Young Girl Takes Down Kevin O`Leary on GMO

Submitted by: Draculya 2 years ago in Science

[13 minute video warning]
There are 25 comments:
Male 40,739
They`ve recently discovered that many living things contain "other DNA" that somehow got transferred in the distant past.

They suspect it`s how viruses "jump species" for example Bird Flu suddenly affecting humans.

Monsanto is still a criminally evil company, but GMO food is nothing to worry about, at least yet. It does indeed happen in nature...
0
Reply
Male 15,261
"It all exists for one reason. So one or two companies can claim IP on DNA in food and therefore monpolise / control it."

Yes, that`s Monsanto.
0
Reply
Male 702
OMG. IAB delivers content! *slow clap*
0
Reply
Male 1,983
So the connection between ADHD and insecticide use has been tied together after 4 decades even though it was "Studied at length" at the time and now look.
And GMO`s have NOT been studied anywhere near as much as insecticides were so what do you think that will lead to?

I am not opposed to GMO`s. Goodness knows that quite a few medicines [such as Insulin] are produced by GMO bacteria.
I just have issues believing that a plant that is designed to cause the stomachs of insects to rupture is safe for long term human consumption.
Monsanto and Union Carbide and the rest do NOT have the best public safety records.
Nor do I trust the fact that ALL testing has been internal and they have sued EVERY outside facility that tried to conduct independent testing on their products.

If you are proud of your product, you typically plaster it all over the packaging.
There is just too much to indicate that they are trying to hide something.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Freak: "I don`t like it being "beta tested" on people without their consent."

First off, no one is being "beta tested" with GMO foods. If anything, cattle and poultry were the second layer of testing outside labs.

"It should have been studied at length first before going out on the market."

They have been and there are no ill effects.

Argus "one or two companies can claim IP on DNA in food and therefore monpolise / control it."

No lawsuit so far has given any company the right to patent DNA. They can protect their research data, but not the DNA itself.
0
Reply
Male 1,253
It all exists for one reason. So one or two companies can claim IP on DNA in food and therefore monpolise / control it.
0
Reply
Male 7,916
I suppose I have another beef with the whole GMO thing. I don`t like it being "beta tested" on people without their consent. It should have been studied at length first before going out on the market. Us being the guinea pigs doesn`t strike me as ethical.
0
Reply
Male 210
Many Country`s have banned GMOs, For a good reason, only the Country`s that put money before health and well being allow them to exist.
0
Reply
Male 1,106
I wouldn`t say she "took him down." I would say it was a draw. Labeling will hurt small companies much more than large ones, but, I guess that`s maybe a necessary evil. If these activists would quit demonizing large companies, and start their own independent research organizations that would analyze GMO products and then publish their works and actively make all their findings public, through use of websites and advertisements, I think they would be much more effective.
0
Reply
Male 663
>>Bliznik you are retarded. Playing God with food will only end in disaster.<<

Laughable on its face. What do you think the human race has been doing for the last 10,000 years? We stopped scavenging from the land thousands of years ago, and have been modifying the food we grow ever since.
0
Reply
Female 19
I know nothing about GMOs, nor am I political at all, but it feels like this little girl is basically just regurgitating stuff she`s read from a one-sided source. She refuses to listen to his side of the story, and she refuses to address many of the scenarios he shows her. I`m surprised at how quiet that the host was being with her, because I know if I had a kid spouting stuff at me like that I`d get aggravated.

I agree with him in one line he said, about her being flexible. I think she just seems to immature to handle this sort of debate, or that she needs to do more research.

Other than that, I think that the post is a bit misleading. I don`t think she buries the host or the buries her. It`s basically subjective, whomever you want to have won, "won."
0
Reply
Male 2,579
"Regarding labeling, "GMO vs. non-GMO" is retarded and doesn`t convey anything meaningful. Some GMOs are great, others not so great."

Bliznik you are retarded. Playing God with food will only end in disaster.
0
Reply
Male 1,737
The girl didn`t take down anyone. All she did was avoid answering the questions posed just like a politician or lobbyist would. At least Kevin addressed her points, and said, "Yes, more transparency is always good." She just ignored his.

Regarding labeling, "GMO vs. non-GMO" is retarded and doesn`t convey anything meaningful. Some GMOs are great, others not so great. Nutrition information and long-term study information is much more important
0
Reply
Male 5,811
...apple shut down the production of that molecule. How would you go about labeling such an apple?

"Is GMO." Not particularly useful.

"Contains extra copy of gene already present." Also useless.

And all this for something which has repeatedly been shown to be harmless. Yet, you don`t see people screaming bloody murder to have them label which pesticides were used on their food, and those HAVE been shown to be harmful. Yet just because it has the word "genetic" in it people start witch hunting because they are ignorant of all the good research behind the sound science.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
While I may not agree with all of Monsanto`s business practices, the science behind GMOs is sound, and there is no harm from eating them. Study after study has shown this, take a look at this meta analysis of many studies encompassing a variety of different GMOs, a variety of test animal species, and a variety of lengths, ranging from 90 days to long term multigenerational studies. No harm found.

Labeling them is pointless as well. It would be easier to label the ones that aren`t, and besides there is already organic anyway. The differences in each GMO make labeling a nightmare, which is part of why in Europe they decided to mostly stop selling GMOs.

For example, take Arctic apples. This is a new apple that doesn`t brown. They accomplished this by adding an extra copy of the gene responsible for browning, which makes the ap
0
Reply
Male 2,106
I`m also with Mr. Chouly.
0
Reply
Male 297
Did everyone miss the part about GMOs NOT having higher yields? This, among other reasons, is why more testing needs to be done: neither the positive or negative benefits have been recorded at all, we are all just assuming that these foods are better or the only choice because they say so.
0
Reply
Male 7,916
I don`t get why people are starving because of Monsanto. The part I disagree with is their ability to copyright nature.
0
Reply
Male 5,163

0
Reply
Male 7,916
I`m with patch here, we are either going to have to artifically stop procreating or increase the food supply. That`s going to have to be done through modifying foods. I don`t see another way of doing it.
0
Reply
Male 5,163
0
Reply
Male 5,163
Anyway,we are 7 bilions procreating in exponential way, overpopulation is the real problem of the earth and one of the cause of this situation are the companies like Monsanto and GMO products. Our planet have never saw such a larger number of humans, we passed from barely one billions to 7 bilions in less than a century, and what a single person consume nowaday is like what an entire village was used to consume. Go on with GMO and we will destroy ourselves and our planet by overpopulation.
0
Reply
Male 5,163
Probably people in others countries less lucky than Murica are starving right because of Monsanto or others greedies companies like that. Those anchormen are annoyng.
0
Reply
Male 4,745
I suppose this is one of the areas where I diverge from the Liberals. We`ve been altering food for years. Heck, corn is a crazy, mutated grass. I think this is simply a case of the general population being afraid of new technology. GMOs are set up to do a TON of good. It is the future of our food and the best way to end a lot of suffering.

And for the record, I think the girl got buried here. She either didn`t want to discuss the merits or hadn`t really given it much thought. Either way, she kept staggering and returning to the labelling issue as a way to deal with her lack of focus on the questions she was getting.
0
Reply
Male 15,261
Link: Young Girl Takes Down Kevin O`Leary on GMO [Rate Link] - [13 minute video warning]
0
Reply