One importance of food is that it provide energy for the body. Do genetic modified foods provide an energy level higher than the organic foods, or is it the other way round? Just curious.
It's clear that there is a problem with mass food production on lots of levels.
A lot of food you buy in the supermarkets today contains lots of sugars and fat. More and more people have allergies because of poor food quality. May this be the mass production and the tons of poison used in fruit and vegetables or the added "stuff".
Genetically modified foods have the risk of unbalancing the ecosystem. This is already done by using tons of poison on the crops and trees. As a result that bees are dying for instance. Growing GM food is like using nuclear energy, making use of the scientific possibilities that show profit without bothering to think about the impact on the environment and problems on longer terms.
It's obvious that organic food is far better than modified food. As organic food grew and developed on a slow piece together with the evolution of homo sapiens.
You can argue about the practicality of organic food, but that's a different subject.
A really good Netflix series I want to promote here is called Rotten. It's a series of short documentaries about the problems in the food industry. Like the slavery behind the chocolate industry, the milk industry problems, the bee farmers losing every year more and more colonies.
There is indeed something rotten in the state of the food industry and it is time that these powerful syndicates are made aware of their responsibility.
Another thing is. We used to spend more money on food and less on renting a house/mortgage. Today it's the opposite for lots of people. I advocate for raising the prices of food so the farmers get more for their produce (Not the middle man) and lower the prices of houses (in whatever way possible.)
Food is incredibly important. If you eat good food you won't get sick that quickly or have to go to the dentist that often. An apple a day keeps the doctor away.. An organic apple that is. Not an apple you have to wash before you eat it.
I would question whether "organic" food is better than "modified" food simply because it took a long time to come about. Certainly the "modified" (specifically bred for this or that attribute) food, while taking decades or centuries to become what it is today, did not develop along with the human species. That would take hundreds of thousands of years, and even then does not account for mankind moving about and eating new foods as he did.
We could cut the cost of housing very easily by simply downsizing - people don't need a thousand square feet per person. We could also eliminate many of the amenities in a house, like dishwashers, AC (in much of the world), extra thick walls with extra insulation (of course that means more energy) a whole raft of kitchen appliances, nice flooring - the list is extensive of what we put into a house that we don't need.
We evolved around food. We learned to cook and our stomach is used to cooked food. The same with grain and rice. We did not suddenly eat all this food. First, we foraged them, and then on a small scale we "farmed" them, this was a slow process over thousands of years. We evolved together with our food. And the food and climate made us who we are. Different foods in different parts of the world, and different tolerances. Some people are fine with cows' milk some not. This is an evolutionary process and if I'm correct a genetic thing.
GM does not take into account this evolutionary process. and for this, it's highly questionable.
Then there is the whole business around "rights" and patents. A nasty business that is!
I'm not a religious person, but a truly religious person should be anti-MG. Politics talk about Pro-Life and anti-abortion etc. But you never hear them talk about anti-GM. Why? Simple there is to much power and money involved. And then ethics are thrown out of the window.
You missed the point. Mankind came out of Africa to Europe and found new sources of food there. They didn't grow up with it, they didn't evolve with it - it was brand new to them.
This has been repeated over and over throughout our history as man changed his diet. It might be from a climate change, might be from a geographical change, it might be from a newly discovered method of preparation or methods of storage. It might even be from a new plant or animal in the area, brought in by wind or waves. Whatever it was, man has found new foods forever and did not evolve with what he ate.
And that was the point - to say that because man evolved with a certain food source and therefore only that food should be eaten is incorrect. Man is an omnivore and can (and does) eat almost anything - he does not require that only food sources that are millenia old be eaten.
We are innovative without poisonous fertilizer and chemicals of GMO methods.
I net abouts $50 an hour net growing and selling my vegetables. Also can train, most people to do the same. Imagine just growing your garden on your lawn, takes as much time and money as growing grass.
Even though man's an omnivour, it does not necesarily mean he could eat anythng or all things. That could place him in the same class as the cocksoach! Agreed that mankind migrated ov of Africa, I can assume they took along with them certain foods while crossing big rivers seas, and oceans. Or even deserts. Otherwise how d'you account for the foods they eat accross the seas or the deserts? Fish? Games? Or while roaming out of the evergreen forests(not every fruit growing on a tree is not fit for food, right?) they should be taste as salt. Hence, they took certain foods with them out of Africa, while in the state of hunter-gatherer.
I agree with you. Naturally, I prefer organic foods sold in the market over that on the counter in the big malls and supermarkets. I always read labels attached for example, over a gram of potatoes if these were source locally(remember the 500 yards radius, right?) or imported. It meant much to me.
It's a no brainer that organic foods are healthier because we grow it and know it plus train others to do so. Is much cheaper than buying it too.
The life expectancy of countries that grow moreso organic are higher and people are happier because you are what you eat. My daughter and I are first hand examples we grow our own vegetable and fungi food the two largest biomass life on the planet. I'm 66 years old most people think I am age 50 always get asked for seniors ID. My daughter is age 30 she always get asked for ID for places like bars if she is over age 18. People in Japan and hong kong live 7 or 8 years longer than Americans big on organic food. My holistic doctors in Belize only live on home grown food and medicine , as most of them live over age 100.
The only disadvantage is organic is higher in price and spoils faster. Yet that is changing quickly because health and loving yourself is most important thing in the world. Plus the freedom to be allowed to do so from GMO who do everything they can to destroy the our healthy market and places to grow it.
Also even Nathanville states European ban GMO and they are among the highest life expectancy also.
I've noted all your points. But does it implies that GMO food source cannot increased longivity with some individuals?
There is very little food that we eat that has NOT been modified to provide more profit to the producer. From the grains we grow to the meat we raise it has all been genetically modified.
I think it is not true with many peasant farmars. They refused buying GMO seeds, shoots, and roots.
But they DO buy modified seeds and such. Somehow we ignore that decades or centuries of working to produce "better" plants and animals, using breeding plans rather than gene splicing, is still producing a "genetically modified" organism.
That we choose plants and animals with a mutation originating from a cosmic ray, chemical change or even simple chance rather than intentionally changing the genetic structure to produce the next generation does not change that.
There is a difference here. The modification of let say grain, happened over the centuries, and man and the environment developed with it.
With modern Genetically Modified food, the environment and the human body are not developed at the same pace as the GM product.
In other words, the shock to the natural system is much larger and it's far more difficult to know and predict the consequences.
Asuming that could be true. But I think a scientific proof is required. For example, the first genetically engineered cow, Dolly lived to be six years. Throughout her life time, Dolly birth Polly. More so, it was just an experimental and the science of genetics is being exploit. My question: could the generations of Polly be comparable to the naturally breed cows in terms of meat or nutrient?
Dolly and Polly were cloned sheep.
Dolly Polly is a monster, so she lies awake in fear of the Witcher, who will kill her, because she is a monster. ... Witchers are mutants with powers that allow them to singlehandedly fight and kill dangerous monsters that are a threat to a large group of people.
Freaky Frankenstein stuff.
Castlepaloma, you're doing yourself a great favour. What has Dolly Polly, no it's Dolly and Polly got in common or in connection with your ART? Don't derail from the thread. It's all about GMO modified foods. Hope you adhere.
The GMO is the Frankenstein monster in abstract
Yes. But could not there be any trace of GMO in there? I have my doubts, and at the same time extremely curious. This is an issue. May it not fall into the waste bin!
We must "listen to Mother Nature or she will box our ears."
However, I believe we can improve foods when done/modified right.
For instance, a genetically modified rice, called Golden Rice, has been created by combining rice genes with corn genes. It is yellow because of the corn genes and therefore, contains vitamin A. Golden Rice could help poor kids in impoverished areas of the world who cannot get enough vitamin A in their diets.
Yet there are those who are against it, just because it is GMO.
We do know for sure that white rice specific lack vitamin A. So if GMO means cross breeding related plants or animals for a higher production(is that not a sort of fertilization, polination, or mating?), I don't see what's wrong with that. Actually, the yellow rice could be much more nutrtious than both the white rice and corn combined.
Yellow rice is more nutriential than white rice. Don't know about corn yet there is way too much of gmo corn in everything.
PS Organic is best. It tastes and digests better than non-organic vegetables and foods.
Who wants to overburden their organs (kidneys and liver) with insecticides and chemical fertilizer residue?
That sounds better.
Nothing could be further from the truth, the whole truth.
Are you saying Miebakagh.???
GMO foods tastes and digests better than organic vegetables and foods.
Even with GMO insecticides and chemical fertilizer residue ?
"Organic is best." I'm yet to eat a GMO food.
That's another advantage you have, living there.
Still love to hook up with a black woman, many here are soiled.
How about trying the unsoiled/de-soiled ones over there? As it is there, so is here. Besides it is rare these days to get a pure breed. But for those seeking are finding. Western or European civilization like GMO is corrupting. I try to make out a story late last on this. I need to do more research.
Think I have to find someone nice here.
Almost nobody can traveled anymore because they been so much broken from the plandemic.
by Tom Maitland 12 years ago
I've been asked to do a little bit of research into people's ideas of genetically modified food. This can range from disease-resistant crops, to using genetic modification to make our tomatos redder and orangers oranger. Does all this worry you, or do you think over all it's better?Would be great...
by Melis Ann 11 years ago
Would you knowingly eat genetically modified food? If so, what makes you comfortable with this?
by Nicola Thompson 10 years ago
Genetically Modified Foods? Yeah or Nay? Why?Are you for or against?
by Sherry Hewins 10 years ago
Are you concerned about GMOs (Genetically Modified Foods)?Do you care a little, a lot, or not at all?
by Susan Zutautas 11 years ago
Can genetically modified food change ones DNA?
by Shil1978 13 years ago
What are your views on genetically modified foods? Do you have any apprehensions about them?
Copyright © 2023 The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of The Arena Platform, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
Copyright © 2023 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective owners.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|