non GMO Cheerios

Funny how the pro gmo side gets all riled up when a company decides to use non gmo in their product.

Food prices are already predicted to go up by 3-5% next year. Doesn't have a hoot in holler whether it is GMO or not.

Most corn products are GMO these days, for Cheerios to use non GMO corn is being responsible to their customers. If customers did not demand a certain product, mfg. would have no reason to provide it. I, for one, love original Cheerios and will buy their product as I do like a bowl of cereal every once in a while.

I think that the consumer/customer has a right to know what they are consuming and if they prefer not to purchase a product that has GMO ingredients, they should have alternatives. It's free market and capitalism at it's best. No one is forcing anyone to change, but the alternatives should be available to those who want them.

I reckon I would want to know why those who prefer GMO products feel that non-GMO products are such a threat?

__________________
Be yourself - no one can tell you that you're doing it wrong!

PackBack, I'm not ignoring anything. But let's face it, with the current consumer driven desire for non GMO and/or organic foods, if a product contained non GMO ingredients in place of ingredients typically associated with GMOs, I would think they would label it accordingly.

Will there process be certified and carry a guarantee? I will bet a shiny penny they will have a disclaimer! If they do not it will have to be manufactured in a separate facility with a dedicated supply line for raw materials. There is a non GMO soy bean exporter within a half mile of me and the paperwork is a huge part of the job.

I don't consider it getting "riled up", more like a roll of the eyes. Because despite the best efforts of a lot of smart people for 20+ years to definitively prove that the GMO crops cause harm to animals, people or the environment, nobody has been able to do it! There is all kind of speculation and pseudo-science and jumping to conclusions not supported by facts, but no real case has been made. When GMOs first came out, I bought into all the "franken-food" fears, too. But guess what, 20 years later and the sky didn't fall. And I have since learned how much less tillage and overall chemical application is used because the inserted gene does the work that the chemicals used to do. And more production on the same amount of land so more land can stay in grassland, woods, and so on.

So when people persist in fear-mongering about GMO's, demonizing them, it gets a little tiresome.

As far as the threat part, I think we are all being threatened with paying more for Cheerios!

Mostly it's a marketing ploy. Remember when fat and cholesterol were portrayed as the bad guys? Soon there appeared "fat free", "cholesterol free" labeling on candy and all kinds of other products. Like all of a sudden, jelly beans and twizzlers were good for you! Same concept here. Nothing much is changing except the perception. And since the perception is flawed, it's annoying.

__________________
It is still best to be honest and truthful; to make the most of what we have; to be happy with the simple pleasures and to be cheerful and have courage when things go wrong.
Laura Ingalls Wilder

Perhaps no case has been made for non GMO foods as those that control the patented products will not allow independent scientific research on the product. One must obtain permission to study GMO crops and as far as I can ascertain, permission has not been granted to independent scientific researchers. Also I have not seen research in excess of 18 to 24 months published. I seem to remember the tobacco industry publishing their own research stating smoking was harmless. I do not trust research which is controlled by those that will profit from positive results.

__________________
Be yourself - no one can tell you that you're doing it wrong!

So if a person is not convinced that GMO foods are as safe as some would suggest, that makes them to be looked on as an idiot?

That's pretty annoying, too.

It's sad that these threads always seem to end up a peeing match.

There are plain and simple so many misconceptions out there, and some of us want to share the other side. Nothing more, nothing less. None of us are idiots, we just have different information. I think debate is healthy in anything, whether it is global warming, evolution/creation, or gm vs. non gm crops. But what we do with factual information, is entirely up to us. It is just that so many folks are so disconnected from what a farm does anymore. So they get their information from dubious sources, and think gm means MORE herbicides, not less. They think their non organic, bagged chicken feed is "full of chemicals".

And so some of us who farm, or who simply have a different scientific take on things, want to share these thoughts with you. When something false is stated about your occupation, do you sit back and watch as people tell lies, or do you step up and say something that may give them a better understanding? If they listen with an open mind at least.

What if someone said tow truck drivers smoke pot and crack? IF you were a tow truck driver you would probably defend yourself. Here we have people saying farmers basically are poisoning the countryside, killing their soil, giving the population cancer, and causing abortions, allergies, MS, celiac disease, etc., because of gm crops that they plant.

As a farmer I will step up with countering information. Clear information. FACTUAL information. Scientific herbicide application rates to counter the "dousing" arguments. All to try and counter the vast mis-information that is out there these days.

I don't think we should be smothered from trying to help share information, even if it does not fit the many non-factual perceptions that seem to be getting more prevalent these days. Do you???

This so called "New Cheerios" still cannot be guaranteed 100% GMO free~! LOL
http://fooddemocracynow.org/blog/201..._2_go_GMOFree/

__________________
Oh my, dishes yet to wash and dry

See My Pictures at
http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/0903/arabianknight/

And here lies one of the core issues... Facts. Clear information.

Who's facts? Who's clear information?

What's clear and factual to you may be seen as fabrications by the other side while what's clear and factual to them may seem like psudo-science to you.

Facts and clear information are pretty hard to come by in today's world. Facts that can't be disputed are even harder to come by.

I don't quite follow the logic of the tow truck driver example. I don't think farmers are being characterized as the villains. It's the science behind the GMOs that is in question by some.

And I have trouble trying to find an analogy indeed! lol. I just am not sure what to use for one. I admit my towtruck driver one was not perfect...

On the anti gm camp, we also have varying opinions. Some folks bash, some don't. Some accept others opinions, some completely ignore factual reasoning.

It is all good. We are all entitled to opinions. And that is awesome. I do think it is good to hear all sides, to use reason when good ideas are shown.

Cheers.

"GE herbicide-resistant seeds are clearly the growth engine powering the pesticide industry,”
http://www.salon.com/2014/01/03/usda...ange_chemical/

Ughhh. Not the false, "agent orange is 2-4D" thingy. Saying 2-4D is agent orange is exactly the same as saying my goat is a pig.

Since the advent of gm, both the amount applied, and the toxicity of herbicides has gone WAY down. Less is needed than ever before. You will hear this from farmers actually growing the crops. You will not hear it from people who think 2-4D is agent orange. I wonder why???

Cheers,

Dale

Why wouldn't they use the anti-GMO angle to their advantage? Their sole reason for existence is to sell cereal, not to educate people.

Very, VERY true.

Water was an ingredient of agent orange, also. Shoud it be banned also?

It has been determined - for some time now, that the dioxin contamination, in the herbicide solution, caused the mass sickness.

2,4,D has been in use for 70 years.

People don't want to be "educated" anyway, as that will put the responsibility of their actions - on themselves.

They just want to feel safe, whether they are really safe, or not.

If Cheerios says GMO is bad, then it must be bad, right?

And as I recall Monsanto told the gov/military about the contamination fairly early on and the military decided to go ahead despite unknown risks, not Monsanto

__________________
The internet - fueling paranoia and misinformation since 1873.

2-4-D was just One part of Agent Orange, and should never even come into this conversation. As just one part of it. It cannot be called Agent Orange.

__________________
Oh my, dishes yet to wash and dry

See My Pictures at
http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/0903/arabianknight/

How's a person to know ? Everyone should take a multivitamin , well maybe not , the food pyramid is the way to eat , well maybe not , eggs have too much cholesterol & are bad for you , well maybe not , asbestos is harmless , well maybe not & everything is known by the state of California to cause cancer .

"Trace amounts of genetically modified (also known as “genetically engineered”) material may be present due to potential cross contact during manufacturing and shipping" http://www.cheerios.com/en/Products/...x#.UsnxYHKA1jo

If folks thought brown eggs were better, the market would provide them, for a price.
This thread isn't about the pro-GMO folks being upset that a company is promoting it's products as GMO-free, it is that there is some unfounded excitement over a non-issue.

Have you heard the latest development? Crisco is 100% sugar free. Wow, that's great. What will they think of next? White sugar that is 100% Trans fat free.

Clever marketers are seeing that there are "trigger words" that influence consumers. So, expect more use in marketing. People hear one thing and don't have enough facts to see the real truth. Who knows that nearly all "grass raised beef" sold in this country, comes from Uruguay? Who knows that all chicken and pork has "no added hormones or BHT"? Non-GMO bread, non-GMO rice cakes, where does it end?
I've never had animal by products in any chicken feed I'd had. But a major chicken marketer is promoting their chickens as eating a totally vegetarian diet. Makes theirs sound special when it is just like other products on the market.
How many people know that non-GMO, non-organic corn was likely to have received several applications of weed killer, fungicides, insecticides? Who understands that conventional (pre-no till, pre-Roundup ready) tillage allows tons of soil per acre to be lost in wind and water erosion?
Where does it end? Should I start selling "Non-Radioactive lettuce" at the farmers market?