Maelochs

okay, I'll bite. EXACTLY how am I "another marketing victim."

You said it, now support it.

ogmtb

Gconan

Thank you for the link. It was a propaganda piece in my opinion, but when I saw the high praise for Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)
crops it sealed it. Thanks anyway though.

ogmtb

Gconan

Bought and paid for. Look at the way it is written. You must be in the industry.

Maelochs

Didn't take long for omgtb to give away whatever credibility he might have been granted through benefit of the doubt.

Gconan

I quite reading when I came across the "wonderful", shameless plug for GMO's.

TimothyH

Grant Peterson and Donald Trump are both masters of the "getting attention" school of marketing.

It doesn't matter whether you love me or hate me as long as you are paying attention to me.

The worst thing that can happen to either is that we forget they are there for a moment, or two, or three.

A rap star was asked how to be successful. He replied, "You just gotta make a lot of noise"


-Tim-

shrtdstncrdr

No one gives Peterson or Trump more attention than their detractors. And Peterson is NO Trump fan.

OBoile

There's nothing wrong with GMO crops. And the other guy is right, organic pesticides are often just as bad as regular ones.

If you, or anyone else wants to eat organic food fine. But, there has been no proven health benefit to doing so.

Happy Feet

What's wrong with GMO's specifically? Other than a vague fear based reaction? Almost everything we eat is genetically modified from it's original form. Do we reject the taste of the non gmo potato or tomato we eat today even though it doesn't resemble even remotely its ancestor in any shape or form. The benefits of grains with high yields? The affordability of milk because of how much the cow delivers? The reduced price of chicken because of the accelerated time it takes to mature to market? All those are just a few of the benefits we derive from non gmo genetically modified foods right now.

Frankly, I think the anti gmo fad is something only a person with plentiful secure food sources could ascribe to. The rest of the world is trying to scrape by in subsistence due to drought, infestation and lack of capacity to invest in intensive agricultural solutions. Most of the world is hungry and I'm loath to reject without hard science, solutions that create drought tolerance, pest tolerant, weed tolerant, higher yielding, more nutritious food sources just because of how they were developed.

Not a lot of complaint about cardiac patients having pig valves inserted into human hearts. Talk about Frankenstein science that doesn't seem to bother anyone.

JohnDThompson 

My concern with GMOs is not so much that they are unsafe to eat, but rather how they are grown and what it means to have a multinational corporation in control of our food supply. Crops engineered to resist herbicides encourage farmers to use toxic herbicides on the crops, and as herbicide resistance spreads into weed plants, farmers will use more herbicides and more toxic herbicides to attempt to control those weeds. GMO pollen has already contaminated organic crops in Oregon, meaning that organic farmers can no longer market their crops as organic. This has cost those farmers their export markets in Europe and Asia, where GMO crops are more regulated than here. And farmers using GMO seed are prohibited from saving seed from their harvest to plant the next year's crop, instead having to purchase seed from the multinational corporation every year, compromising their independence. Crops engineered to produce their own pesticide (e.g. Bt toxin) have unknown long term human health consequences, and may also adversely affect non-target insects including important pollinator species (e.g. https://www.enveurope.com/content/pdf...014-0024-3.pdf). Finally, there is precious little evidence that GMO crops are more productive than ordinary crops (e.g. https://cdn3.ewg.org/sites/default/fi...MOs%202015.pdf).

noglider 

Eat Bacon, Don't Jog, by Grant Petersen

Gconan

​​
You are greatly mistaken. Nothing I eat is GMO. You have mistaken hybridization for Genetically Modified Organism. Two different things.

No. This has absolutely nothing to do with GMO's. Why confuse the two separate things?

It has been argued that wheat is ruined, and there is a reason that so many people are now allergic to it. That the quality has been lost. But again, what does this have to do with GMO's? They are separate things.

These are not benefits to the consumer, but unhealthy. Your Grandparents had quality milk AND chickens because they were not injected with hormones and feed crap. But this was changed simply for the producer to make more profit without regard for people's health.
​​​​

Happy Feet

You raise several issues, some of them having stand alone merit. I respect those issues yet the current bias against GMO's mixes them all together in a fear based way so that there is no coherent way to deal with them other than overall rejection.

1. Control of food supplies and seed stock. Yes and no. But it's already a controlled environment as far as large scale agriculture goes. Big production doesn't preserve it's own seed stock and supply of non gmo sources is as corporately controlled as gmo sources. Sure, a business may own the right to seed stock they develop but non GMO seed stock producers also own their rights. They don't give the seed away. The only reason that wouldn't change (allowing more diversification) is that smaller scale operations still reject gmo and thus, do not enter the market.

2. encroachment into non gmo stock. Again, yes and no. However, non gmo pollen travels just as easily yet is not targeted with the same concern for tainting otherwise single strain seed stock. And, while the organic label may seem appealing, it as somewhat based on fuzzy science for the most part. For example, the plant does not distinguish between manure fertilizers and fertilizer salts. All break down to the same ionic forms when taken up by the plant.

3. Pesticide resistance. Resistant stock reduces the amount of general pesticide needed and allows a more targeted application to those that aren't. I worked in the greenhouse industry for a decade as a grower and one of my roles was spraying and given the choice to using lots of general application chemical vs less but more targeted chemicals we always chose the latter because we also used beneficial biological agents to control pests and as pollinators (honey bees), which would be killed by mass general applications. You still need to control the pests that infest intensive monoculture crops somehow. You mention Bt specifically but do you know that the alternative is mass spraying of it in liquid form as a control. All of your crop and anything in/on it is affected and you just hope that the grower waits the recommended period before harvest. They developed Bt producing plants because of the excess spray that was otherwise the default.

4. One control measure to ensure adherence to laws surrounding non gmo crop production is governmental or regulatory bodies which is really just another form of corporate control of an industry (hence the push back from foreign organic regulators on those NA producers). Yet outside control is the complaint against GMO production. Seems those producers are being controlled by a large body regardless.

In the end, while there may be problems associated with gmo production, as there is with any other method (noticed food poisoning issues in organic crops) they cannot be solved effectively by prohibition any less than the problems surrounding alcohol were. We will never eliminate gmo production because it solves far more problems than it creates for a world surpassing 7 billion and counting.

ogmtb

Happy Feet

Delusional much? The only difference between natural genetic modification (hybridization) and genetic manipulation is time.
Wheat is ruined today? Grandparents healthier? Uhh... was that when there was mass famine from crop failure or they died because of simple infections or got rickets from unfortified flour? When they died by the millions from Spanish influenza for lack of immunization? If I were born before the age of blood transfusions (about only 100 years ago) I would have been dead at 6 months. We are bigger, stronger and smarter than ever before. Seems life expectancy is higher now than then but perhaps they all just died healthy?

One example of the benefits of genetic manipulation is the potato which is perhaps, the most ongoing modified food there is. Having witnessed the mass famine caused by a lack of resistance to simple bacterial blight in Ireland leading to the exodus of one nations refuges for another, scientists now manipulate the genetics of the lowly potato to keep it continually resistant to the bacteria which is also always seeking to evolve and over come that resistance. A beautiful and continuous genetic dance.

All that improved growing "crap" is partly due to the fact that we now have to feed 7billion people as compared to a few villagers here and there. Try doing that with old school organic methodology.

Just keep telling yourself that organism that was hybridized by genetic modification isn't a genetically modified organism

Hoopdriver

Soylent Green here we come. I understand it's better than bacon.

jon c. 

Nothing is better than bacon.

Ironfish653

Yeah, this thread took a turn I wasn't expecting.

Grant was right however about a few things:

• Wide Tires
• Flared Handlebars
• Bacon
• The RB-1

Road Fan

No, no Maelochs ol'buddy, you're missing something! The bacon ENABLES the metal bikes! It's all a BIOTECHNICAL SYSTEM!

Why? That will be explained in my upcoming seminar planned for this March! You may contact my event management service.

Seriously, if possible, this sounds a lot like a consultant giving a seminar I attended last Fall. I might go to the March seminar, but ... it's on my own ticket this time.

I don't think there's anything magic about bacon and eggs, but I have found that old adage about eating a "good" breakfast to start the day works for me. But while bacon or sausage and eggs are favorites (man = dog?), I've had the same response with rice+bean based dishes, amino acid complementarity to max out extracted protein. There was a great veg restaurant in Denver, "Healthy Habits," which was a close second to the classic B+E.

But I'm not really a vegetarian.

Road Fan

Maybe I read too much Internet crap, but as I understand it one of the keys to officially organic meat is the elimination of antibiotics from the animals, based on feed and treatment. I'm not gonna get into this part further, it deserves another thread, probably in P&R. It's certain rant-bait.

Rides4Beer

No idea who Grant Petersen is, but I'm new to cycling.

Experiment of one here, dropped 85lbs and have kept it off for over six years. Went from not being able to run at all, to a 2:56 marathon @ 185lbs, fueled on beer, burgers, pizza, bacon, eggs, and whatever the hell else I want to eat. Yes, I eat a lot of fruits and vegetables, but I also eat a ton of refined carbs/grains, I have to in order to be able to sustain the level of activity my body has become accustomed to, plus they're delicious. I eat a lot of meat, a lot of runners (and probably cyclists too) don't get enough protein, they think protein is for body builders. If you want your muscles to get stronger (not just bigger), then you need protein.

Not even gonna touch the organic/gmo discussion, do whatever works for you, spend your money wherever you want (kind of like bikes/parts lol).

seamuis

TimothyH

People are free to eat bacon and eggs every day to reduce pain.

Just keep in mind that heart attacks can be painful as well, that's all.


-Tim-