CosmicBills Posted November 16, 2012 Posted November 16, 2012 I wouldn't really have a problem with the label, but I don't know that it's really necessary. I have a lot of friends that are big on this wheat grass eating hippie movement who only shop at organic grocery stores where they advertise not having GMOs. So people who are concerned about this have options. And why do you lay this off on Monsantos? Plenty of white people are involved as well.
3rdnlng Posted November 16, 2012 Posted November 16, 2012 I wouldn't really have a problem with the label, but I don't know that it's really necessary. I have a lot of friends that are big on this wheat grass eating hippie movement who only shop at organic grocery stores where they advertise not having GMOs. So people who are concerned about this have options. And why do you lay this off on Monsantos? Plenty of white people are involved as well. Crayonz, is that you?
Nanker Posted November 16, 2012 Posted November 16, 2012 Sweet Jebus. I leave for a minute and BearBull breaks out a Moderator rap about snot nosed wimps who went running to him to reign havoc upon our heads. WTF? Buch of sore-azzed winners from the last election came out of the woodwork to spew their personal venom and hatred with personal attacks aplenty. Then they dash off into the dark because they got shown Snow White's mirror. /hijack
Adam Posted November 16, 2012 Posted November 16, 2012 I know all the food I eat is genetically modified. I don't need labels to tell me. Heck, labels don't even tell you anything. Most 100% Wheat bread contains enriched flour and is as bad as white bread, and many eat it, because the big label is what they see, instead of the fine print.
Nanker Posted November 16, 2012 Posted November 16, 2012 Twinkie's ingredients. RIP Hostess Bakery. The site that's from. I think it's run by We Come In Peace, but I can't be certain.
Doc Posted November 16, 2012 Posted November 16, 2012 Doc, answer me this. It's a simple question: How can you take personal responsibility for watching what you eat when you're not told the truth about what's in the food you're buying and consuming? As has been mentioned, you read the ingredients list and nutrition facts to get an idea what's in it. As for GMOs, what specifically is it that you think they're doing to you?
Adam Posted November 16, 2012 Posted November 16, 2012 Twinkie's ingredients. RIP Hostess Bakery. The site that's from. I think it's run by We Come In Peace, but I can't be certain. RIP to all the people who ate Hostess products too much, as well
outsidethebox Posted November 16, 2012 Posted November 16, 2012 Heck, labels don't even tell you anything. Most 100% Wheat bread contains enriched flour and is as bad as white bread, and many eat it, because the big label is what they see, instead of the fine print. I agree. They slap the "all natural" tag on it and think its good for you. But like everything. including PPP, moderation is the key.
CosmicBills Posted November 16, 2012 Posted November 16, 2012 As has been mentioned, you read the ingredients list and nutrition facts to get an idea what's in it. As for GMOs, what specifically is it that you think they're doing to you? But like I keep saying, what good does it do to read the ingredients to screen for harmful products when Monsanto and their ilk have spend Billions (with a B) to prevent legislation requiring proper labeling? GMOs are tied to increased risks of bladder cancer, colon cancer, pancreatic cancer, diabetes, IBS and IBD, and the list goes on. Like the tobacco industry, the big food industry has spent millions discounting every scientific study done on the subject -- it's a game of light and shadows. They claim there are no long term effects -- but they have no verification and the evidence, circumstantial AND scientific, shows they are incorrect. Worse, since 1996 the amount of GMOs in our food supplies has nearly quadrupled -- pretty much anything with Soy or Corn in it that is processed includes GMO. Monsanto has made it their mission to buy up all natural seed and replace it with GMO seed. So it's quickly reaching a point where there will no longer be natural seeds available for independent farmers. This is an assault on our food supply.
Adam Posted November 16, 2012 Posted November 16, 2012 But like I keep saying, what good does it do to read the ingredients to screen for harmful products when Monsanto and their ilk have spend Billions (with a B) to prevent legislation requiring proper labeling? GMOs are tied to increased risks of bladder cancer, colon cancer, pancreatic cancer, diabetes, IBS and IBD, and the list goes on. Like the tobacco industry, the big food industry has spent millions discounting every scientific study done on the subject -- it's a game of light and shadows. They claim there are no long term effects -- but they have no verification and the evidence, circumstantial AND scientific, shows they are incorrect. Worse, since 1996 the amount of GMOs in our food supplies has nearly quadrupled -- pretty much anything with Soy or Corn in it that is processed includes GMO. Monsanto has made it their mission to buy up all natural seed and replace it with GMO seed. So it's quickly reaching a point where there will no longer be natural seeds available for independent farmers. This is an assault on our food supply. Until that process is fixed, the best policy is (always has been and will be) to eat foods with as few ingredients as possible.
outsidethebox Posted November 16, 2012 Posted November 16, 2012 Until that process is fixed, the best policy is (always has been and will be) to eat foods with as few ingredients as possible. Thats the key. If it has more than one ingredient in it, is not all natural.
Doc Posted November 16, 2012 Posted November 16, 2012 But like I keep saying, what good does it do to read the ingredients to screen for harmful products when Monsanto and their ilk have spend Billions (with a B) to prevent legislation requiring proper labeling? GMOs are tied to increased risks of bladder cancer, colon cancer, pancreatic cancer, diabetes, IBS and IBD, and the list goes on. Like the tobacco industry, the big food industry has spent millions discounting every scientific study done on the subject -- it's a game of light and shadows. They claim there are no long term effects -- but they have no verification and the evidence, circumstantial AND scientific, shows they are incorrect. Worse, since 1996 the amount of GMOs in our food supplies has nearly quadrupled -- pretty much anything with Soy or Corn in it that is processed includes GMO. Monsanto has made it their mission to buy up all natural seed and replace it with GMO seed. So it's quickly reaching a point where there will no longer be natural seeds available for independent farmers. This is an assault on our food supply. Do you have any links?
keepthefaith Posted November 16, 2012 Posted November 16, 2012 RIP to all the people who ate Hostess products too much, as well A guy at work today brought in a box of cupcakes, ho-ho's, twinkies and zingers. We all ate too much but the discussion about the Hostess situation was priceless. Until that process is fixed, the best policy is (always has been and will be) to eat foods with as few ingredients as possible. Yeah. If we can eliminate or greatly reduce the food you eat with sugar, white flour and hydrogenated oils, we do ourselves a huge favor.
DC Tom Posted November 16, 2012 Posted November 16, 2012 Do you have any links? No. Because there aren't any. Every source you'll find is from some homeopathic/naturopathic crackpot site that's just making **** up as they go along. There's a case to be made for ecological and economic damage from GMO's (Monsanto, for example, has this really annoying practice of "licensing" seed to farmers - not only do farmers have to pay every year for their seed corn, for example, but if seed blows onto your field from another field Monsanto can effectively sue you for "piracy" - stealing their patented property). But the health concerns...pretty damn laughable. You're at more risk from antibiotic-fed chicken.
Jim in Anchorage Posted November 17, 2012 Posted November 17, 2012 Twinkie's ingredients. RIP Hostess Bakery. The site that's from. I think it's run by We Come In Peace, but I can't be certain. I started a thread on this once. Who ever came up with the idea that calcium sulfate, for example would be a great thing to put in food?
ExiledInIllinois Posted November 17, 2012 Posted November 17, 2012 Unless you have hormone issues, but in general it is calories in versus calories out...Americans just tend to excel in calories in.. Bingo! You would think it would crossover to their bank accounts! You know... That saving mentality! I started a thread on this once. Who ever came up with the idea that calcium sulfate, for example would be a great thing to put in food? I am not sure what it does... But maybe many years ago it was to retain color or preserve shelf-life? I don't know, maybe a chemist somewhere. Stuff like xanthum gum... WTF is that? I guess it is a binder and keeps things from separating? I notice that is in stuff like Chivetta's and Frank's Red Hot... Quite a staple ingredient in BFLO bar food! LoL... Anyway... Good riddance Hostess... We need LESS choice in this world... Sorry about the workers, maybe they can find honorable professions, like making flags or something...
Doc Posted November 17, 2012 Posted November 17, 2012 No. Because there aren't any. Every source you'll find is from some homeopathic/naturopathic crackpot site that's just making **** up as they go along. There's a case to be made for ecological and economic damage from GMO's (Monsanto, for example, has this really annoying practice of "licensing" seed to farmers - not only do farmers have to pay every year for their seed corn, for example, but if seed blows onto your field from another field Monsanto can effectively sue you for "piracy" - stealing their patented property). But the health concerns...pretty damn laughable. You're at more risk from antibiotic-fed chicken. Kinda what I figured. But I'm still curious to see what's being claimed. As for the patent and licensing, I can understand them doing that, although the suing thing seems dickish. And on a side note, after doing a search, it appears the patent is good for 20 years. I came across "Roundup Ready Soybeans," which are soybeans resistant to RoundUp weed killer, and that patent is set to expire in 2014. That should help lower soybean prices.
ExiledInIllinois Posted November 17, 2012 Posted November 17, 2012 No. Because there aren't any. Every source you'll find is from some homeopathic/naturopathic crackpot site that's just making **** up as they go along. There's a case to be made for ecological and economic damage from GMO's (Monsanto, for example, has this really annoying practice of "licensing" seed to farmers - not only do farmers have to pay every year for their seed corn, for example, but if seed blows onto your field from another field Monsanto can effectively sue you for "piracy" - stealing their patented property). But the health concerns...pretty damn laughable. You're at more risk from antibiotic-fed chicken. So right! Yet, they gotta stockpile the cash so they remain relevant... Just like Apple does w/its battle and insanely gross mark up of hardware... Kinda what I figured. But I'm still curious to see what's being claimed. As for the patent and licensing, I can understand them doing that, although the suing thing seems dickish. And on a side note, after doing a search, it appears the patent is good for 20 years. I came across "Roundup Ready Soybeans," which are soybeans resistant to RoundUp weed killer, and that patent is set to expire in 2014. That should help lower soybean prices. I wonder if lowering the time one can hold a patent may help?? Especially, in the tech world where things change so fast... ??
3rdnlng Posted November 17, 2012 Posted November 17, 2012 So right! Yet, they gotta stockpile the cash so they remain relevant... Just like Apple does w/its battle and insanely gross mark up of hardware... I wonder if lowering the time one can hold a patent may help?? Especially, in the tech world where things change so fast... ?? Well, if things change so fast what good would it do to lessen patent control time?
ExiledInIllinois Posted November 17, 2012 Posted November 17, 2012 Well, if things change so fast what good would it do to lessen patent control time? I am not sure BUT, longer time that few have a stranglehold on things is definitely not better. I suppose I mean "fast" as before the current controls run out... Have it the other way... Before something changes, have the controls expire.
Recommended Posts