mumsnet debate on GMO

[eragon]

http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/guest_posts/a2233450-Guest-debate-Should-we-be-worried-about-GM-foods

[lakeswimr]

I don't think there is a link between GMO and FAs. 

[SilverLining]

activists and Hollywood stars warned of the dangers of GM foods.

'Nuff said!

[guess]

I agree with elastamum and Moocherbot. 

elastamum Wed 12-Nov-14 23:11:03

Robyn O'Brien's article is scientifically sloppy in the extreme. Designed to scare you by linking together whole bunch or stuff without any causality.

The hard to swallow truth is that without GM crops the developing world will continue to suffer famine and health problems due to vitamin deficiencies.

Golden rice was a development which increased vitamin A in rice to prevent blindness. But due to opposition from the Anti GM lobby the delayed application of Golden Rice in India alone has cost 1,424,000 life years since 2002. That odd sounding metric – not just lives but 'life years' – accounts not only for those who died, but also for the blindness and other health disabilities that Vitamin A deficiency causes. The majority of those who went blind or died because they did not have access to Golden Rice were children. Golden rice development is continuing supported in part by the gates foundation.

It is easy to be anti GM from the comfort of your centrally heated kitchen. Am all for labelling food properly, but we need GM to help solve the nutritional problems of the developing countries.

Society needs groups like Greenpeace and other environmental organizations to hold big companies accountable when they put their profits before our health, as they too often do. But society must also hold advocates accountable when they let their passions blind them to the facts and, in pursuit of their values, stop the introduction of technology that can help protect the vulnerable, the weak and the poor of this world

Moocherbot Thu 13-Nov-14 00:17:06

"Whilst correlation does not prove causation, the introduction of GM crops into the US in the mid-1990s has been accompanied by an unprecedented increase in a range of diseases including allergies."

"Diseases"? Like what? Malaria? Polio? Ingrowing toenails? How can something so completely vague be even worth saying?

And hear hear elastamum I think that is an extremely good and well put point - neither unchecked corporates nor unchallenged advocates.

Most definitely the source Dr. Aradottir provides. 

We have found it difficult to point people towards anything that could give them a direct way into the debate without being overwhelmed by scientific detail on the one hand or polemic on the other.  We found that much of the commentary is written as though we all know what GM is and does - but then often gets it wrong, talking about "zombie seeds" and "super weeds". It has sometimes been difficult to find clear answers to questions such as "are we eating the products of GM in the UK?" and "was 'terminator technology' ever used?"

There are some big gaps between perception and reality. For example, conventional plant breeding already exploits crosses between plants that would not occur in nature or induces random mutations artificially with radiation or chemical agents, so it isn't really more "natural" than GM. "Eating genes" is something that everyone does every day, whether they eat GM foods or not. GM crops are grown in 23 countries, so the world isn't and can't be "GM-free". Discussion about GM also seems to have become a proxy for other much-needed discussions about food shortages, economic power of multinational corporations, food safety, farming systems and trade agreements, which go far beyond this technology and its applications.

This guide is about what scientists are doing and why. We have asked a lot of people to help, from researchers at the main UK plant research institutes to farmers, toxicologists and people who could lay their hands on relevant material. The contributors helped define the most useful material to include from a scientific point of view (we've included some individual quotes too) and Sense About Science has done its usual thing of trying these out with civic and community groups to find the most valuable and counterintuitive contributions. Arriving at just 20 pages was tough, but here it is; we hope it helps you to cut through what you hear and to distinguish fact from misinformation.

The GM version of the food is compared to one made from conventional crops and checked to see whether there is a nutritional difference between the two or a heightened risk of allergy or toxicity.

Consistent with our hort school.