GMO Crops Don’t Harm Human Health, Report Says

[Gods We Faked]

you're calling him tardo like he's wrong

the GMO designation specifically involves the manipulation of genetic material by introducing material from other organisms, or knocking it out completely. this isn't done with sex. it's done with biotechnology. so no, a dog breed is not a GMO, and we haven't been genetically modifying organisms for thousands of years.

If a dog is different genetically than a wolf then we have obviously genetically modified it. Weird argument.

[Furn]

Apparently one of the author's brother's ex-wives used to play golf with a guy whos mum once dated a guy who's second cousin worked for a company that used the same type of photocopy paper as a University that did a study that was funded by a research institute that used to be partly owned by Monsanto.

This study can be ignored like the 100s of others.

[jaded]

We're been genetically modifying foods for centuries now with no ill effect on human health, but I'm certain that won't stop conspi******s from thinking the worst. The banana is a perfect example. Ever seen what a wild banana looks like? The things are practically inedible.



But whatever. It's all a conspiracy because Jews.

well i just hope its true.

GMOs aint going nowhere. its probably going to be needed if these ******s, chinese, and bollywood b*tches dont stop producing at such a high rate....

the world is overpopulated and i probably shouldnt mind the illuminati new world trilateral bilderberg commission under the orders of the 13 families trying to depopulate the earth.

whatevs....

damnnnnn...Sterling Archer is really slipping. I can't believe he let a perfectly good opportunity to spew a little Jew hating pass him by like this. Somebody get the paramedics over to him fast.

[SplitSecond]

This is why americans athletes suck nowadays. Just eating sht.

[New England]

If a dog is different genetically than a wolf then we have obviously genetically modified it. Weird argument.

your dog is not different genetically from a wolf. certain traits are recessive. certain traits are dominant.

it's not a genetically modified organism. unless you want to make up what a genetically modified organism is, and expect us to follow your definition. you're getting into a petty argument about words. yes, the word "modified" exists. it still doesn't make a dog breed a GMO.
eak out muh human bio 101 notes from freshman year

a GMO grain of rice has biology [genetic material] introduced from bacteria that produce vitamin A. they're not dog breeds! you don't have your dog **** a grain of rice and get dog rice .

you'll just have ot believe me if you don't understand what i'm talking about. DNA from bacteria is sequenced, coded, and the relevant DNA is removed and introduced to DNA from an existing organism. this is not done with breeding. it's done in a laboratory with biotechnology that involves the manipulation material on a genetic level. genes are baically maps that tell your body how to make particular proteins, and those proteins carry out the functions of your biology. pieces of those maps [called RNA] are brought out of the nucleus of cells, which act almost like a workbench. then you link amino acids together. the sequence / shape determines the function of the protein, and they're often enzymes for other reactions. these could be bigger muscles, or in the case of the GMO i brought up as an example, vitamin A producing mechanisms introduced to a grain of rice from a completely unrelated strain of bacteria.

eventually these organisms are stabilized to the point where they can pass on their genes with all of their modification. this is the creation of a new, modified species. a dog is still a dog is still a wolf is still a dog.



it's really only a weird argument if you genuinely have no idea at all what you're talking about . none. i have a tiny background in biology and i've read enough to know that if you read even the introduction to any literature on the subject you'll understand what i'm talking about.

don'y get hung up on the word modified. yeah, we "modified" dog breeds. we changed the frequency of the alleles that manifest as physical characteristics through inbreeding. we DID NOT modify the genetic material of the wolf. it's still there. nothing has been added or removed. it's simply a matter of which genes are recessive and dominant. GMOS are different. WE ADD OR REMOVE GENETIC MATERIAL, usually from OTHER ****ING ORGANISMS. this is genetic engineering, and is only similar to "modifying" a dog breed in the sense that the word modifies is english and it exists.

the second you talk about a GMO you are referring to a very specific process, and it involves the introduction of genetic material from other species, even kingdoms, or the complete removal [called knockout,] of material THROUGH GENETIC ENGINEERING.


done teaching high school biology for the morning

[Gods We Faked]

your dog is not different genetically from a wolf. certain traits are recessive. certain traits are dominant.

it's not a genetically modified organism. unless you want to make up what a genetically modified organism is, and expect us to follow your definition. you're getting into a petty argument about words. yes, the word "modified" exists. it still doesn't make a dog breed a GMO.
eak out muh human bio 101 notes from freshman year

a GMO grain of rice has biology [genetic material] introduced from bacteria that produce vitamin A. they're not dog breeds! you don't have your dog **** a grain of rice and get dog rice .

you'll just have ot believe me if you don't understand what i'm talking about. DNA from bacteria is sequenced, coded, and the relevant DNA is removed and introduced to DNA from an existing organism. this is not done with breeding. it's done in a laboratory with biotechnology that involves the manipulation material on a genetic level. genes are baically maps that tell your body how to make particular proteins, and those proteins carry out the functions of your biology. pieces of those maps [called RNA] are brought out of the nucleus of cells, which act almost like a workbench. then you link amino acids together. the sequence / shape determines the function of the protein, and they're often enzymes for other reactions. these could be bigger muscles, or in the case of the GMO i brought up as an example, vitamin A producing mechanisms introduced to a grain of rice from a completely unrelated strain of bacteria.

eventually these organisms are stabilized to the point where they can pass on their genes with all of their modification. this is the creation of a new, modified species. a dog is still a dog is still a wolf is still a dog.



it's really only a weird argument if you genuinely have no idea at all what you're talking about . none. i have a tiny background in biology and i've read enough to know that if you read even the introduction to any literature on the subject you'll understand what i'm talking about.

don'y get hung up on the word modified. yeah, we "modified" dog breeds. we changed the frequency of the alleles that manifest as physical characteristics through inbreeding. we DID NOT modify the genetic material of the wolf. it's still there. nothing has been added or removed. it's simply a matter of which genes are recessive and dominant. GMOS are different. WE ADD OR REMOVE GENETIC MATERIAL, usually from OTHER ****ING ORGANISMS. this is genetic engineering, and is only similar to "modifying" a dog breed in the sense that the word modifies is english and it exists.

the second you talk about a GMO you are referring to a very specific process, and it involves the introduction of genetic material from other species, even kingdoms, or the complete removal [called knockout,] of material THROUGH GENETIC ENGINEERING.


done teaching high school biology for the morning

Even weirder argument and it shows a poor understanding of evolution professor. No mutations have occurred in any dog breed to make them genetically different from wolves? Your argument that genetic engineering and selective breeding aren't synonymous is correct, the fact you think all dogs are genetically identical to wolves is incorrect.

[Amazinger]

Widespread use of genetically modified crops, which are often engineered to resist the effects of pesticides, has contributed to concerning levels of pesticide resistance in weeds and insects. Pests improve in their ability to resist pesticides every time the chemicals are sprayed, creating a vicious cycle of increased spraying and more resistance.[/B]

“There have been claims that [genetically engineered] crops have had adverse effects on human health,” the report says. “Sweeping statements about crops are problematic because issues related to them are multidimensional.”

Researchers behind the report called for a process that evaluates potential health and environmental concerns about new type of crops regardless of whether they are genetically engineered.

The report comes as public health and environmental advocates continue to push for mandatory labeling of genetically modified food. The results of the National Academy report suggest that such measures may not be necessary. Report committee member Michael Rodemeyer said at a press conference that without evidence of health effects from GMO crops, the Food and Drug Administration does not even have the authority to mandate such labels.

But the report is unlikely to stop calls for labeling that have already succeeded in some states, such as Vermont, and led some food manufacturers like Whole Foods to promise to curtail their use of genetically modified ingredients. Report authors acknowledged that their report would not—and should not—settle the debate over GMOs.

“We’re hoping that our report is not this big tome but something that starts a conversation,” North Carolina State University professor Fred Gould, who chaired the committee behind the report. He also hoped the findings would help fuel an evidence-based discussion rather than a heated back and forth between. “It would nice not to have a debate, but maybe an eight-hour discussion,” Gould added.

http://time.com/4338702/gmo-human-he...odified-crops/

See highlighted part.....

Why Do they made a GMO that is resistant to PESTICIDES?. why not resistant to PEST!.

[ßringer]

your dog is not different genetically from a wolf.

Sig material.

[New England]

Sig material.

says the dude who thought that humans have been creating new organisms for thousands of years. you very clearly had no idea that GMO processes involve the introduction of DNA from other species with biotechnology. dog breeds doe.

[ßringer]

you very clearly had no idea that GMO processes involve the introduction of DNA from other species with biotechnology.

Says the guy who still refuses to admit that dogs are genetically modified from wolves.

I remember when you used to brag about your dad dropping a ****load of money for your education and how smart that made you.