GMO Foods Bad for US?

hooknline

Production costs dramatically were reduced when it came out. And for the first time in a long time, farmers were able to make a living wage because of the savings. Now, costs have shot back up because of fuel and fertilizer costs. Feed corn is way up now because of ethanol. And farmers aren't making the same percentage of profit. If it weren't for round up ready crops, I'm flat out telling you most could not afford meat or veggies. Because the farmers has to make a decent wage or what's the point.

kodiakzach

hooknline wrote: »

Production costs dramatically were reduced when it came out. And for the first time in a long time, farmers were able to make a living wage because of the savings.

Yet oddly, yields went down:

http://www.ag.iastate.edu/farms/2000reports/se/RoundupReadyvs.Conventio.pdf

Wasn't the whole stated purpose of GM seeds to produce more yield to feed an ever growing planet? Because the GMO soy crops yield less than their non GMO counterparts. Where was the savings from Corey?

hooknline

The savings came from not having to use as much other herbicides and no residual losses to the crop plants themselves. Less tips trough the field to spray. Because roundup is extremely effective. Less fuel used. Less maintainance on the equipment. Less herbicides needed. Less fert needed.
Yield was down because of drought. Drought that still hasn't let up in some states.
Can you imagine the yield losses if it hadnt been for the release of rr crops

kodiakzach

hooknline wrote: »

The savings came from not having to use as much other herbicides and no residual losses to the crop plants themselves.
Yield was down because of drought. Drought that still hasn't let up in some states.
Can you imagine the yield losses if it hadnt been for the release of rr crops

Clearly you didn't read the link. They planted GM and non-GM crops. The non-GM crops yielded more. Drought dont have **** all to do with that.

jcbcpa

kodiakzach wrote: »

Was I professing the be the "science" behind the **** they do to our food? Nope, but we can all break out the Toogle. Yes, after a quick search, I agree with what you are saying. Now enjoy the toogled efforts I put forth with this study I turned up. In before Tater finds someone Mansanto has bribed to refute it:

Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize
Gilles-Eric Séralini a,⇑, Emilie Clair a, Robin Mesnage a, Steeve Gress a, Nicolas Defarge a, Manuela Malatesta b, Didier Hennequin c, Joël Spiroux de Vendômois a
a University of Caen, Institute of Biology, CRIIGEN and Risk Pole, MRSH-CNRS, EA 2608, Esplanade de la Paix, Caen Cedex 14032, France b University of Verona, Department of Neurological, Neuropsychological, Morphological and Motor Sciences, Verona 37134, Italy
c University of Caen, UR ABTE, EA 4651, Bd Maréchal Juin, Caen Cedex 14032, France

http://ac.els-cdn.com/S0278691512005637/1-s2.0-S0278691512005637-main.pdf?_tid=f2dbd16c-e1b4-11e2-a931-00000aab0f6b&acdnat=1372617986_d19818bc3d87ecb005fe1dc8cef9c03d

PS - this study covers BT and Roundup ready corn

Did any of you read the Letters to the Editor?

Hickory Dog

If they came out with corn tomorrow that was perennial and needed no fertilization the farmers would kill it for a few years and then the market would level out and they would just be scraping by again. The issue there is big agribusiness and the market not the decreased cost of weed management due to RR crops.

My uncle makes a pretty good living selling non GMO beans overseas and non GMO corn to distilleries using those outdated production methods. Those crops are in no way healthier than GMO crops - just different risks.

I am in no way against all GMOs - I just don't get the cheerleading on either side. There is no free lunch in an production system - they all have their dangers and faults. Organic poses few health risks but is so labor intensive that coupled with lower productivity just won't feed everyone. Cornfed beef and milk pose health threats, confinement pork is just effed up, Round up ready is already creating super weeds that are glyphosate resistant.

There is no wonder cure/drug/GMO/pesticide/food/whatever - they all pose risks and should be approached with caution. Especially GMOs as they pose the risk of self replication unlike our experiments with better living through chemistry.

hooknline

kodiakzach wrote: »

Clearly you didn't read the link. They planted GM and non-GM crops. The non-GM crops yielded more. Drought dont have **** all to do with that.

I didn't have to. Yield is only one small part of the farm for profit basis. I can grow an 800 lb calf if I buy high dollar feed. I can also raise a 450 lb calf on grass only. Guess which one has more profit.

rrbgtt

Calusa wrote: »

Guys like Rusty, TTT, and hooknline have the ability to sidestep this BS, as they can plant their own crops using untainted seed, and raise grass-fed cattle and free range poultry for their personal consumption.

Yet, I still prefer to buy corn fed beef and arsenic chickens.

got ants?

jcbcpa wrote: »

Did any of you read the Letters to the Editor?

I did... :Spittingcoffee

I think its funny the dynamics of these discussions in that those who are against it 100%, think us that argue against them think that means we are 100% for it.

Of course nobody in thier right mind is promoting GMO corn seed which is sold for ethanol production only, to be used for human/animal consumption. Advances in technologies of all sorts of have thier pros and cons. They all have to be weighed but the hysterical antics of some these anti GMO's is sometimes comical.

Calusa

hooknline wrote: »

I can grow an 800 lb calf if I buy high dollar feed. I can also raise a 450 lb calf on grass only. Guess which one has more profit.

Out of curiosity, which one? I'd venture the grass-fed ......?

hooknline

With grain over 400/ton down here... You bet it's the grass fed.
450 lbs at 1.40/lb at the auction. Or 800 lbs at 1.10/lb and 3-400 in grain( that's what it would take to push a wean calf to 800 lbs with good genetics)
If you do the math there's an xtra 50 on the 800 lb er. But you also have to figure in fuel to get the grain, labor to feed it, Etc.
basically not worth it down here. Further north it would be because grain is cheaper

Calusa

Hook - you ever eat any of those grass cows? How's the flavor and quality?

hooknline

All beef is grass fed. If you mean grass finished, I have. Flavor was great. Takes too long to grass finish them for my liking. 2 years plus

GT Fish

Tater love GMO's and hungryman din din's

Hickory Dog

Hickory Dog wrote: »

Oh really. Please explain how genes that aren't naturally in a species occur during hybridization - since we are discussing food feel free to use corn as an example.

What happened Tater? You posted a bunch since I asked this but seem to have forgotten all about this thread.

troutman561

I like the taste of grass fed beef over corn fed. But our country is so accustomed to corn fed most would find it "less tasty".

fins4me

Calusa

greggl

CaptTater wrote: »

I was eating grapes and bananas this am both of which are "seedless" and unable to reproduce... Do you guys not eat them or find seeded grapes and non cloned bananas.? Where do you find this organic natural food? Where do you get natural seed? :yawn

****!!!

Do even REMOTELY think that 'seedless' variants share anything in common as far as risk, compared to Genetic Modifications?