What is your opinion on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs)? Here is a great TED Talk on the benefits of GMOs.

2015-05-04T21:20:17-04:00

A great TED Talk on the benefits of Genetically Modified Organisms and how it can help millions around the world to include those here in the United States. She uses a great example of how a GMO helped farmers here on Oahu for those of you in Hawaii.

What side of the GMO debate are you on?

I am a full supporter of GMOs and also support the labeling of products. We all want to know exactly what we are consuming GMO or not. IMHO, we need to stop being so focused on those who can afford to choose what kind of food they eat and focus on those who can't afford to maintain their daily nutritional needs. People are so worried about the unproven "harmful effects" of GMOs. If you truly feel this way just don't eat them. GMOs can drastically help the impoverished or those who are malnourished in many ways. It will also help the farmers in many way as well.

Pamela Ronald: The case for engineering our food

Pamela Ronald studies the genes that make plants more resistant to disease and stress. In an eye-opening talk, she describes her decade-long quest to help cr...

Response by CPT Zachary Brooks made May 4 at 2015 9:23 PM

2015-05-04T21:23:46-04:00

Shouldn't matter what side you are on. If we had more transparency with the labeling on how our food is made then people could make their own choices.

Response by SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S. made May 4 at 2015 9:25 PM

2015-05-04T21:25:53-04:00

GMO = Good
Monoculture = Bad

Response by Col Private RallyPoint Member made May 4 at 2015 10:24 PM

2015-05-04T22:24:29-04:00

So my first question is what's her angle. Does she so a vested interest, biased?

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made May 4 at 2015 11:30 PM

2015-05-04T23:30:30-04:00

Tastes better, serves a purpose, supported by research...all systems go. Labels because I like to know what I am eating. Everything causes cancer these days, everything will kill you in excess, everyone will die eventually.

Response by CAPT Kevin B. made May 5 at 2015 12:28 PM

2015-05-05T12:28:06-04:00

There's a bigger question here. How are you going to feed everybody a century from now? The food production capacity is reaching it's limits with current technology, irrigation, fertilization, etc. which also has negative environmental implications. Also GMO has been going on for centuries. It's called splicing or grafting. Now the ability exists to tinker on a molecular level. Like anything else, it can be good or bad. The general consensus is genetic diversity is "good" and there is a legitimate fear that an uber-corn would get used 98% of the time while the diversity is set aside to gradually perish. I'd propose any GMO effort have a mirroring species diversity protection aspect to it.

There's a similar churn going on with food preservation; irradiation. Lots of misperceptions. However a lot of food is wasted simply because we don't do it. Should we? If you really know the physics of the process and there is nothing "radiation" eaten, then most would likely be OK with it.

Response by SGT Mary G. made Jun 7 at 2019 6:51 PM

2019-06-07T18:51:56-04:00

We definitely need labeling! However, I am unconvinced about GMO and GE being past the trial and error stage. And that means the human population is the target of the trial and error stage. Having said that, I suppose the use of all new technology includes many unforeseen surprises once implemented.
I would include EMF with GMO and GE for the same reasons - especially 5G, because it is much stronger but is effective at shorter distances, which means a lot more 5G towers . . . because the "FCC admits no 5G safety studies have been conducted or funded by the agency or telecom industry, and that none are planned." There have been independent studies and they raise huge questions about safety.