non GMO Cheerios

Like. A lot!!! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

That's the funny thing about this...they don't even have to say GMOs are bad...and as far as I know they haven't said that. They're just taking advantage of a belief that is already out there. All they have to do is trumpet that Cheerios are GMO-free and the customers do the rest. They won't lose any customers by labeling their product GMO-free, but they'll gain some...win-win for them!

Yep.

It's like getting a 18oz bottle of mustard that says - in bold letters "NOW 50% MORE THAN OUR OUR 12oz SIZE". Wow.

Wow...this reply is so full of inaccuracies its not even funny.

Sent from my GT-P3113 using Tapatalk

__________________

Oh no, agent orange again...that stuff has not been around for years...many years.

Sent from my GT-P3113 using Tapatalk

__________________

This is true. Also proper PPE were not used.

Sent from my GT-P3113 using Tapatalk

__________________

I found it quite sad, really.

Ok, it may be, its just my opinion how I see it. If it is inaccurate, then please educate me.
No sarcasm, no snide remarks, just absolute, indisputable proven facts.

Well I know I busted out laughing at such nonsense as that was but then I started to cry to think there are so many that still think everything you read on the net is the truth. When so much of these anti gmo stuff has been debunked time and again. I just can't understand how some can still believe. But then again the truth about Obama was told to so many also before he got elected years ago, but we still got him. And now those truths are coming to bare on just how bad a president he really is and what he is doing to this country.

__________________
Oh my, dishes yet to wash and dry

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

You asked for facts, we gave them. Here, I will try again...

Prior to gm canola, here is how it worked to farm canola. The same general rule of thumb may be used for corn and soybeans to a degree.

1. Summerfallow the soil for a year, grow nothing on it, burn gallons of diesel an acre cultivating it for the summer, wreck soil structure, watch soil blow away. In the spring, fix the gulleys washed away by snow melt, after watching brown water run off the fields.

2. The following spring, spray a couple lbs of Trifluralin (a soil applied toxic herbicide, designed to kill all germinating seeds that are not the wanted crop) to the soil surface.

3. Cultivate twice. The soil is now completely powdery, there are no earthworms or any other observable insect life forms to be seen. It gets windy while cultivating. Clouds of topsoil begin leaving the field, carrying trifluralin with it.

4. Seed the canola into the powder as best you can.

5. Spray with several ounces of clopyralid, because trifluralin sucks at controlling wild buckwheat and canada thistle, which with all the tillage was minced into bits and is now growing everywhere on the field

6. Spray with another few ounces of clethodim, because the trifluralin did not work on the wild oats and green foxtail.

7. Spray with another ounce of muster herbicide, because nothing else works on wild mustard in canola.

8. Harvest a crop of canola, about half the yield of what we see today. Hope the soil which has eroded with every rain, and every windstorm, does not run into your reservoir, your well, your animal water source.

Now, with gm canola, here is how it goes...

1. Seed into standing stubble of the prior crop. Burn about 1/2 galon of diesel an acre. The soil did not erode. No trifluralin is leaving the soil and entering the water sources. No more gulleys form runoff events to fix. Earthworms, and other soil life is abundant. Soil organic matter is building. The soil is being rebuilt from the old methods. The water seldom runs off anymore because of the better soil structure and porosity, which allows it to soak up more rainfall. If it does run off, the water is clear, and pesticide free.

2. Spray with about 1/4 of a lb of glyphosate an acre, or about a lb of glufosinate ammonium per acre. Kill almost every weed in one single application. No further herbicides needed. Remember, an acre of soil weighs 2 000 000 lbs., and I applied 1/4 of a lb. of herbicide, which is not soil active like trifluralin or clopyralid. Upon application, the herbicide is digested by the plants, and once it hits the soil, it is rapidly digested by the soil, and or tied up by the soil microbes, which are many now from not tilling the living tar out of the soil.

3. Harvest the canola, which yields 2 times what it used to, because of far healthier soil, far cleaner fields of weeds.

4. Crush the seeds. Because the gene is a protein, and canola oil contains ZERO protein, there is no gm material in the canola oil.

See, the gene was selected from a naturally occurring soil microorganism, which was found to be the reason glyphosate is broken down and digested by the soil. And again, once crushed, the gene is nowhere to be found, because the oil has no protein in it.

This is the scenario that gm canola, and other crops are similar, have given us.

These are all facts that can not be disputed scientifically. And since you asked, I hope you learned something about gm crops. And I hope that just because it does not fit with the false information you seem to have, it still helps you out in your quest for the actual truth.

I don't blame you for not knowing how these things work. Most non-farmers do not know, it is not their occupation. Much like I am clueless about how to be a Doctor. I only hope you learn gm crops are not the scary, environment killing, soil killing things you seem to think they are...

Your mustard example reminds me of the ketchup with lycopene...it has always had lycopene, but for a little while it became the biggest marketing gimmick around for selling the stuff...forget the fact that you would have to eat a LOT of ketchup (along with the sugar and salt in it) to get much benefit...and that every other ketchup has it too.

Farmerdale, thanks for the explanation. It does bring up other questions tho, not wholely about GMOs, but about processes. If gmo crops can be planted via no till drill, why cant non gmo?
And my anti GMO stance also comes from the idea of altering genetics period. Im not so naive to believe that this could apply to many things in modern life.
If the gene is protein, and no protein is in canola oil, ok. But what about corn and or soy bean meal? A lot of protein there.
Another question, if the is nothing harmful about GMO crops, why does it seem that companies such as monsanto will not allow independent labs to analyze their products?
I know many European countries have studied them and will not allow them to be farmed.

I'm not saying there are no advantages, but just as anything man made, there are some advantages, and disadvantages. The problem with modern man is, we refuse to stop anything once we have started it, due to disadvantages, we just find a new solution.
Hypothetical situation to better explain what I mean; company X creates a product. People love the product because it helps man in his never ending search for easier and quicker.
A couple years go by and we find out said product causes this problem and that problem. So, because we have gotten use to the advantages of said product, we either ignore the problems caused, or we invent other products to counter the problems caused by first product. Then, as history repeats, the solution product causes a different problem, so yet another solution product needs to be invented, endless cycle. When all along, discontinuing use of first product could have eliminated all the residual problems, but would require going backwards in technological evolution.

I hope that all reads slightly clearer than mud, lol.

Actually it's not always obvious. Cheerios are not gluten free. They do put wheat in them despite most of the grain used being oats. I can eat rice chex, but not cheerios.

Oh - I know that.... I just was trying to show the labeling of items solely for financial gains. Like labeling an apple as gluten free.

Cheerios give me a stomachache too even though they're mostly oats. Nature's Path is a good brand to try and are GF. http://www.amazon.com/Natures-Path-O.../dp/B0028UA2NA

A no till drill is like a regular drill (seed planter), except it is made to cut through the plant material that is left on the surface to reduce erosion (both wind and water). So, you could use a no till drill on non GMO crops.
Prior to GMO crops, weed control was done with chemicals and continually turning over the soil. Then cultivators were pulled through the fields, uprooting everything between the rows. This took lots of fuel, caused more deep soil compaction and left the soil exposed to wind and water erosion. Crop residue (corn leaves, chopped corn stalks) had to be plowed under to be away from the cultivator shovels. Now, it is left as protective mulch.
Lots of folks base their hate of GMO on altering genetics, so you are not alone. I think if you had a better understanding of the process and saw the amount of genetic manipulation that is done without GMO, it wouldn’t seem so scary. Hybridization is a way to gain characteristics that never could be done by waiting for a chance crossing in nature. Once you see what is done in hybridization, you’d see that GMO isn’t as different as you may have been led to believe.
Some folks have avoided Canola Oil and Beet Sugar because they want to avoid all GMO products. So, it is important, in an explanation of canola, to mention that there is no GMO in these products.
Yes, there is protein in corn and soybeans. Every plant and animal has DNA. It is so complex that no two animals have exactly the same DNA. Brothers, sharing the same parents, have differences in DNA. Some parts of DNA are recessive in one person, but not in another. In nature, it is all quite random.
When I eat a steak, I am able to digest the protein. But I do not absorb the cow’s DNA and have that cow become a part of my being. Simply doesn’t work like that. If a crop can resist the effects of a plant herbicide, eating that pland doesn’t mean that you injest pesticides. Quite the opposite is true. Such plants are subjected to far less chemicals than their non-GMO counterparts.
GMO products have been tested by many independent universities. The official ban on US GMO grain is a complex topic. Briefly, any excuse not to use our products, keeps free trade agreements intact, while protecting their less productive farmers. In reality, many farmers in Europe are using GMO seeds.

But we are getting a long way from corn-free (GMO or non-GMO) oat cereal, aren't we.

Hybrids are crosses between close species... Genetic Modification is splicing genes between radically different species, something not done in nature. Insect and bacteria DNA do not belong in self-replicating PLANT DNA.
'Genetic Modification' and hybridization are nowhere near equivalent.

I no till non-gmo crops all the time, they can indeed be no-till seeded. But the crops which have been modified, as I mentioned with canola, had very limited weed control options. The trifluralin HAD to be sprayed onto bare soil free of trash. Then it HAD to be cultivated TWICE to mix it well enought to semi-work. Point being, the crops that have been modified, were for good reasons. They had very poor weed control options. The other crops I grow, wheat, peas, barley, rye, oats, flax, etc., all have good weed control options, so they can be no-tilled easily. Canola simply could not, at least effectively.

There IS protein in the meal of canola. Note I am speaking of canola, as it is what I grow. I am no soybean or corn expert at all. I am not positive the gene donor that was used for these crops, so I can not be as strongly confident on them, I will admit.

There have been hundred of studies, I as a farmer have read about gm crops, that are not put out by monsanto, bayer, or any other of the companies using gm technology. It is often brought up, but I have yet to see any proof that these companies stop others from studying these products. I am not sure where this idea comes from. I find it very interesting, that right after you say this, you state that Europe has studied them extensively, which really makes little sense does it? How is it Europe studies them, yet North America can not... strange theory to me.

And to use Europe of all places as proof gm is not safe, is strange, because Europe pretended for decades that South America had no gm soybeans. Yet they imprted millions of tons of beans from South America. Beans the whole world knew were gm beans. As well, Europe imports Canadian canola oil, which is crushed in Dubai, so they can tell their consumers it is not from Canada. A bit rich, hey? Europe subsidizes their farmers about 4 times more than in the US. Part of this theory they use, is being extremely protectionist of their own farmers. What better way to do this, than to ban products from other countries, so their own farms can produce them. European farmers have a lot of power, and so their governments are VERY cognizant of that, and treat them like spoiled children.

Japan has been a long time faithful importer of Canadian canola and oil. I would argue Japan is on the ball in terms of healthy choices, and they have no qualms about using gm products.

I agree there are disadvantages in some cases. Too much reliance, particularly in the US, where they use gm crops almost exclusively, can lead to rotational problems, weed selecting, and other issues. Up here, we only have one gm crop, and only grow it once in three or four years on the same land, and we grow here, a MUCH more diverse number of crops. So the exposure up here is much, much less. I think the US is over-killing to an extent, their dependency on only two basic crops to begin with. GM or not. The fact these are BOTH gm to a huge extent, has potential ramifications from a farmers perspective. I do not think they are unsafe to consume, I just mean practically, for soil health etc. more than two crops are always best. In my opinion, gm altering must not spread to animal life. Nor do I want gm wheat, oats, flax, barley, etc. It is simply not needed like it was to maintain canola as a viable crop. Excellent weed control options are already there with other crops.

GM crops have been grown on billions of acres, fed to billions of animals, and humans, and have never been proven to be unsafe in two decades of usage...

The only thing different, is a spliced in gene. We have always eaten genes without trouble. We do not soak genes into our own, or are affected by them in other crops. It is not like it is a bacteria, a virus, etc. It is simply a single gene. For that and many reasons I think these crops are safe.

Thank you for the thorough explanations. Honestly gives me a new perspective to see things from.
I, quite honestly, cannot say I am fully convinced that something modified by man is "better" than something designed by God and reproduced naturally, but, thank you for explaining it from a new perspective.

I am glad to be able to share. I am appreciative for the opportunity, and even more appreciative that this thread, drifted as it got, (sorry for my part in that!) never got really snide, cruel, or mean hearted. Just good old fashioned sharing of ideas.

I am glad to have been able to share a perspective. Your not being convinced for the reasons you mention, I totally understand. For some reason plants being modified don't bother me for the most part, but if they start messing with animals, etc., that would make me cringe. Like when they clone sheep, or grow fake meat in a petri dish, etc.. I feel the way I do about animal modifications for the same reasons you have reservations about crops.

Cheers,

Dale

I can't have a discussion if you are going to put God into the mix. Let's say that God has opened the eyes and provided the knowledge so man could do GMO? Did God give us medications? Did God make knee replacements?

I'd prefer to look at this in a more natural perspective. Check out what corn looked like before man began manipulating it. One or two kernels on a single cob. Took the natives a few thousand years to get to the point it was at when the religious zealots hit the North American shoreline.

Rather than have us "agree to disagree", I'll accept that GMO isn't better than what God could make. If God made corn seed that fought off corn borers and produced 200 Bushels to the acre and was open pollenated, I'd take Monsanto off my Christmas Card list in a flash.

To get the traits for just one corn variety (there are hundreds each year) plant breeders use the pollen from one variety and the silk from another variety. Hybrid. So rows of each variety are grown together. Years ago, that meant putting bags over the silk on one variety and cutting the tassels off the other variety, so they would be making the proper cross. That took a lot of hand labor. Now days, plant breeders have included additional traits. So the corn plants that they would have cut tassels off, now grows two feet taller than the plants that they want the tassels left, plus tassels out (forms pollen) weeks earlier. So, a machine can go through the field and cut the tassels (where the pollen is produced) from one variety and leave the tassels from the one that they want to provide pollen. Lots of mixing and matching of corn variety traits to produce corn that stands up to wind, withstands drought, tolerates various diseases and fungi, germinates in cold conditions, uses the nutrients in the soil and the sun's energy better to produce large ears of corn. Some is bred for higher starch contents, some waxy varieties and some with more sugar. All while producing record yields. Among all this "tinkering" a small portion of it is a variety that has ben manipulated to resist the effects of a specific, safe herbicide, known as Roundup Ready. This trait is then bred into most of the other varieties.
But not all corn is GMO Roundup Ready. A friend that grows thousands of acres, does not use Roundup Ready corn. He uses GMO corn that resists corn borer. Then the next year he plats those fields to Roundup Ready soybeans. This way he can spray the field with Roundup, kills the weeds and the corn that sprouts from last year, leaving his soybeans mostly weed free.
This is a fairly complex subject. Can't be well explained in a few hour training, much less my brief explanation. Suffice to say that after decades of production, thousands of acres, millions to bushels, millions of cattle fed, millions of meals prepared, no one can say that GMO has caused a bit of harm to anyone. Yet some still hold out hope.