|
Traveler asks
US News Aug., Scientific American Sept. and Harper’s Magazine Oct issues have articles about genetically altered food. These articles explain the difference between making within species versus mating unlike things such as tomatoes and flounder fish to create tomatoes with antifreeze qualities. Also, globalization interferes with regulation which makes genocide easier. Creating products that produce their own pesticides that rats, cattle and bugs will not eat is mixed into human food and sold to us as a way to fix world starvation. It so seems that mass food with no nutritional value that induces heart disease, diabetes and cancer is assuring the need for medical intervention by promoting overweight malnourished people with no way of knowing if the addicting genes of such plants as cocaine and heroine are being blasted into these foods to increase desire for foods lacking in nutrition while inducing lethargy.
These articles raise the question of how can one be sure that Porky the pig is not laced with cocaine and Foghorn Leghorn’s DNA has not been altered with heroine to eliminate protein absorption while making us crave fried chicken?
From a professional point of view I have seen a change in body fat and immunity over the past twenty years. Evolution has not changed so quickly in the past, so one must wonder what we are doing (in the name of great fortunes that can be had) that is making many humans over weight and lazy or starving and paying for liposuction?
Blah, blah, blah answers imply laziness not wanting to fix or change status quo or having vested interest in genetically modified (GMO) products. Does anyone else feel more open communication and product labeling that products are GMO is needed to allow people all over the world to decide what they want to buy and be more informed?
Cattbarf: because more information brings to light both sides of an issue. Why did you evade supporting your views if you are aware of it?
John H.: And what is your thoughts on GMO's? Could you list your sources and opinions instead of evading the question, and using insults to possibly insinuate you are knowledgable on this subject?
I wonder how Dr. Strangelove would interpret these past articles (below).
As for the US farmers, do you think the majority of farmers push for Monsantos to monopolize all seeds by sterilizing their crops with invasive GMO crops that infect other farmers fields, then those farmers are sued for steeling the technology?
I bet the farmers love the super weeds that are also resistant to drought and herbicides caused by the mutation of these crops.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0115-04.htm
https://secure.ga3.org/03/support_us you can make a donation to the department that
awarded Monsantos “n total, U.S. courts have awarded Monsanto more than 15 million dollars, according to a new report by the Washington-based Center for Food Safety (CFS) called "Monsanto vs. U.S. Farmers". "Monsanto's business plan for GE crops depends on suing farmers," said Joe Mendelson, legal director for CFS.". Published on Saturday, January 15, 2004 by the Inter Press Service
http://www.csa.com/discoveryguides/gmfood/overview.php
|