Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Major Nikon

(36,814 posts)
108. I'm surprised I actually have to explain it to you
Sun Mar 29, 2015, 08:58 AM
Mar 2015

The "factor" you are in part basing your decision on is pretty much garbage. Even if you accept it at face value it only applies to people who apply glyphosate, not people who eat food from fields treated with it. So if you don't want to eat GM for whatever reason, more power to you, but basing that on what the IARC reported is a bit ridiculous. Not that any other reason is that much better.

Just sayin'

Now it's just a matter of convincing the people We pay to orpupilofnature57 Mar 2015 #1
Monsanto pays those same people MORE. We can't compete with the money in politics. Which is why sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #96
Checks & Balances police human nature, or Greed . orpupilofnature57 Mar 2015 #125
Pesticide and herbicide resistance isn't the only form of GMO evirus Mar 2015 #2
That's not the only problem with GMOs Art_from_Ark Mar 2015 #4
You can't prove a product is safe. You can only prove a product is harmful. jeff47 Mar 2015 #89
Lack of research funding is due to funding agencies not finding a good reason to spend their money. Buzz Clik Mar 2015 #115
Everytime I mention "golden" rice to my mother Generic Other Mar 2015 #140
Nonsense round up ready crops are huge in America, and we were lied into accepting them. bettyellen Mar 2015 #5
That's a bullshit comment and nearly irrelevant to the conversation. Buzz Clik Mar 2015 #116
"We" are consumers, who had no choice but to have them snuck in our foods. bettyellen Mar 2015 #134
What lies were you told that led you to accept GMOs? Buzz Clik Mar 2015 #138
We consumers had them snuck into all our corn and soy without being told bettyellen Mar 2015 #147
+ 1000 !!! orpupilofnature57 Mar 2015 #148
How about people such as yourself let the rest of us... 99Forever Mar 2015 #20
"Maybe you can wash it down with nice tall glass of that "harmless" Roundup while you are at it." NuclearDem Mar 2015 #28
That's what your shills are selling. 99Forever Mar 2015 #29
Wake up. HuckleB Mar 2015 #38
while your what is at it? there is a difference between your and you're (you are). niyad Mar 2015 #41
Yup. There is. HuckleB Mar 2015 #42
couldn't even get to the content with that glaring error. niyad Mar 2015 #45
Derp. HuckleB Mar 2015 #47
LOL! Buzz Clik Mar 2015 #117
Roundup does not claim to be harmless Motown_Johnny Mar 2015 #131
And I've never claimed Roundup was harmless. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #132
There's one problem with labeling... evirus Mar 2015 #33
And include mutation bred products, too! HuckleB Mar 2015 #39
Nonsense. 99Forever Mar 2015 #44
So useful information is not your goal. HuckleB Mar 2015 #46
You want to label them all with the same label. jeff47 Mar 2015 #87
Anyone who knows about golden rice knows that the research is being done by a non-profit eridani Mar 2015 #77
They will not sell "yellow" rice to Asians Generic Other Mar 2015 #141
Can't find any info about whether is is being widely used or not. A more important concern IMO-- eridani Mar 2015 #144
Since when do we sell food as if it were a drug anyway? Generic Other Mar 2015 #146
Just tell us what is a GMO vegetable and what is not. We can do the rest. We are adults and it is sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #99
You can't even give a science-based reason for labeling GMOs. HuckleB Mar 2015 #100
You can't explain why the American people should be denied the right that all of Europe's citizens sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #103
Ah, the US should go with every political whim of Europe. HuckleB Mar 2015 #118
Yes!!! Then everyone could have health care! roody Mar 2015 #128
That would be an improvement, but that's one matter among many. HuckleB Mar 2015 #135
Monsanto's shills will join this thread in 3... 2.... 1.... Scuba Mar 2015 #3
Cute, Steve. Anyone who disagrees is a "Monsanto shill"? Excuse me, but... Buzz Clik Mar 2015 #10
this^^^ mopinko Mar 2015 #23
Hey Buzz.......... diverdownjt Mar 2015 #30
LOL! Think about what you just said: Buzz Clik Mar 2015 #55
Monsanto will sue you if you try that... druidity33 Mar 2015 #107
Monsanto suing a researchers for unauthorized research: You can prove that, right? Buzz Clik Mar 2015 #114
you could try here... druidity33 Mar 2015 #119
Your link seems to dispel your claim. Buzz Clik Mar 2015 #120
so glyphosate has nothing to do with GMOs? druidity33 Mar 2015 #127
So you can't support your claims. HuckleB Mar 2015 #137
You don't have to buy the seeds from Monsanto. jeff47 Mar 2015 #86
+1 FLPanhandle Mar 2015 #31
How about the way they operate in foriegn countries.... diverdownjt Mar 2015 #34
So in other words, you've got no evidence to show. FLPanhandle Mar 2015 #37
Predatory business practices are hardly an indication of the things you claim. n/t Buzz Clik Mar 2015 #56
see post 30 ND-Dem Mar 2015 #52
Post 30 is bullshit FLPanhandle Mar 2015 #60
where *did* they get their seeds, since you have to sign a contract to get proprietary seeds? ND-Dem Mar 2015 #63
So, you are now claiming a world wide conspiracy... FLPanhandle Mar 2015 #65
The editors of Scientific American. Clearly they know nothing, are conspiracy-mongers, and ND-Dem Mar 2015 #66
You are aware that this is from 5 years ago and Monsanto changed their blanket agreement since? FLPanhandle Mar 2015 #68
so the hell what? cosmetic change only. it's *you* who's not improving your reputation, ND-Dem Mar 2015 #71
How has my story changed? FLPanhandle Mar 2015 #72
"68. You are aware that...is from 5 years ago and Monsanto changed their blanket agreement since?" ND-Dem Mar 2015 #105
Hundreds of studies have been done and are being done. FLPanhandle Mar 2015 #126
You pretty much nailed it. Enthusiast Mar 2015 #16
recurring theme with 'some.' Disagree in a thread and you're a shill and 'swarming.' wyldwolf Mar 2015 #26
An exercise in cherry-picking, brought to you by the organic industry's most rabid lobbying group. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #6
+1 Buzz Clik Mar 2015 #9
++++++ mopinko Mar 2015 #24
exactly. wyldwolf Mar 2015 #27
Indeed. It's very sad to see so many at DU conned by such bad propaganda. HuckleB Mar 2015 #35
Your GMO funders will console you. roody Mar 2015 #129
Speaking of bad propaganda: We get the shill gambit! HuckleB Mar 2015 #136
hey uncleardem.....(deliberate misspell)... diverdownjt Mar 2015 #40
If I was defending Monsanto, that question would be relevant. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #58
K&R DeSwiss Mar 2015 #7
epic KG Mar 2015 #8
This should have its own thread. obxhead Mar 2015 #21
Ut oh... 99Forever Mar 2015 #22
Can we have a comment on ^this^ post from the eternal defenders of corporate sanctity Zorra Mar 2015 #54
Oh yeah...tell it Oilwellian Mar 2015 #97
K & R GoneFishin Mar 2015 #11
I believe this article mischaracterizes the WHO study. blackspade Mar 2015 #12
Telephone. Igel Mar 2015 #19
Not sure what all this has to do with my comment. blackspade Mar 2015 #50
It wasn't a "new" study Major Nikon Mar 2015 #61
Your point is what? blackspade Mar 2015 #106
I'm surprised I actually have to explain it to you Major Nikon Mar 2015 #108
That's like your opinion, man blackspade Mar 2015 #113
None of these appear to be effects of GMOs FarrenH Mar 2015 #149
Eyeroll.... blackspade Mar 2015 #150
This message was self-deleted by its author FarrenH Mar 2015 #151
True, FarrenH Mar 2015 #152
This article reveals more about the patent illogic and unscientific reasoning of many GMO opponents FarrenH Mar 2015 #13
Anyone with a basic understanding of science will agree with you. FLPanhandle Mar 2015 #15
Nonetheless, as a software engineer working on home security systems FarrenH Mar 2015 #17
1 and 2 are the same thing. obxhead Mar 2015 #25
I know that FarrenH Mar 2015 #79
Your number 2 seems a bit disingenuous. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #43
It's used extensively in urban environments as a weed killer FarrenH Mar 2015 #81
It is all in the application method. obxhead Mar 2015 #82
... ND-Dem Mar 2015 #57
. FarrenH Mar 2015 #83
GMO ingredients are so intertwined into our food supply, it is difficult to find foods without them. Dont call me Shirley Mar 2015 #14
They've only been out there for 30 years Major Nikon Mar 2015 #64
Walking into this one. DisgustipatedinCA Mar 2015 #70
... Major Nikon Mar 2015 #74
E coli is not spinach. thanks DisgustipatedinCA Mar 2015 #90
Brilliant! Major Nikon Mar 2015 #91
No, not brilliant. But not nearly as stupid as trying to equate e coli to the veg it's growing on. DisgustipatedinCA Mar 2015 #92
Great news! Major Nikon Mar 2015 #93
And no again. DisgustipatedinCA Mar 2015 #95
Organic food doesn't kill, just the e. coli from the shit used to fertilize it kills! Major Nikon Mar 2015 #98
Thanks for reminding me that I have to go and buy some more glyphosate Botany Mar 2015 #18
It's embarrassing to DU that every report pushing anti-GMO zealotry winds up on the Greatest page Orrex Mar 2015 #32
Meanwhile a thread about regulating dangerous homeopathic products is ignored. HuckleB Mar 2015 #36
You keep thinking that Huck... diverdownjt Mar 2015 #48
And the usual anti-GMO BS is offered as a response. HuckleB Mar 2015 #51
You need to specify type of cancer. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #59
+1 FarrenH Mar 2015 #130
Both camps are wrong about science being "on their side" whatchamacallit Mar 2015 #49
Basically, that's true. HuckleB Mar 2015 #53
In the case of GMO companies, they have veto power over research, thereby insuring there's ND-Dem Mar 2015 #69
So, you concede that there are no published, peer reviewed, scientific anti-GMO studies. FLPanhandle Mar 2015 #73
so, more bullshit & smoke from you. no surprise. ND-Dem Mar 2015 #75
LOL. And still no evidence from you. No surprise FLPanhandle Mar 2015 #76
Right; except Monsanto has a lock on who can do research & what type of research can be done, ND-Dem Mar 2015 #78
Yes, yes. We've got your point that there is no scientific evidence for the anti-GMO postion FLPanhandle Mar 2015 #80
Nonsense Major Nikon Mar 2015 #84
Pssst....You don't have to buy the seeds from Monsanto. jeff47 Mar 2015 #85
To publish the research, you have to get the seed from an approved source and sign an ND-Dem Mar 2015 #104
Nope FarrenH Mar 2015 #122
....from the horse's mouth. ND-Dem Mar 2015 #123
You're misreading the word "product" FarrenH Mar 2015 #124
Sure, just so long as you ignore all this... Major Nikon Mar 2015 #62
GMO is not one thing, bad or good. hunter Mar 2015 #67
Best post here today. Thanks! n/t pnwmom Mar 2015 #88
I dislike any argument that treats GMOs FarrenH Mar 2015 #94
isn't the point of Organic... druidity33 Mar 2015 #109
... FarrenH Mar 2015 #110
Many small farmers druidity33 Mar 2015 #111
I did a massive edit to my post above FarrenH Mar 2015 #112
Something I need to respond to is this FarrenH Mar 2015 #133
+1 FLPanhandle Mar 2015 #121
So your concern about "genes jumping species" is there for any seed development technology. HuckleB Mar 2015 #101
Now the city of San Diego has to sue Monsanto.. for fucking up their Bay with chemicals.. Cha Mar 2015 #102
They are feeding us a poison red herring Generic Other Mar 2015 #139
Derp. HuckleB Mar 2015 #142
Watch a GMO Advocate Claim a Weed Killer Is Safe to Drink but Then Refuse to Drink It Generic Other Mar 2015 #143
Derp the second. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #145
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Sorry, Monsanto: The Scie...»Reply #108