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
U.S. GMO food labeling bill passes Senate [View all] proverbialwisdom Jul 2016 OP
It is sham legislation sponsored by the food industry. N/T Big Blue Marble Jul 2016 #1
Which accomplishes absolutely nothing. longship Jul 2016 #3
Sadly, it is even worse. Big Blue Marble Jul 2016 #5
GMO is not equal to Monsanto, nor vice-versa. longship Jul 2016 #9
There are differences between PatSeg Jul 2016 #11
Consequences? longship Jul 2016 #12
You said there was no difference PatSeg Jul 2016 #13
Well, I only care what the science actually says. longship Jul 2016 #14
No you won't PatSeg Jul 2016 #15
Science says: put up or shut up. longship Jul 2016 #16
Science is not as "pure" as you think. While the idea sounds nice, the reality is often nowhere FighttheFuture Jul 2016 #19
Oh, I forgot to say... longship Jul 2016 #23
Time has everything to do with it. We are making geneitc changes that would not occur in nature, FighttheFuture Jul 2016 #54
I don't think so. Scientific Positivism is a fallacy. cprise Jul 2016 #27
How is GMO scaremongering more scientific than Republican climate change denial? Silent3 Jul 2016 #34
I raised the issue of fallacies, and they become thicker...? cprise Jul 2016 #48
Well said PatSeg Jul 2016 #51
"This doesn't inspire confidence" doesn't answer the question. Silent3 Jul 2016 #52
Why does GMO salmon require perfect isolation from waterways? cprise Jul 2016 #88
You're answering a different concern than the one that's typically expressed... Silent3 Jul 2016 #89
You said it, althoughh unwittingly... FighttheFuture Jul 2016 #55
Monsanto’s GMO Feed Creates Horrific Physical Ailments in Animals... IthinkThereforeIAM Jul 2016 #28
Still trying to be your friend... IthinkThereforeIAM Jul 2016 #29
Is that peer reviewed? longship Jul 2016 #31
Okay... IthinkThereforeIAM Jul 2016 #37
It is your ignorance of data... IthinkThereforeIAM Jul 2016 #38
And then there is this... IthinkThereforeIAM Jul 2016 #39
Yup! From yet another anti-GMO site. longship Jul 2016 #41
Yet your fine with claiming that Monsanto is entirely objective? Really?! FighttheFuture Jul 2016 #59
Then get some of your science friends to peer review it and stop whining that it is not!!! FighttheFuture Jul 2016 #58
In these discussion, PatSeg Jul 2016 #66
Than how do we know that Schoen's work was fraudulent? longship Jul 2016 #69
I'm sure you will PatSeg Jul 2016 #70
It's an integral part of science, which is where I make my stand. longship Jul 2016 #72
Careful... IthinkThereforeIAM Jul 2016 #77
Evidently PatSeg Jul 2016 #78
So, he's letigious on top of doing bad science. longship Jul 2016 #82
Holy Smokes... IthinkThereforeIAM Jul 2016 #93
The court says one thing, the scientists say another. longship Jul 2016 #94
Have a splendid weekend! PatSeg Jul 2016 #79
The same to you! longship Jul 2016 #81
thanks for this post. While peer review and repeatable results are very important, they are FighttheFuture Jul 2016 #84
You are welcome PatSeg Jul 2016 #90
This! newthinking Jul 2016 #33
That is great... IthinkThereforeIAM Jul 2016 #36
Exactly. It is really not needed at this point in our society. So, why have it, except for FighttheFuture Jul 2016 #60
We have the very best science PatSeg Jul 2016 #67
Modification by nature in response to adaptation is NOT the same as modification by humans. FighttheFuture Jul 2016 #18
First, there is no difference in kind. longship Jul 2016 #20
Did the word "time" escape your comprehension? FighttheFuture Jul 2016 #22
Oh dear, the Frankenfood ploy. longship Jul 2016 #24
Ah, the "tree of life" everything its the same as everything else ploy. Oh dear!! FighttheFuture Jul 2016 #61
What an idiotic and insulting non sequitur! longship Jul 2016 #63
Spare me the faux outrage. I don't wish you to die, I just wish to understand the ridiculousness of FighttheFuture Jul 2016 #83
No, you just invited me to drink hemlock. longship Jul 2016 #87
And you, being the final word on all things "Science" here, would know not to! In the meantime, FighttheFuture Jul 2016 #95
I misspoke. longship Jul 2016 #96
I understand. When you can't take the heat for being called out, time to skedaddle. FighttheFuture Jul 2016 #97
What a pant load you produced! FighttheFuture Jul 2016 #21
The time argument is rubbish. longship Jul 2016 #25
Thank you for doing yeoman's work in this thread and challenging stopbush Jul 2016 #26
oh baloney. We are not talking a single base pair. Mutations of the type that happens with GMO newthinking Jul 2016 #35
That's old thinking. longship Jul 2016 #42
Calling me a liar rather than debating just makes you look like a fool. Not to mention TOS here. newthinking Jul 2016 #44
I apologize for that. longship Jul 2016 #46
Thank you for that report PatSeg Jul 2016 #68
Myth: Genetic engineering is just an extension of natural breeding newthinking Jul 2016 #32
Biology 101 longship Jul 2016 #40
You are impossible to engage newthinking Jul 2016 #43
Well, the Frankenfood argument is a non-starter. longship Jul 2016 #45
Night newthinking Jul 2016 #47
Tell him to try the hemlock experiment (#61); he thinks its all the same with his "Tree of Life" FighttheFuture Jul 2016 #85
Also GMO promoters PatSeg Jul 2016 #50
The only "science" proving GMOs are safe OrwellwasRight Jul 2016 #56
Yeah, none of what you said is true. Humanist_Activist Jul 2016 #64
um, yes it is. you do understand how research funding works right? OrwellwasRight Jul 2016 #71
OK, how about this, is there any evidence for your claims? Or is that also hidden... Humanist_Activist Jul 2016 #73
i won't do your research for you.there is plenty out there about gmos infecting other OrwellwasRight Jul 2016 #75
Monocultures actually is an issue that exists independent of GMOs... Humanist_Activist Jul 2016 #76
"The U.S. is the world's largest market for foods made with genetically altered ingredients." proverbialwisdom Jul 2016 #2
K&R PatSeg Jul 2016 #4
This is a terrible bill because it requires access to QR Code with a SmartPhone Equinox Moon Jul 2016 #6
Plus, electronic coding is SpyWare for the Corporations! Equinox Moon Jul 2016 #7
Exactly benny05 Jul 2016 #8
It goes to congress next Equinox Moon Jul 2016 #92
and you'd have to scan every single item you put in your basket to avoid GMOs OrwellwasRight Jul 2016 #57
Center for Food Safety (CFS) Condemns Senate Vote on GMO Non-Labeling Bill proverbialwisdom Jul 2016 #10
What a cluster-fuck of legislation. Sad Democrats voted for this POS. FighttheFuture Jul 2016 #17
Trojan Horse november3rd Jul 2016 #30
"disclose their GMO ingredients through a QR code on the package" KeepItReal Jul 2016 #49
I don't trust Reeps. What does the fine print say? ananda Jul 2016 #53
I don't want to have to pull out my phone in the middle of grocery shopping. NT Eric J in MN Jul 2016 #62
Of all the major issues facing us, why are so many people so concerned about magic DNA? cpwm17 Jul 2016 #65
I'll be honest and say I kinda like debunking obviously wrong information, but it does get tiring... Humanist_Activist Jul 2016 #74
Feel free to devote your time PatSeg Jul 2016 #80
I would, but I feel compelled to debunk bullshit... Humanist_Activist Jul 2016 #86
'Nothing laudable in spreading misinformation' PatSeg Jul 2016 #91
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»U.S. GMO food labeling bi...»Reply #51