Genetically Modified Foods, nothing to fear

http://sanstandards.org/userfiles/fi...ber%202011.pdf

Something to think about is that not everything that is harmful causes cancer. There are so many food allergy problems that nobody seems to be able to find a cause for. The number of people who are having a problem is increasing very quickly. The problem is especially great in the US.

Could it be that we are creating something in our food stream that is a cause? I don't know. I do think that it is crazy to say that there is no harm in eating a food because it didn't cause cancer in some animals over a 1 or 2 year test. The interactions of food in our system is so much more complex than that can ever show.

Also, one of the arguments for GE crops is that they have created less need for pesticides. I do not think that this has shown to be true.

It is demonstrably true that gm has allowed for far less herbicide use in most gm crops.

I am in an area that has been growing gm canola since 1996. Several generations of all manner of mammals, insects, birds, reptiles, and amphibians have been living in this area. Now, there is more wildlife than EVER before. IMO, it is because gm crops allow for far less tillage and therefore erosion, less soil applied herbicides, cleaner runoff from the fields, more food available, more habitat from the abundance of soil life, which as we all know is the basis of any strong, clean ecosystem.

The fields after a hard rain, used to have muddy runoff, laden with trifluralin, phosphates, and nitrates, along with sediment. Now the water runoff is less, due to better, more dynamic soils. Rainfall infiltrates the no till land much better. And when runoff does occur, the water is clear, because the soil is not eroding. There is no more trifluralin use. Phosphates stay on the land for crops to use.

The environment around this area has never been so clean and pure. Wildlife has never been this abundant and healthy. My soil has never had such amazing soil life in it. Nesting birds no longer have their nests ripped apart by tillage, they have more insects to eat now. Salamanders, frogs and snakes are everywhere, because they have cleaner, less pesticide laden water to use.

Again, there is always two side to a story. The internet. And then there is actual in the field experience. My personal experience tells me that because of our purer environment, gm crops have been a large boost to our ecological diversity, cleanliness, and have allowed for an environmental turnaround from previous practices...

Dale

Do you think that food allergies could be caused by the carp that is added to food when it is being processed and packaged for retail sale in your local grocery store?

Such a great point. I am a strong believer that HOW we are eating as a society, has far more to do with any perceived health risks, than the raw materials used. Most people eat out of a box. Most buy their food from the store, in pre-packaged form.

I think something we can all agree on and be proud of, is we do for the most part, maintain some varying level of raising at least a bit of what we eat.

We are on this site for a reason after all. To learn about just that. In so many different categories. I know I have learned a lot about certain things on this site.

I like most on here, like knowing where my food is coming from. For me that means my eggs that are laid by hens who I know what they have had for breakfast. I know the eggs are fresh. I know my wheat I grind is grown in good soil that is well cared for. I know my chickens are fresh.

IMO, what is being added to our food, and how society is in this convenient loving society, is more of an issue than the raw materials by and large...

I would rather eat grain grown in today's world, than that grown in the 1950's, knowing what was sprayed then, vs. what is sprayed now...

Awesome post, I SO agree!

__________________
Please take the time to watch this video about Cerebral Palsy!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0mrs4fpRv8

I was thinking this yesterday, about how my daughter exhibits many symptoms of gluten intolerance after reading several articles about it.Also with lactose intolerance, I wondered if it is not actually the wheat or dairy all the people are suddenly allergic to, but all the additives ,pesticides,herbicides,etc, that are involved in processing/growing them? I have always been a Nature Nut, and believe that every living organism on earth has a purpose. How did human beings survive before modern medicine & modern agriculture? Could it be that man's "progress" is doing more harm than good? I think that is what is happening.

__________________
Please take the time to watch this video about Cerebral Palsy!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0mrs4fpRv8

Barley and oats.

They grow green manure crops and then 'crimp' them.



Then I am surprised to hear you talking as if no-till were new.

Since you follow Masanobu Fukuoka, you must be familiar with the background of no-till.



I suggest that you address toward a flax producer.

__________________
http://www.mofga.org/

http://www.mofga.org/Programs/FarmAp...2/Default.aspx

Interesting if you want half the yield conventional guys get. Saw an interview with an organic producer near LaCrosse and even with Rodale out helping his yield was about half the neighbors...

__________________
Deja Moo; The feeling I've heard this bull before.

I understand your first 2 paragraphs. At some point there is enough testing to move forward, but some people don't gfeel whatever amount of testing done has been enough. And between lack of exersize, processed foods, an assortment of plastics, an assortment of cleaners and anti0germ stuff, and an assortment of chemicals in farming and industry.... There is renough room to wonder.

GMO crops lead to easier ways to kill weeds, and plants resistant to insects. In the case of weeds, we certyainly use less harmful, less potent, weed sprays. In the old days we used combinations and cocktails of many weed killers, and sprayed often. Per bushel of grain grown, we use far less chemical with GMO.

And insect issues it is even more dramatic. Folks have ordered planters without insecticide boxes since bT crops came out. Used to be somer very nasty dangerous insecticides that lasted in the environment were put on every acre. Far less of that now.

Paul

I will say that after grain is harvested, probably 50% or more is treated with insecticides to prevent deterioation due to insect infestations, whether it is destined for human or animal feed stuffs.

As to how did humans survive, many did not. They starved to death or died of disease. The weak and infirm did not dilute the gene pool.

I will say that if one does their research, that "modern medicine" is the greatest killer in this country, bar none.

And what most treat that grain with has also improved. From the good old days of using phostoxin, which could kill humans if they breathed it in, to today where if we have storage risks, we use diatomateous earth. A benign powder.

For those interested in growing grain commercially and doing it in an organic and/or sustainable manner:

http://www.organicgrains.ncsu.edu/NC...ainProject.htm

http://eorganic.info/

Field Crop information: https://attra.ncat.org/field.html

just a small listing of resources for those interested in growing organically or practicing sustainable farming.

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

1) You have to be suspicious of "fox guarding the henhouse" claims, i.e. studies financed by the GMO devlopers, and the Government, too. They want GMO's to work, and even if they say otherwise, there's pressure to make the numbers support the billing.

2) Maybe they're OK, and maybe they're not. But if you don't even know which are which, how can you tell? It's like people who react to an unreported change in the fillers used in pills, doctors assume it's a reaction to the active ingredient (the drug), and change to a possibly less-effective alternative, when it's actually the filler and simply changing the brand of the drug will remove the reaction.

3) The current "GMO" trend actually started with wheat. Mounting evidence suggests the modification is responsible not only for increases in Crohn's and celiac disease, but also increases calorie consumption. (http://www.infowars.com/doctor-says-...hronic-poison/) Birds have the sense to avoid it. Yet, the Government advocates eating whole wheat and blames our obesity epidemic entirely on sugar intake, with emphasis on HFCS. (supporting point #1)

Your first two points are opinion, so won't argue them.

Number three tho, is terribly misleading.

We commonly have come to understand gmo to mean modified DNA in a laboratory. He is using the term first to mean regular plant breeding and crossing of plants in a natural manor.

Then later in the article it references gmo corn, which they mean back to the traditional definition of gmo.

I think that is quite a poor, deceiving way of trying to explain anything, and would discount his thought just on that basis alone. If he does not understand what gmo means in common use, then he must have an agenda or a slight of hand trying to decive us. There is no gmo wheat seed sold for planting, and gmo did not start until the 1980s. If he pretends to be an expert on this topic, he should understand that and be clear on what he is saying.

In other words, I believe he has a book to sell, and fits very very well your definition of a fox attempting to guard the henhouse! His comments should be discounted as too inaccurate to have meaning.

Paul

I didn't say we had 70 acres. I said 70 acres of pasture. Apparently you didn't read my whole reply - add up the numbers and keep counting. I said there is more in addition to that although I did not specify how much more. We farm approximately 1,100 acres (total depends on which deeds you look at... +/-10%) between all our different crops and we don't use GMOs, herbicides or pesticides on any of that. Perhaps 70 acres, 110 acres, even 1,000 acres is small-scale to you. Me thinks you'll never be satisfied with any number anyone farms.

What had been said was:
That is false and a lie. Pesticides (and GMOs and herbicides) are not used on organic farms nor are they used on all crops nor are they necessary to farming.

Don't spread lies.

__________________
SugarMtnFarm.com -- Pastured Pigs, Poultry, Sheep, Dogs and Kids

I was under the impression there were organic labeled fertilizers, herbicides, and insecticides?

Not every organic operation uses them on every acre, but I think some use some on some organic ground, or they wouldn't be available?

Folks here keep saying we should use salt and/or vinegar to kill weeds, that would be a herbicide in that use, so they too are using pesticides.

Anyhow, pretty good operation you have there, making organic work on a big scale is always impressive to me. On the big ag forum, a fella is working on organic notill, it is interesting to follow his struggles with it. He is big enough to need crop insurance, and it is difficult to satisfy the farm bill side of things, the organic side of things, and make notill work through it all.

Paul

What kind of crops do you grow organically without using GMOs, herbicides, or pesticides on that 1100 acres?

Corn? Wheat? Tomatoes? Trees?

What kind of yields do you get on your corn, soybean, wheat, or other grain crops?

Let's not get this into a personal "you prove it match".

We have a member here doing what several members are trying to say cannot be done.


This will stay a discussion and not a fuss.


As posted earlier, infractions for fussing and insulting will be easily handed out.

__________________
"Live your life, and forget your age." Norman Vincent Peale

Isn't neem oil, Thuracide, and dipel dust considered organic insecticides?

Wouldn't arsenic and nicotine sulfate be considered organic?

What about DE? Misused it can be harmful.