Proposition 37, California's GMO Labeling Initiative

[TheSilencer1313]

https://blogs.laweekly.com/squidink/2012/09/proposition_37_california_gmo.php

Big agriculture companies Monsanto and DuPont have spent millions on TV commercials and a web campaign. So far,Monsanto has put up $7.1 million toward the campaign,which claims that the law would be expensive and has too many loopholes. But,just as with any political issue,there's misinformation on both sides.

I find it very interesting that Monsanto and Dupont have spent millions trying to get this initiative defeated in just California.

Can anyone imagine what would happen if there was a bill like this in the house?
Billions maybe?

 

[nightmare3983]

I'm too out of the loop to have an opinion on this. I had to look up GMO just to see what it stands for.

 

[TroutBum]

I'm too out of the loop to have an opinion on this. I had to look up GMO just to see what it stands for.

Giant Moose Ovaries. That is a movement I could get behind.

 

[TheSilencer1313]

Giant Moose Ovaries. That is a movement I could get behind.

I think Foghorn Leghorn would be offended at the idiocy.

 

[TheSilencer1313]

I'm too out of the loop to have an opinion on this. I had to look up GMO just to see what it stands for.

Well all in all my friend, they take the DNA of a seed and they change that DNA to whatever they want to change it to.
Therefore changing the DNA of food that humans have been eating since the beginning of time.
Not to mention the pesticide that's basically built into the seed, and obviously throughout the entire piece of food that's grown.
Problem is.... there's no labeling for these foods, for individuals that might not want to eat this genetically altered food.

 

[One Brow]

Not to mention the pesticide that's basically built into the seed, and obviously throughout the entire piece of food that's grown.

What makes you think that? many genes are switched on and off, dependent on cell type and other conditions. The pesticide might only appear in the root, or the leaves.

 

[TheSilencer1313]

The pesticide might only appear in the root, or the leaves.

This would be the equivalent of a meth abusers baby born with only meth in their system around their feet or hair.

 

[TroutBum]

This would be the equivalent of a meth abusers baby born with only meth in their system around their feet or hair.

I don't remember the last time I ate a babies foot or their hair.

 

[TheSilencer1313]

I don't remember the last time I ate a babies foot or their hair.

You never know Trout ;-)

The equivalent is the fact that both plants and animals are living things.

 

[TroutBum]

You never know Trout ;-)

The equivalent is the fact that both plants and animals are living things.

Which is totally relevant to this conversation, right?

 

[billyshelby]

GMO's are completely irrelevant unless you enjoy being a guinea pig in one of the largest mass scale scientific experiments ever foisted upon society. But not to worry, the use of GMO's in food is carefully studied and regulated by the FDA. You know, the public safety administration whose board is a revolving door for Big Agriculture. So the guys protecting you from whatever harmful effects GMO's might have on your health are the same guys who either used to work for those big companies, or will eventually work for those big companies. No conflict of interest or anything.

 

[One Brow]

This would be the equivalent of a meth abusers baby born with only meth in their system around their feet or hair.

No, because methamphetimines travel in the blood system, which is completely different from a GMO creating a pesticide based on an activated DNA string. Most DNA strings are selectively activated based on cell type. That's why you don't grow hair on your retina.