Obesity-monsanto

[devilock76]

I don't have any proof that genetically modified food has any adverse effects on the people that eat them. I also don't have any proof that the tactics monsanto are using are dangerous to the environment and agriculture in the long term...

However - my academic training is in genetics - I have a first class degree from Cambridge University in genetics and the natural sciences - and all the basic principles I have ever learnt during my degree lead me to suspect that at least the genes inserted within the monsanto varieties will be detrimental to agriculture in the long term because. It also leads me to believe in the possibility of dangers for people consuming the food from these GMO plants.

It is clear to me that the healthiest diet possible is one which most closely follows the diet of a hunter-gatherer in abundant times - there is no way that the human gut can have evolved significantly in the 10 thousand years or so since agriculture became widespread. We are all genetically hardwired to crave as much protein, fat, salt, sugar and carbohydrate as we can cram in our mouths because there is always a shortage of those things in the hunter-gatherer's diet and because all those things are essential in small amounts so we needed motivation to seek them out. Now those things are available to us 24/7 - the current health problems of western societies are very understandable. The average hunter-gatherer would have got their nutrition from about 1000 species of plants throughout the year - most of us now get our nutrition from under 50!

I am no different for knowing these things - I eat too much fat, meat, salt etc. in my diet - given the way our society works life is too short to not indulge sometimes - but I try to make sure that these excesses are from a variety of sources - all of which I know the provenance, and many of which I grow myself - I hope that by knowing the science behind my desire for unhealthy food I can turn around some of the health problems I am at risk of.

The bottom line is ... the closer you can get to an old fashioned way of getting and processing your food the better it will be for you and your environment - and it will be more tested by time. GM food is none of these things - and it will undoubtedly bring up more problems than it solves in the long term.

Cheers

Squeezy

I agree with everything you said from a personal health point on more "primal" living.

I also agree that the jury is technically still out on GMO in the absence of completely verified proof.

I will say the one problem is though that there is a good chance we may never feed all of the planet without these new methods in the years to come or even now. And Genetic Modifications have actually saved at least one produce item. There would be no Papayas if not for genetic modification and if you eat a papaya it is pretty much guaranteed to be modified genetically.

Ken

[lxskllr]

I will say the one problem is though that there is a good chance we may never feed all of the planet without these new methods in the years to come or even now.
Ken

I'm not interested in feeding the planet. There's too many people as-is, and increasing that number through hackery isn't the way to go. Food is only a small part of the equation, and allowing temporary life continuance through unnatural food propagation only delays the inevitable. I'm against proprietary software, and that's trivial when compared to proprietary food.

[devilock76]

http://news.discovery.com/human/us-l...es-110615.html

38th sure is great.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ife_expectancy

34th sure is great.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...mortality_rate

Your missing my point, weather for the sake of being abstruse or I was not clear. But let me reiterate. I am referring to the trend of our numbers over time.

So to address the links. Comparatively yes 38 and 34 are pretty good. When especially in life expectancy the separation between the top countries (yes between 38 and number 1) is about 4 years. 4 years out of a base of near 80 is 5% difference. So if they get a 100% on a test, we get a 95%, still an A. But again my point was our trends over time.

Now that one mentions we are lagging. Yeah I would bet we are now. In the middle of our economic mess yes I would bet we are. There are so many factors to why. But let's compare us to the countries above us. First of all world wide the US is the largest consumer of illegal drugs. I would have to wager that is a factor. Also among most of those countries we are one of the few without a fully socialized health care system. I think that would explain that 5% difference very well.

But again my point was over time. The US is constantly improving in these two figures. Your 3rd link shows that. Now granted there are many factors there, such as medical advances. But my supposition is this...

If we are "dropping like flies" then we should see a statistically significant change in the trends of these figures that correlates with the timeline of GMO being on the market. So I was looking for something more like that. Something that would at least imply a causality like you were saying.

Ken

[devilock76]

I'm not interested in feeding the planet. There's too many people as-is, and increasing that number through hackery isn't the way to go. Food is only a small part of the equation, and allowing temporary life continuance through unnatural food propagation only delays the inevitable. I'm against proprietary software, and that's trivial when compared to proprietary food.

OK, so how do you propose to pick out the millions of people that shall die from starvation?

Ken

[lxskllr]

OK, so how do you propose to pick out the millions of people that shall die from starvation?

Ken

Same as it's been done since there's been animals on the planet. When food's plentiful, animals eat, and reproduce. When there isn't food, animals starve, and don't reproduce. It doesn't require manipulation from an outside source. It takes care of itself. It may not be pretty, but it's natural, and necessary for a healthy planet.

[truthwolf1]

Your missing my point, weather for the sake of being abstruse or I was not clear. But let me reiterate. I am referring to the trend of our numbers over time.

So to address the links. Comparatively yes 38 and 34 are pretty good. When especially in life expectancy the separation between the top countries (yes between 38 and number 1) is about 4 years. 4 years out of a base of near 80 is 5% difference. So if they get a 100% on a test, we get a 95%, still an A. But again my point was our trends over time.

Now that one mentions we are lagging. Yeah I would bet we are now. In the middle of our economic mess yes I would bet we are. There are so many factors to why. But let's compare us to the countries above us. First of all world wide the US is the largest consumer of illegal drugs. I would have to wager that is a factor. Also among most of those countries we are one of the few without a fully socialized health care system. I think that would explain that 5% difference very well.

But again my point was over time. The US is constantly improving in these two figures. Your 3rd link shows that. Now granted there are many factors there, such as medical advances. But my supposition is this...

If we are "dropping like flies" then we should see a statistically significant change in the trends of these figures that correlates with the timeline of GMO being on the market. So I was looking for something more like that. Something that would at least imply a causality like you were saying.

Ken

With disease and obesity on the rise, it can all be debated although eating franken food might just be a big contributer. More Studies like the above should be done. Why not? There are many countries who do not not want GMO and yet it just get's pushed on people it seems with brut corporate force. My grandparents never jogged or slammed wheat grass or popped mega vitamins and hit their mid 80's to 90's. They were smokers/drinkers and ate a lot meat. Pretty much all died of old people disease. My dad has had 4 heart attacks, colon cancer, Mother- diabetes, high blood pressure, crohns etc.. all before the age of 60. Diabetes is rising in kids at alarming rates. 1-3 Cancer statistics. PEOPLE ARE GETTING SICK and I think it is worth the worry to look into our food/water sources.

[devilock76]

Same as it's been done since there's been animals on the planet. When food's plentiful, animals eat, and reproduce. When there isn't food, animals starve, and don't reproduce. It doesn't require manipulation from an outside source. It takes care of itself. It may not be pretty, but it's natural, and necessary for a healthy planet.

Easy to be nonchalant about it in abstract. How about if it is someone you know?

Ken

[devilock76]

With disease and obesity on the rise, it can all be debated although eating franken food might just be a big contributer. More Studies like the above should be done. Why not? There are many countries who do not not want GMO and yet it just get's pushed on people it seems with brut corporate force. My grandparents never jogged or slammed wheat grass or popped mega vitamins and hit their mid 80's to 90's. They were smokers/drinkers and ate a lot meat. Pretty much all died of old people disease. My dad has had 4 heart attacks, colon cancer, Mother- diabetes, high blood pressure, crohns etc.. all before the age of 60. Diabetes is rising in kids at alarming rates. 1-3 Cancer statistics. PEOPLE ARE GETTING SICK and I think it is worth the worry to look into our food/water sources.

Yet people are still living longer...

And granted with obesity rates that may change. But there are some way more direct culprits to that, like the fact that as a society we move less and consume more. I mean that simple physics equation explains it all. And has been proven time and time again to the point it is just a plain fact.

Ken

[lxskllr]

Easy to be nonchalant about it in abstract. How about if it is someone you know?

Ken

My personal thoughts have nothing to do with what's right. "feelings" have no place in setting policy. They even negatively affect the people being "helped". Shipping food to a desert in Africa artificially supports a culture that can't exist. The artificial food boosts the population which can't sustain itself, and will lead to a harder crash when the food is taken away. That's not counting the degradation of ecosystem that occurs when the infrastructure is insufficient for the population, which negatively affects the living. You don't have to go to Africa to see that. We've engineered ourselves into a disaster in the US SW. Water's running out, and we're fscking up more stuff trying to support a culture that shouldn't exit. It's already affecting people that /aren't/ in the SW, and the affects will spread far and wide before it's over.

[devilock76]

My personal thoughts have nothing to do with what's right. "feelings" have no place in setting policy. They even negatively affect the people being "helped". Shipping food to a desert in Africa artificially supports a culture that can't exist. The artificial food boosts the population which can't sustain itself, and will lead to a harder crash when the food is taken away. That's not counting the degradation of ecosystem that occurs when the infrastructure is insufficient for the population, which negatively affects the living. You don't have to go to Africa to see that. We've engineered ourselves into a disaster in the US SW. Water's running out, and we're fscking up more stuff trying to support a culture that shouldn't exit. It's already affecting people that /aren't/ in the SW, and the affects will spread far and wide before it's over.

So it is people living where they shouldn't that is the cause of lack of food. Not the tribal warlords there, in your africa example, not a regional drought. Let me ask a question, have you ever been to africa, particularly these areas or have any first hand experience with people from these areas?

Ken

[lxskllr]

So it is people living where they shouldn't that is the cause of lack of food. Not the tribal warlords there, in your africa example, not a regional drought.
Ken

Of course. Are the warlords digging up farmer's fields, and stealing food, or is it the case that there's nothing there in the first place? Or perhaps there's too many people cutting down trees for fuel, /creating/ desert, and overharvesting local resources.

Squirrels go through boom and bust cycles if you care to notice. Nut trees don't produce the same volume year after year. There's good years, there's bad years, and it happens regardless of the weather patterns. Squirrel population increases, and decreases with the nut cycle, and the end result is balance.

I know little about the Africans, and tbh, I don't care that much. It's the other side of the world, and has little impact on my life. I only have so much time for caring about things, and there's an unlimited amount of bullshit to care about in the world, so they didn't make the cut. People get fscked by life. That's the way it's always been, and that's the way it always will be. Intervening can make things worse, and the "we need more people paradigm" is unsustainable.

This is all getting away from the greater point that this planet has finite resources. If you create more food by hacking the system, other problems come up like people shitting in the river, and polluting the water supply. Engineer the water supply using energy intensive purification methods, you run out fuel. Run out of fuel, and food stops being shipped. Guess what happens when food stops being shipped...

[devilock76]

Of course. Are the warlords digging up farmer's fields, and stealing food, or is it the case that there's nothing there in the first place? Or perhaps there's too many people cutting down trees for fuel, /creating/ desert, and overharvesting local resources.

Squirrels go through boom and bust cycles if you care to notice. Nut trees don't produce the same volume year after year. There's good years, there's bad years, and it happens regardless of the weather patterns. Squirrel population increases, and decreases with the nut cycle, and the end result is balance.

I know little about the Africans, and tbh, I don't care that much. It's the other side of the world, and has little impact on my life. I only have so much time for caring about things, and there's an unlimited amount of bullshit to care about in the world, so they didn't make the cut. People get fscked by life. That's the way it's always been, and that's the way it always will be. Intervening can make things worse, and the "we need more people paradigm" is unsustainable.

This is all getting away from the greater point that this planet has finite resources. If you create more food by hacking the system, other problems come up like people shitting in the river, and polluting the water supply. Engineer the water supply using energy intensive purification methods, you run out fuel. Run out of fuel, and food stops being shipped. Guess what happens when food stops being shipped...

So my original point from before still stands:

Easy to be nonchalant about it in abstract. How about if it is someone you know?

Ken

Ken

[lxskllr]

So my original point from before still stands:



Ken

We already went over that. Feelings don't matter.

[devilock76]

We already went over that. Feelings don't matter.

They do if you don't have to have them tested. That is the point, anyone can say that. Ever watch someone dieing from starvation, someone you know perhaps? Until you have it is easy to say feelings don't matter. Everyone has a certain degree of bluster to support a viewpoint till they are faced with the actual ramifications of that view point.

Ken

[devilock76]

The point is, you would prefer a portion of our population dies than advances in agricultural science continue. That is like wishing for Polio and Small Pox to come back because they did wonders for population control.

Ken