Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > Community Center > The Lounge > Current Events, Philosophy, & Religion
Register Blogging Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Welcome to Music Banter Forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with over 70,000 other registered members. After you create your free account, you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 1,100,000 posts.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-04-2017, 02:44 PM   #81 (permalink)
MB quadrant's JM Vincent
 
duga's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 3,721
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by elphenor View Post
You're gonna have to link the $800 per consumer number

I'm cynical but just the fact that they want to conceal info from consumers is a huge red flag
Here's an article that sums it up:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/henrymi.../#6163529065b3

I know that's how it seems and most proponents of labeling look at it from that cynical sort of angle. It's really to keep costs down, though. GMO's in general make food cheaper by increasing size, allowing you to choose when it ripens, increasing pest resistance - there is no ulterior motive there (if we want to get into stuff like Monsanto, their shady **** happens on the corporate side, not the GMO's themselves). By stoking fears rooted in ignorance, most consumers will be driven to buying organic. Have you been to a Whole Foods? Have you seen those prices? To say there isn't some kind of monetary incentive to labeling GMOs is inaccurate.
__________________
Confusion will be my epitaph...
duga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2017, 02:48 PM   #82 (permalink)
Reading PDFs
 
elphenor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 11,546
Default

Lol I'm not reading a Forbes article

Their allegiance on issues is p obvious and it's not with consumers
__________________
Just another marketing ploy

Quote:
I love tube disasters
I wanna marry a tube disaster
I want another one just like the last one
because I live for tube disasters
elphenor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2017, 02:51 PM   #83 (permalink)
MB quadrant's JM Vincent
 
duga's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 3,721
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by elphenor View Post
Lol I'm not reading a Forbes article
Ok, so...I win?
__________________
Confusion will be my epitaph...
duga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2017, 03:05 PM   #84 (permalink)
be excellent 2 each other
 
Frownland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Atop of the Throne
Posts: 32,284
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by elphenor View Post
Except there's no financial benefit for "promoting the fear" of GMO's

Producers want to use them for higher profits

They're prob safe, nothing wrong with giving consumers more info though, let them make that choice for themselves
The organic food industry basically propels itself off of fear of GMOs. Get with the program.
__________________
At a time like this, scorching irony, not convincing argument, is needed.

Frownland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2017, 04:00 PM   #85 (permalink)
Reading PDFs
 
elphenor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 11,546
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by duga View Post
Ok, so...I win?
I was hoping for a science publication maybe but you give me a source from a pro buiz magazine
__________________
Just another marketing ploy

Quote:
I love tube disasters
I wanna marry a tube disaster
I want another one just like the last one
because I live for tube disasters
elphenor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2017, 04:02 PM   #86 (permalink)
Remember the underscore
 
Pet_Sounds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: The other side
Posts: 2,324
Default

Regardless, if the vast majority of people think they should be labelled, shouldn't we listen to the will of the people?

Poll: Skepticism of Genetically Modified Foods - ABC News

93% of respondents said "the federal government should require labels on food saying whether it's been genetically modified, or 'bio-engineered' (this poll used both phrases)."
__________________
Everybody's dying just to get the disease
Pet_Sounds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2017, 04:12 PM   #87 (permalink)
be excellent 2 each other
 
Frownland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Atop of the Throne
Posts: 32,284
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pet_Sounds View Post
Regardless, if the vast majority of people think they should be labelled, shouldn't we listen to the will of the people?
If the will of the people is based on an unscientific premise (in this case, the idea that GMOs are unhealthy/dangerous), then no. Much in the same way that we shouldn't (I would say don't but that's not realistic) allow the public's opinions on climate change affect public policy. Because as a rule of thumb, the public is dumb as ****. That's why the gubment exists in the first place.
__________________
At a time like this, scorching irony, not convincing argument, is needed.

Frownland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2017, 04:17 PM   #88 (permalink)
Reading PDFs
 
elphenor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 11,546
Default

Totally disagree.
__________________
Just another marketing ploy

Quote:
I love tube disasters
I wanna marry a tube disaster
I want another one just like the last one
because I live for tube disasters
elphenor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2017, 04:25 PM   #89 (permalink)
Remember the underscore
 
Pet_Sounds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: The other side
Posts: 2,324
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frownland View Post
If the will of the people is based on an unscientific premise (in this case, the idea that GMOs are unhealthy/dangerous), then no. Much in the same way that we shouldn't (I would say don't but that's not realistic) allow the public's opinions on climate change affect public policy. Because as a rule of thumb, the public is dumb as ****. That's why the gubment exists in the first place.
"Moral questions are outside the scientific realm." —Richard Feynman

The role of scientists is to serve as advisors, not to dictate policy. And the public's opinions on climate change currently ARE affecting public policy, albeit indirectly (through their choice of leader).

Additionally, I question whether or not there is a scientific consensus on GMOs. Both the EU and Japan have regulations regarding the labelling of products that contain GMOs. Those nations are certainly not anti-science. Also, here's a pretty important geneticist who's worried about GMOs.
__________________
Everybody's dying just to get the disease
Pet_Sounds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2017, 04:30 PM   #90 (permalink)
MB quadrant's JM Vincent
 
duga's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 3,721
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by elphenor View Post
I was hoping for a science publication maybe but you give me a source from a pro buiz magazine
We are talking about the economic impact, though....what does science have to do with that? You need me to convince you GMOs are safe?

The one line responses are not really motivating me to give you more.
__________________
Confusion will be my epitaph...
duga is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads



© 2003-2020 Advameg, Inc.