicity caused by GMOs.
Studies that have found harmful effects have been found to be flawed or have results that have not been replicated by follow-up studies. For example, one study claiming that GM corn causes cancer involved a breed of rats that are naturally prone to tumors and was subsequently retracted by the journal.
GM foods have not been around long enough to determine whether they have harmful long-term health effects on humans. Thus, some argue that GMOs should be prohibited until we know more about their long-term effects. If governments used a precautionary principle to prohibit the use of every technology that might someday be found to have harmful effects, many improvements that have raised our standard of living, improved health, and extended lives would never have become commercially available.
After biotech crop varieties, many of which were resistant to glyphosate, became commercially available in 1996, numerous farmers around the globe adopted them. Using glyphosate to control weeds means farmers can save time and fuel with reduced soil erosion by not plowing to control weeds.
Although research studies have generally been unable to find evidence of harmful health effects from glyphosate, some evidence suggests it does cause some other harmful consequences, such as reducing earthworm populations. It may also harm other beneficial bacteria that live in the soil. The longer it and other chemical herbicides and pesticides are used, the more weeds evolve to adapt to it so that higher and higher doses are required.
Life inevitably involves tradeoffs. We accept some risks (e.g., of dying in an accident commuting to work) to reduce others (starving for lack of income). This principle applies to environmental risks just as much as to any others.
The environmental harms that can be attributed to glyphosate and GMOs should be compared to the benefits. Glyphosate is often used instead of more toxic herbicides. Likewise, some crops have been genetically modified to be resistant to insects, reducing the need for pesticides. Genetic modification combined with the use of glyphosate reduces production costs and increases yields. It enables farmers to conserve energy, soil and water, reducing their production costs and the amount of soil washing into rivers and streams.
Over time, there may be a need to find new and better ways to control weeds and insects, as existing weeds and insects develop resistance to herbicides and natural pesticides released by GM crops. Nevertheless, genetic modification, herbicides, and pesticides have made important contributions to the supply of abundant, low-cost food that has benefitted billions around the world. As I’ve noted before, genetic modification offers promise for the development of more nutritional varieties of crops that can be grown in parts of Africa, where malnutrition continues to contribute to death and the poor health of millions.
Herbicides and pesticides increase yields in a cost-effective way or farmers would not use them. Careful research, government regulation, and consumer choice have led to the demise of many of the most harmful pesticides and herbicides, with insect resistant crops and glyphosate replacing them. According to one estimate, the adoption of GM insect resistant and herbicide tolerant technology has reduced global pesticide spraying by 8.1%. A recent study estimated that banning glyphosate in the UK would decrease yields of wheat and oilseed rape by 12–14 percent due to more weeds.
Because of modern agricultural methods including pesticide and herbicide use, GMOs, chemical fertilizers, and factory farming, food has become much more abundant and affordable in many parts of the world today than it was even 30-40 years ago. The improvement in human health and wellbeing from a more abundant and nutritious food supply far exceeds any side effects that may have occurred from the use of pesticides or herbicides. Good research continues to discover new crop varieties and alternatives to the most harmful pesticides and herbicides and may also reveal better alternatives than some existing GMO crop varieties. In many cases, developing, planting, and cultivating genetically modified crops can improve nutrition and contribute to better stewardship of the land and soil.
“The GMO debate is as chock full of obfuscation, lies & hyperbole as “collusion” & “uranium one,” “
On both sides.
Actually, it could be argued that radical scientism, which is anti-Christian and anti-God, is not at all what God planned. Intentionally messing with His Creation in ways which could destroy species He created is satanic.
Thank you, Metmom.
Clearly, but as in the others - including global warming, vaccines, etc. - this FReeper’s looked at both and when it comes to GMO (generally-speaking), pro is on weak ground when its defense is the toxic alternatives which predated current methods...the prior methods lacking any regulatory oversight whatsoever (not that regulatory oversight in this day means much).
The quashed history of FD Roosevelt and his affliction with Polio as an adult is pertinent to understanding the history of agricultural chemicals and the harm to human health which has resulted. Exemptions for glyphosate “surfactants” (in glyphosate formulations) is just one example, as is the quashed history of Polio in general...outbreaks of which were already in decline by the time of arrival of the vaccine...coincidentally during the declining use of lead arsenate pesticides.
More FRepers should be offended at the assault perpetrated upon them by the government we charge with safeguarding our health...
The nuclear underground tests are most certainly responsible for such tenacious weeds
Maybe some real water would work? Or distilled?
I spent a great deal of time as a ute walking corn and bean fields pulling weeds. They called me "Weed Killer".
One drop of water and the weed(s) grow three inches no kidding. Something called “goat head” would take over the Sahara in two years!
Well there was one about 60 miles from here. The joke is the irradiated ones glow during the day time. ;-)
“All viruses and germs ebb and wane.”
True, but I have no idea to which you’re referencing re indoor plumbing. No correlation whatsoever. Reference?
The theory is that constant low level exposure to the polio microbe allowed a body to develop immunity. When indoor plumbing came on the scene then outbreaks of polio rose dramatically when the microbe was present in the environment due to a exposure of a large enough dose to cause an infection. It can be searched but the subject gets lost in the vaccine flame wars on the interwebs.
Thanks for the tomato variety tip!
Odd that I didn’t come across.that while researching Polio and “other” factors.
The FDR story is compelling and has a lot of.supporting data.
More research...
I've worked with rooting powder and successfully gotten rose cuttings, about 5 varieties, to root. It's tricky. I've not had any luck with clematis and haven't tried anything else.
Some on the garden forum have cloners (Daisy cloner is one) and root tomato cuttings in water. I never understood exactly how much rooting powder I'd use, can look it up or would come with the instructions on the cloner. It's done in constantly swirling water (ionized) which helps the processs.
It took awhile to find a medium that worked but there are a couple I can mix up.
But the poppy, I doubt I could have rooted or cloned that. As I recall I got a couple more buds and brought it inside under my grow lights I set up but knew by then that it would never self pollinate. I doubt I'll ever find another one as pretty as that one but you never know. Once you get them going, they pollinate with other poppies and self seed fairly readily.
redinIllinois: Thank you about my poppy.
exDemMom: Thank you for your interesting post. I've never grown portulacas but seen the colorful ones planted around and in catalogs, pretty pastel colors, singles and doubles, grow well on the grass between the sidewalk and street, haven't seen them for awhile. I don't know how you keep the weeds out as their neat foliage grows low to the ground but doesn't form a dense mat as I recall. A red would be rare I would think, and it's really disappointing when you miss a chance, not so much for the money but for the pleasure of it and making it available to others. Making money is ok, too, though.
I lived close to Santa Rosa for 2 years but didn't know about Luther Burbank's work there at the time. Only later when I got interested in plants did I read about it, shasta daisies, of course, one of my favorites, have one variety still coming back every year.
I was also enchanted with the woman in Canada who bred beautiful lilacs, one lovely pink in particular. Saw one growing in a yard; the foliage was different from other pinks I'd seen and bloomed at a different time. I would have loved to have found one like that to grow. The people got it from a catalog, sent away for it. I can't find the one named after the Canadian woman who bred it (and others). There are lots now, I see but none with her name which eludes me.
I also use a flame when there is not a burn ban. That works well too. There’s also the old fashioned method of getting down on your knees and pulling weeds by hand. That only works in a small garden like mine (2400 sq ft.)
Burning is good but we often have a ban. Yea, I wind up on my knees in the garden. Real PITA.
There was a great guest on C2C a few nights ago, talked about lawsuits against Monsanto saying Roundup causes cancer, gave an example. Guest was Jeffrey M. Smith, very convincing. Also the huge settlement by J&J for the 30 some odd who came down with ovarian cancer from talcum powder, guess it was asbestos in it but only tangentially related to GM crops.
"n the first half, Director of the Institute for Responsible Technology and a leading spokesperson on the health dangers of genetically modified foods, Jeffrey Smith talked about the current Monsanto trial, as well as the risks of GMO foods. Monsanto faces some 5,000 lawsuits that allege that their glyphosate-containing weed killer, Roundup, causes cancer, and a US District judge decided the cases can proceed to trial. The first case involves Dewayne Johnson, a 46-year-old former school groundskeeper, who got drenched by Roundup during an accident, and within nine months his body was covered with lesions that turned into cancer-- non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Monsanto never responded to Johnson's inquiry about whether his initial rashes were related to the chemical exposure, Smith recounted.
"Johnson is so ill that he may not even survive the trial. "If he had been told by anyone at Monsanto [about the dangers of glyphosate], he would have stopped using it," Smith added. Regarding the consumption of GMO foods, Smith believes many gastrointestinal problems are caused by them, as well as gluten sensitivity. While major food companies banned GMOs in Europe, they remain in many food products in the US, though companies like Unilever and Nestle are starting to remove them here by popular demand, he cited. Next week, Smith is kicking off an online conference about healing from GMOs and Roundup, which people can sign-up for at no cost."
https://www.coasttocoastam.com/show/2018/07/12
Very frightening actually, so much information.
As to growing, if you are farming in an area where all the crops are GM, there will be cross-pollinization if you are trying to grow the old way, even corn pollen travels in the wind even though corn is self-pollinating.
Recommended people get rid of Roundup in the enviro manner (centers for chemicals) and only buy (or grow) organic food.
I do have a chapter or 2 on GM, but it’s less about GM than it is about the fact that they are contaminated with residues. Most people are unaware that wheat is sprayed prodigiously with “roundup” to increase yields just before harvesting. There is no “washing” of wheat to get rid of the residues. Result: Tolerable limits set by our government. Glyphosate is very controversial. One precept is apropos: Follow the money.
Considering all the corporate sponsored research reinforcing Monsanto’s claims, their position is dubious, history being a guideline on chemicals promoted by the chemical industry.
But the real problem is not glyphosate itself, but the formulations used to apply it to crops.
https://www.gmoseralini.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Mesnageal.TOX_2012.pdf
As well, there’s the matter of cancer actually being caused by a breakdown in our immune system. Considering that our gut is the heart of our immune system and glyphosate is likely toxic to the microbiome, there’s merit to linking glyphosate, its formulations and cancer.
I wrote prior about choices being much more than just a ‘diet’; consideration of all the chemicals we’re exposed to in modern society, there’s a strong correlation between disease and said chemicals. There’s an interesting story about lead arsenate being used 100 years ago for pest control and triggering an immune response in humans which was later labeled Polio. Once lead arsenate was discontinued, the incidence Polio dropped like a rock.
Roosevelt was perhaps the most famous adult to have contracted Polio, ironically not long after visiting Campobello and swimming in a local watering hole contaminated with lead arsenate runoff and eating blueberries awash with the same compound.
http://harvoa.org/polio/fdr.htm
It is distinctly-ironic to have arguments with Conservatives about all the threats arrayed against our health when the same people who say there’s nothing wrong with our food critique every other government agency and ignore the one or two which might challenge their lifestyle habits.
Eh. It is what it is, but my new approach will elaborate (still secret).
It troubles me that most people I speak with either rationalize modern medicine as a solution or that disease is a forgone conclusion.
Think carefully about each of those statements. An metaphor is apropos: Waiting until the bomb goes off is too late.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.