Please help me out: Why do some people get worked up over GMOs?

[Tommy_Carcetti]

I always see some people tearing their hair out over them, claiming a need to be GMO food free. And honestly, it's an issue that's totally passed me over. I'm not saying these people are necessarily wrong to be scared about GMOs, nor am I saying they are right. It's pretty much a non-issue to me. But since I hear about so much, I figure I might get an idea as to what the issues and concerns are.

So, objectively speaking, is there any real dangers in GMOs, or is it just a bunch of hysteria spread through the internet? Or, more likely, is it something of a combination of both?

I have no horse in this race, mind you. I'm just woefully out of the loop.

[el_bryanto]

1. There is a couple of issues

1). There are people who are concerned that GMOs might not be healthy - either from a distrust of the science underlying them (the frankenfood theory) or from a distrust of the corporations who are using that science. These concerns run the gamut from the theory that they are slowly killing us to the theory that they are addictive to the theory that they just aren't as healthy as food grown the old fashioned way.

2). Some corporations, particularly Monsanto, have placed a patent on seeds and grains that they grow. This has been stretched to imply that any crop with their particular DNA belongs to them - even when crops gain that DNA through the normal course of pollination. Monsanto has been pretty thuggish in this regard, clamping down on farmers who's only real crime is growing crops near someone who is growing Mansanto crops - these developments are "good" for big farmers and make life even harder for small or family farms.

There are probably other issues as well.

Bryant

[sendero]

5. I'd say..

.... that pretty much covers it. But I would add that there are many different "flavors" of GMO, that which merely makes easier to accomplish what could be accomplished with "breeding", which I have not much issue with. Then there is putting a fish gene into a corn plant, I really don't want to eat that.

Also, one could reasonably ask what the ACTUAL benefits to society are. I think not many, but lots of benefits to corporate thugs.

I just think that overall, the promise of GMO to deliver higher yields of production at lower cost is somewhat suspect. The main accomplishment of Monstanos GMO seems to be Round Up Ready, i.e. a plant that can withstand glysophates so that farmers can just spray everything with Round Up. Even this seems to be backfiring as many weed plants are becoming resistant to Round Up (effing basic biology in action).

All told, I'd prefer not to eat them as there have been ZERO long term health studies. Why should I take ANY risk for someone else's profit?

[el_bryanto]

7. That's the question though - if they are producing more food or healthier food

than that's an undeniable benefit. But Monsantos thuggish behavior (as well as others) makes that claim suspect.

We are going to need more food as time goes on and food that packs more of a nutritional wallop - and GMO foods are likely going to have to play a role in that strategy - but the corporate machinations make this unpalatable at the moment.

Bryant

[RiverLover]

2. Herbicide and Insecticide Use on GMO Crops Skyrocketing While Pro-GMO Media Run Interference

There is so much PR manipulation by Monsanto & Dow & MSM, I can see why you'd be wondering. Here's a few articles to help educate on why GMOs are hurting our food supply & environment.~


Herbicide and Insecticide Use on GMO Crops Skyrocketing While Pro-GMO Media Run Interference
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-bronner/herbicide-insecticide-use_b_5791304.html

GMO Crops Accelerate Herbicide and Insecticide Use While Mainstream Media Gets It Wrong
http://ecowatch.com/2014/09/29/gmo-crops-accelerate-herbicide-insecticide/

Monsanto will keep selling seeds treated with pesticides linked to bee deaths
http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/blog/2014/10/monsanto-will-keep-selling-seeds-treated-with.html

[Prophet 451]

3. As far as I can tell, there's three seperate issues

As far as I can tell, there's three separate issues with GMOs:

1) Some people feel that GMOs are bad for the people eating them. I have no idea if this is true.

2) Some people feel that GMOs are bad for the environment. Again, I have no idea if this is true.

3) Many people believe GMOs should be included in food labeling. On this, I agree entirely on grounds of consumer information. Many GMO proponents oppose labeling, either because they feel it's an unscientific demand (in that instance, so is vegetarianism) or because they feel science will advance more if that information is withheld.

I have no opinion on 1 and 2 because I don't know enough on the subject to make a judgement. On 3, I'm strongly in favour of labeling on the simple grounds that people should know what's in their food. They're already labeled here (UK, as part of EU law) and it hasn't notably affected their sales. Just toss it into with the nutritional info and let people make their own minds up.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

4. That sounds like a reasonable assessment. nt

[NRaleighLiberal]

6. It is a very complex issue with many facets and stakeholders

As with most technologies, there are benefits and risks.

From Wikipedia - the controversy involves "consumers, farmers, biotechnology companies, governmental regulators, non-governmental organizations, and scientists. The key areas of controversy related to genetically modified food (GMO food) are whether such food should be labeled, the role of government regulators, the objectivity of scientific research and publication, the effect of genetically modified crops on health and the environment, the effect on pesticide resistance, the impact of such crops for farmers, and the role of the crops in feeding the world population" - that is a pretty good summation of the various areas.

All of this is worth a read if you want to get a pretty balanced assessment of each risk and stakeholder.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_food_controversies

Each individual will have their own concern or support for the technology, based on their own personal philosophy, career, or hobby. My view - it is relatively early days, yet and there is much we don't know. There are possible "butterfly effects" possible that would take time to uncover.

Best thing to do to understand it is read - then see what you think of it all.