And alcohol is a slow poison. Over time, it will kill you.

Do you doubt that glyphosphate might trigger cancer? I realize, of course, that people have trouble grasping how they can avoid cancer with simple measure that, nevertheless, they must apply every single day without fail. Perhaps you have "learned" that cancer hits you like some player at a cosmic shooting gallery--an unskilled player holding an inaccurate gun at that. But I submit that brings only cold comfort when one of that player's bullets strikes you. And the reason I come down hard on negligence in the face of cancer is: I lost my wife to cancer, I almost lost my mother to cancer, and I had an aunt I never knew because she died of cancer.

statins? Yep, I'm trying to get my doc to wean me off them, too, though I haven't seen any bad side effects in the 3-4 years I've been on 'em...

Labeling? CERTAINLY... but so many advocates seem to be coming from a position of "controlling" that it discourages me from being supportive. Maybe some of THEM could change Their "labeling"... :)

and fertilizes the growth and spread of cults, too...
Though few of THEM seem to be life-threatening.

:)

or consider...

http://www.plusaf.com/falklaws.htm#57th

https://www.google.com/search?sourcei...

Keep on Googling...

https://gmoanswers.com/studies/iarc-c...

Nice Graphic, too... glyphosate is slightly more toxic than alcohol (the kind in your wine glass, according to THAT research.)

I'm a seriously skeptical guy when the links you provide come from one source, given all the data out there that's google-able.

I'm still skeptical. Can you change my mind?

Did you know that, because of lousy yields per acre, most "organic foods" are resource- and energy-wasters compared to "non-organic farms"?

I've been in a few cults in my time. I try to be VERY critical in my thinking when presented with "evidence."

I think that's a very nice aspect of Objectivism.

Cheers!

and if they don't share that info, I don't trust them.
There was an old joke going around a generation or two ago that "after five or ten generations, acetylsalicylic acid causes permanent infertility in all users.... "

But "aspirin" hadn't been in use that long, so there was no way to prove the fear was grounded in reality or not... :)

So, with no clear definition of 'long term effects,' I conclude the 'advice' is worth less than the electrons it was transmitted on.

I'm open to new input, though... if there ever is any... :)

Condsidering we're 20 years into station drugs and those are showing problems, 20 is a good start. Better yet, just f'in label it. Explain to me me why that's a problem. That's all I ask for. Give me the choice. Why do you want to take that knowledge away from me?

"old and unimproved" just lacks something, eh?
I agree, 'organic' is just a marketing phrase that is technically confusing.

All right, here are some links:

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/art...

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/art...

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/art...

http://search.mercola.com/results.asp...

Question: would you drink Round-Up? Then why tolerate it in your food? Do you really think the industry washes it off completely?

Part of individual rights is respect for the rights of others.

The right of your neighbor to expect you not to pollute his soil, groundwater, etc.

The right of your eventual customer to expect you not to poison him, either fast (acute) or slowly (chronic).

The automatic and unwarranted assumption that no group of investors establishing a company, nor the management team they install to run it, would ever act out of negligent or reckless expediency--not to say panic or malice--has always been one of Objectivism's greatest failings. But this is less a failure of Objectivism than a failure of imagination, due diligence, and consistent application on the part of its students and practitioners.

How about labeling like "no pesticides used" , "no artificial [man-made?] fertilizers used" or "no laboratory-created GMO heritage..."

Labels with Meaning? "Organic," per se, just tells me that it probably is carbon-based and likely has hydrogen and oxygen somewhere in it... :)

Wanna really have fun? Read the Freakonomics series for their comments on 'organic' foods.

Seems like organic farming yields are so low per acre and per acre-foot of water used that we'd all really be starving if all crops were suddenly to go All-"Organic".... unintended consequences due to lack of data, anyone? They're fun reading, too....

And would you please be the first to get agreement on what "Long Term Trial" would satisfy you?
Five Years, Ten? Two Generations of humans? Ten generations? Using a nebulous, unspecified "standard" to judge success or failure of a proposition or theory is... well... kinda silly, y' know?
:)

Funny, Robert... but 'not direct manipulation of genes' as an argument strikes me somehow like 'the ends are good or bad, depending on the means' which just sounds silly to me.
But hey, that's me, again... :)

Tem... what I can't ever seem to find reported is any evidence to support your last sentence...

Lacking that 'obvious proof,' I find it really difficult to support anti-GMO-folks' assertions of danger!

There is no evidence GMO foods are dangerous. I'm open to new evidence, but for right now I don't see the point in avoiding them.

With organic, my understanding is it depends on the food. The standards for making something organic are not necessarily the best standards for quality food or protecting the environment, although they often overlap. My wife researched this a little and thinks she knows which products are best. Sometimes their "organic", but not always. It's not as simple as just buying all organic.

If you want a real example of a dangerous fraud take a look behind the curtain at "organic" foods. There's a great book on food called The Omnivorous Dilemma that I would recommend. Not a treatise on GMO, but a good insight into our food supply which is becoming more fragile every day. The bottom line is that with our current population growth, and without significant continued productivity improvements in crop production, famine will solve the problem in a most brutal fashion. I'm an Agronomist and have an above average understanding of the GMO process. While there are some legitimate concerns they are controllable. The objections I see trotted out in opposition to GMOs seem to be driven by a bunch of ill informed Luddites. These people have ancestors who riled against electricity and the wheel. Let's see how many starving children turn down a bowl of rice because it contains GMOs.

Yeah. It's a government chart. What's the problem? ;^)

I have a small farm and I think there are some differences to organic, not sure they really make a difference.

GMO is nothing new really. We just went from splicing trees together to grow a new apple, or grape to doing it in a lab. More technological but the same basic premise.

In a non-organic farm we test the PH levels in soil and water to get just the right nutrients to maximise production. Nothing wrong with this but the byproduct is that differences in the chemical makeup of the food will lesson or be completely gone. Carrot A will be identical in what its got in it with the rest of the carrots, or at least much closer. In organic farming the variations in nutritional value will be there within the same batch of carrots far more so. Does that have any effect on the value of the food to our body? It could if the variations in the foods we eat are what keep us from developing allergies, like variations in the gloves doctors use keep from developing latex allergies as much. It is a stretch but its the only thing I have come up with that may make a difference.

Basically its a marketing gimmick

Breeding animals is a very crude way of trying to modify existing life forms, and it still doesn't give you access to the "plans" because there aren't any.

Organic foods primary purpose is to help the upper middle class differentiate themselves from poor and "less educated" people. Keep in mind that food choices are as close if not closer to a person than their sex choices or religion. Religion and Sex play a fairly small part in a persons life when compared to their eating choices. While yes, Doritos might be killing people. The only role GMO has played there is by making corn abundant and cheap, which has made Doritos abundant and cheap.. Which is why we now have a friggen Doritos isle in the grocery store..

I was once in full favor of GMO crops. Then, as is the case with many topics in my life, I decided to study it on my own. This habit...independent study...really has paid dividends in my life. This is another example. I have a really diverse background that exposed me to all kids of things. A stint in agricultural aviation was very informative in terms of learning about our food.

I am not opposed to GMO crops. But, I am opposed to eating what is sprayed on GMO crops. And, a lot of people mischaracterize GMO as basic, old-school, hybridization. That's not what it is.

A few years back we had a GMO labeling proposition here in California. Even in leftist, granola-eating California it was defeated. I asked a (fellow conservative) buddy why he voted against it. His answer, "Because the trial lawyers will make a lot of money filing suits around it." My answer - "Well, they started labeling trans fats a few years back and it didn't happen then." (crickets chirping). He got his science education from the same place most people do, talk radio. GMO is a highly-politicized topic. Therefore, the science behind it will be mostly ignored as the media whips the public into its standard partisan, anti-science froth.

Hear, hear, and tell me what's in the product so I can attempt to make an informed decision.

As has been stated multiple times so far, it is about the choice. If I want to shell out the extra $ for organic or non-GMO food, it's my choice. If I think it's stupid to do so, that is my choice as well. It doesn't matter whether I'm doing it because I think it's healthy or whether I think the companies who are producing it are evil. It's called "free market". I get to choose what to buy. If enough people choose to buy that product, the producer survives. If not, he has to find another line of work. I don't want the government to tell me that I can only buy non-GMO products and I don't want them to tell me that I can't buy them. Let me decide.