Interesting

They do bring up some good points about overall soil polution; which is also somthing that needs to be reduced
The point on making ediable vaccinations is quite scary. That is somthing that MUST be tested.

The point about malnutrition in 3rd world countries has to do with the soil. If the minerals and vitamins are not in the soil to be absorbed, then the plant simply cannot have it. I dont think there could be any disagreement on that. Fertilizers and pesticides will not help the soil. Also, fortified foods are not the same as organic foods in terms of nutrtion content. It may be the same on paper, but it comes in a much different package. For example, Vitamin C produced in a lab is much different than the Vitamin C we ingest from food sources, since its bound to other things. Same thing with antioxidents; We simply cannot take Glutathione and expect our body to use it. It does not work that way in the body

A lot of plants also go through a frost cycle which insures they're survival. It is good for apple trees to go through this, otherwise they will never stop producing fruit. Not nessessarily a bad thing, but the soil needs time to replenish itself. the frost season is when it does that.

They do show potential benefits; but these are still untested. They also outline a lot of points against GM food.

Im not very convinced to these benefits though. The negatives still overpower these untested benefits

The rat study i agree is flawed in this example. However many many other rat studies have conducted using GM foods already on the market.

the thing is so many of the test that showed real results have been shown to be total bullcrap. i have a feeling you are forgetting details or weren't given details on the experiment you are referring to cause i can't seem to find it anywhere to see the details.

Read the book Seeds of Deception; it compiles a lot of the studies right in there
Plus, wheather or not all these tests are bullcrap which i dont believe at all, but lets be hypothetical; the fact still stands that there have not been human feeding trials, and that is a big problem

without human trials there is no way to know but i do know that you put your stock into some incredibly biased sources. a lot of it involves government conspiracies and stuff which i don't even begin to take seriously.

honestly look at the youtube video they proudly show on the front page of this site.

http://www.seedsofdeception.com/Public/Home/index.cfm

its pure exploitation of data and propaganda.

It would be foolish to think that companies like Monsanto are 100% transparent is what they're doing. They were the ones who came out with Agent Orange back in Vietnam; even while their own documentation shows they knew what it did beforehand. Same with DDT, which is now banned

However, im not so much into the conspiracy stuff, though i do think something is going on and its not right.
I put my stock into sources that cite a huge body of research. In the back of the book they cite hundreds of sources with in text citations as they appear in the book.

Again, im not rly into the conspiracy theories, just because some are in this movement, doesnt mean i am. The research presented in the book is still valid. A lot of which i have confirmed from other sources seperate from affilation to Jeffery Smith

And also, keep in mind that the people for GM are also using propaganda to try to dominate the market.

the thing is the organic promoters are way more biased and propaganda based. they have lots of "could" "might" "possibly" stuff. so much has been falsified in experiments for that side of it to that its just throws doubt at the entire movement. valid points are in there but to want to completely remove GM foods from the market forever is ludicrous. i'm fine with people saying GM food might be bad for us but to claim it as a fact and say it needs to be removed is something i will not agree with.

A good place to start would to actually do human feeding trials, which is what ive been saying the entire time.
Until then they shouldnt be in the market, or they should be very limited. We wouldnt dare release a drug without testing, idk why it should be any different for food. After all they are the Food and Drug Administration

This post was edited by Toothfariy on Dec 20 2010 09:16pm

the thing is that it should of happened before they were ever released. now 15 years down the line and no real issues have ever been blamed on GM foods. was it a bad idea? definitely, but it turned out fine and as far the future is concerned you can't say we are going to get health problems from GM foods because you have no idea what GM foods are going to be like in the future.

a large scale full length study would be great but with all of the bad things we do to ourselves these days i don't see it ever being conclusive unless someone turns into a tomato or something lol.

At least we agree on somthing

And you're right, i dont know for sure, since trials havent been done; But i think its irresponsible to promote untested food technology. The information that we have now is pointing at no.
If the same things happen to humans that happened to many of the rats, we are going to be quite a mess. I do hope for the sake of our race that does not happen.

This post was edited by Toothfariy on Dec 20 2010 09:24pm

well given that you're trial gives us 2 more generations before the effects start i think its safe to say GM foods will be exponentially better engineered and put aside all doubts about them being bad.

we advance things pretty quickly these days so we have to wait and see what scientist come up with. isolated incidents are bound to happen since everything has problems are times.