GMO Foods: Genetically Modified Organism - Page 5 - JeepForum.com
Search  
Sign Up   Today's Posts
User: Pass: Remember?
Advertise Here
Jeep Home Jeep Forum Jeep Classifieds Jeep Registry JeepSpace Jeep Reviews Jeep Gallery Jeep Clubs Jeep Groups Jeep Videos Jeep Events Jeep Articles
Go Back JeepForum.com > General > Fitness and Nutrition > GMO Foods: Genetically Modified Organism

Rampage Bowless Soft Top Oconee offroadAlloy USA Still AvailableAdvance Adapters SYE Kits

Reply
Unread 04-14-2013, 04:50 AM   #61
THOR114
Web Wheeler
 
THOR114's Avatar
2004 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: , CA
Posts: 2,090
5.2
Myth: GM crops decrease pesticide use
Truth: GM crops increase pesticide use

“GE crops have been responsible for
an increase of 383 million pounds of herbicide use in the US over the first
13 years of commercial use of GE crops (1996–2008). This dramatic increase
in the volume of herbicides applied swamps the decrease in insecticide use attributable to GE corn and cotton, making the overall chemical footprint of today’s GE crops decidedly negative... The primary cause of the increase [is] the emergence of herbicide-resistant weeds.” – Dr Charles Benbrook, agronomist9
“The promise was that you could use less
chemicals and produce a greater yield. But
let me tell you none of this is true.”
– Bill Christison, president of the US National Family Farm Coalition10
of this trend is questionable, given the emergence of Bt-resistant pests and the changes in insecticide use patterns (see 5.3, below).
But herbicide-tolerant maize, soy, and cotton caused farmers to spray 383 million more
pounds (174 million kg) of herbicides than they would have done in the absence of herbicide- tolerant seeds. This massive increase in herbicide use swamped the modest 64.2 million pound reduction in chemical insecticide use attributed to Bt maize and cotton.
The report showed that recently, herbicide use on GM fields has veered sharply upward. Crop years 2007 and 2008 accounted for 46% of the increase in herbicide use over thirteen years across the three herbicide-tolerant crops. Herbicide use on GM herbicide-tolerant crops rose 31.4% from 2007 to 2008.
The report concluded that farmers applied 318 million more pounds of pesticides as a result of planting GM seeds over the first thirteen years of commercial use. In 2008, GM crop fields required over 26% more pounds of pesticides per acre (1 acre = 0.4 hectares) than fields planted to non-GM varieties.
The report identified the main cause of the increase in herbicide use as the spread of glyphosate-resistant weeds.
5.2.1. Glyphosate-resistant
superweeds
The widespread use of Roundup Ready crops
has led to over-reliance on a single herbicide – glyphosate, commonly sold as Roundup. This has resulted in the rapid spread of glyphosate- resistant weeds in countries where GM crops are planted.15 Resistant weeds include pigweed,16 ryegrass,17 and marestail.18
The Herbicide Resistance Action Committee (HRAC), financed by the pesticide industry, lists 21 glyphosate-resistant weeds around the world. In the United States, glyphosate-resistant weeds have been identified in 22 states.19
When resistant weeds first appear, farmers
GM crops are claimed by proponents to reduce pesticide use (the term “pesticide” includes herbicides, which technically are pesticides). But this is untrue. Herbicide-tolerant crops have been developed by agrochemical firms specifically to depend upon agrochemicals and have extended the market for these chemicals. Far from weaning agriculture away from environmentally damaging chemicals, GM technology has prolonged and extended the chemically-based agricultural model.
The adoption of GM Roundup Ready crops, especially soy, has caused massive increases in the use of glyphosate worldwide.9,11,12,13,14
A report by agronomist Dr Charles Benbrook using official US Department of Agriculture data looked at the effects on pesticide use of the first thirteen years of GM crop cultivation in the United States, from 1996 to 2008.9 Crops taken into account were GM herbicide-tolerant and GM Bt maize varieties, GM Roundup Ready soy, and GM herbicide-tolerant and GM Bt cotton varieties.
The report found that Bt maize and cotton delivered reductions in chemical insecticide use totalling 64.2 million pounds (29.2 million kg) over the thirteen years – though even the sustainability
GMO Myths and Truths page 74

often use more glyphosate herbicide to try to
control them. But as time passes, no amount
of glyphosate herbicide is effective and farmers
are forced to resort to potentially even more
toxic herbicides, such as 2,4-D, and mixtures of herbicides.15,16,17,18,20,21,22,23,24,25,26
US farmers are going back to more labour- intensive methods like ploughing – and even pulling weeds by hand.25 In Georgia, tens of thousands of acres of farmland have been abandoned after being overrun by glyphosate- resistant pigweed.27,28
An article in Monsanto’s hometown newspaper, the St Louis Post-Dispatch, said of the Roundup Ready system, “this silver bullet of American agriculture is beginning to miss its mark.”29
As glyphosate-resistant weeds undermine the Roundup Ready farming model, Monsanto has taken the extraordinary step of subsidizing farmers’ purchases of competing herbicides to supplement Roundup.25,30
5.2.2. How are superweeds created?
Many glyphosate-resistant weeds appear through what is known as selection pressure – only those weeds that survive being sprayed with glyphosate herbicides pass on their genes, leading to a steady increase in glyphosate-resistant plants in the weed population.
But there is a second route through which glyphosate-resistant weeds develop: GM crops
can pass on their genes for herbicide tolerance to wild or cultivated non-GM relatives. GM canola has been found to pass on its glyphosate-tolerance genes to related wild plants such as wild mustard, turning them into difficult-to-control superweeds. The GM herbicide-tolerance gene was shown to persist in these weed populations over a period of six years.31
GM canola itself has also become a weed. Feral canola populations have acquired resistance to all of the main herbicides used in Canada,24 making it difficult and expensive to control “volunteer” canola in soy and maize fields. Feral herbicide- resistant canola has also become a problem in sugar beet fields in the US, where canola seeds are reported to be deposited by defecation from geese migrating from Canada.32
5.2.3. GM industry “solution” to
superweeds: More herbicides
The industry’s solution to the glyphosate-tolerant superweeds crisis has been first, to aggressively market pre-mix herbicide products to farmers, and second, to develop “stacked trait” crop varieties resistant to multiple herbicides. These stacked trait crops enable farmers to spray mixtures of weedkillers freely, instead of having to apply
them carefully in order to spare crops.26 Simple arithmetic indicates that this will double or triple the amount of herbicide applied to a given field.
Dow has applied to release a multi-herbicide- tolerant soybean, engineered to tolerate being sprayed with glyphosate, glufosinate, and 2,4-D34 – an ingredient of the defoliant Agent Orange.
In 2012 Dow sparked public outrage when it applied to the US Department of Agriculture to commercialise its 2,4-D-tolerant corn.35
Weed scientists warn that such multi-herbicide- tolerant crops will cause an increase in 2,4-D
use, trigger an outbreak of still more intractable weeds resistant to both glyphosate and 2,4-D,
and undermine sustainable approaches to weed management.33
In fact, weed species that are resistant to dicamba,36 to 2,4-D,37 and to multiple herbicides38 already exist.
Most stacked-trait superweeds emerge through what is known as selection pressure, where only those weeds that can tolerate herbicide survive to pass on their genes.
But there is another route through which superweeds can emerge: cross-pollination of GM herbicide-tolerant crops within the crop species or with wild relatives. “Stacked trait” multi-herbicide- resistant oilseed rape (canola) plants have already appeared as a result of accidental cross-pollination between GM crops engineered to tolerate different herbicides. As early as 1998, oilseed rape plants were found that tolerated up to three different herbicides.39
A Canadian government study showed that after just 4–5 years of commercial growing, GM oilseed rape engineered to tolerate different single herbicides had cross-pollinated to create stacked trait plants resistant to up to three broad- spectrum herbicides, posing a serious problem for farmers.22,23,24
GMO Myths and Truths page 74

THOR114 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 04-14-2013, 04:52 AM   #62
THOR114
Web Wheeler
 
THOR114's Avatar
2004 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: , CA
Posts: 2,090
5.12 Myth: Horizontal gene transfer from GM crops is unlikely or of no consequence
Truth: GM genes can escape into the environment by horizontal gene transfer with potentially serious consequences

Most GM contamination incidents occur through cross-pollination, contamination of seed stocks,
or failure to segregate GM from non-GM crops after harvest. But for years, scientists have warned that GM genes could also escape from GM crops into other organisms through a mechanism
called horizontal gene transfer (HGT). HGT
is the movement of genetic material between unrelated species through a mechanism other than reproduction. Reproduction, in contrast, is known as vertical gene transfer because the genes are passed down through the generations from parent to offspring.
GM proponents and government regulators often claim that, based on available experimental data, HGT is rare. The EU-supported website GMO Compass states, “So far, horizontal gene transfer can only be demonstrated under optimised laboratory conditions.”164 Alternatively, they argue that if it does happen, it does not matter, as GM DNA is no more dangerous than non-GM DNA.
But there are several mechanisms through which HGT can occur, some of which are more likely than others. HGT via some of these mechanisms occurs easily and frequently in nature. The consequences of HGT from GM crops are potentially serious, yet have not been adequately taken into account by regulators.
The basic mechanisms by which HGT could occur are:
● Uptake of GM DNA by bacteria
● Uptake of DNA from the digestive tract into the
tissues of the organism
● Transmission of GM DNA via Agrobacterium
tumefaciens, a bacterium that is often used
to introduce GM genes into plants because of its natural ability to carry and transfer foreign DNA and to infect plants through wounds in their outer layer
● Gene transfer by viruses.
The following sections outline these mechanisms and provide a perspective on the frequency at
which these events can occur, as well as their potential impacts.
5.12.1. DNA uptake by bacteria
Bacteria are promiscuous. They are always exchanging DNA between themselves and taking up DNA from their environment. Some of this environmentally acquired DNA can
be incorporated to their genome and may be expressed. There are two scenarios in which DNA uptake by bacteria could result in HGT of GM genes.
The first is the transfer of GM DNA from GM food into intestinal bacteria. DNA from a GM plant is released into the intestinal tract of the consumer during digestion. Contrary to frequent claims, GM DNA is not always broken down in digestion and can survive in sufficiently large fragments that can contain intact genes that are potentially biologically active (see 3.1.1, 3.6.2).
Bacteria of many different species are present in the digestive tract, some of which can take up DNA from their environment and incorporate it into their own DNA. In the case of GMOs, this could be problematic. For example, if the GM plant contained a gene for antibiotic resistance, the bacterium could incorporate that antibiotic resistance gene into its genome, and thereby become resistant to the antibiotic. If the bacteria in question happened to be pathogenic (disease- causing), this process would have created an antibiotic-resistant pathogen – a “superbug”.
Since bacteria in the intestinal tract frequently exchange DNA, the creation of a superbug could be a two-stage process. First, the antibiotic resistance gene could initially be taken up and incorporated into a non-pathogenic bacterium in the intestinal tract. Subsequently, if a pathogenic bacterial species becomes part of the intestinal flora, the non-pathogenic bacterium could transfer the antibiotic resistance gene to the pathogenic
GMO Myths and Truths page 90

bacterium, thereby creating a “superbug”. The transfer of GM genes from food to
intestinal bacteria has been documented in a study on humans, which found that the intestinal bacteria of a person whose diet included soy carried sequences unique to the GM soy that was part of their diet.165
The second scenario in which DNA uptake by bacteria could result in HGT of GM genes is the transfer of GM DNA to soil bacteria. Cultivation of transgenic crops leads to the degradation of GM plant material in the environment, liberating GM genes into the soil. Every cubic centimetre
of soil contains thousands of different species
of bacteria, only a small percentage of which have been identified and characterised. Some
of the known soil bacteria can, and do, take
up free DNA that may be present in the soil, incorporating that DNA into their genomes.166 This could result in the transfer of GM genes
to natural soil bacterial populations. Based on limited currently available data, this type of event has been calculated to be extremely rare.167 However, it has been shown that GM DNA can persist in soil at detectable levels for at least a year,168 increasing the likelihood of HGT.
In addition, we only know a small fraction of the soil bacteria that could potentially take up DNA from their environment.166 Furthermore,
if the uptake of a GM gene, for example for antibiotic resistance, gives the bacterium a survival and growth advantage, this can allow them to outcompete other bacterial strains in the presence of widely used antibiotics in agriculture and medicine. Therefore, this initial rare event could still result in a significant environmental and health outcome.169
5.12.2. DNA uptake during digestion
of GM foods
A study on mice demonstrated that foreign DNA present in food can be transferred from the digestive tract to the bloodstream of animals that eat the food. This foreign DNA was also found in white blood cells and in the cells of many other tissues of the mice.170 In a separate study, foreign DNA in a diet fed to pregnant mice was found
in the organs of their foetuses and newborn
offspring. The foreign DNA was believed to have reached the foetus through the placenta.171
It has also been shown that GM DNA in feed
can be taken up in the organs of the animals that
eat it and can be detected in the meat and fish that people eat.172,173,174,175
Most of the GM DNA in food is fragmented before it reaches the blood or tissues. However, a few copies of GM DNA large enough to contain the sequence of a full and functional gene will also be present in the digestive tract and can be taken up into the blood at lower frequency, where it can be transported by the blood and taken up by cells of some tissues or organs.170 Once taken up by a cell, such a GM gene could be integrated into the DNA of the cell, causing either direct mutation of a host gene function or reprogramming the host cell to produce the protein for which that GM gene codes, or both.
At present, this scenario is speculative. Although it is clearly possible to detect transgenic DNA in the tissues of organisms that consume GM feed, no research has been published that shows that the GM DNA is expressed in the tissues of those organisms. It would be expected that if such expression did occur, it would not occur frequently. In order to find out whether such expression events actually occur, it would
be necessary to conduct very large-scale studies – though identifying a suitable experimental design would be challenging.
It should be pointed out, however, that although such events may be of low frequency, because of the widespread consumption of GMOs by both humans and animals, the fact that such events are of low frequency does not eliminate them as important to the biosafety assessment of GMOs.
Though the mechanism is still unclear, GM feed has been found to affect the health of animals
that eat it. GM DNA from soy was detected in
the blood, organs, and milk of goats. An enzyme, lactic dehydrogenase, was found at significantly raised levels in the heart, muscle, and kidneys of young goats fed GM soy.176 This enzyme leaks from damaged cells during immune reactions or injury, so high levels may indicate such problems.
GMO Myths and Truths page 91
THOR114 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 04-14-2013, 05:00 AM   #63
THOR114
Web Wheeler
 
THOR114's Avatar
2004 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: , CA
Posts: 2,090
Source: http://earthopensource.org/files/pdf...ruths_1.3a.pdf
THOR114 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 04-14-2013, 05:38 AM   #64
COLOUXJ
Web Wheeler
2010 JK Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Colorado Springs, Colorado
Posts: 2,005
Quote:
Originally Posted by THOR114 View Post
You happened to pick the worst article I posted. This was one that I did not really want to post as it was the least credible of all of them.
__________________
"When i die, bury me with my jeep. Its never been in a hole it can't get out of"
Black Jeep Society
My JEEP helped win a War > Your Honda mows my grass!!
Mechanical Engineers Build weapons Civil Engineers build targets

Quote:
Originally Posted by cyberpyrot View Post
is it a plink plink kerrrrdunk? or more of a brrrrrconk doc doc miiiidge pang!!!? or is it a badonk ka donk? if it is the latter its just the normal fat *** of the JK

COLOUXJ is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 04-14-2013, 05:39 AM   #65
COLOUXJ
Web Wheeler
2010 JK Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Colorado Springs, Colorado
Posts: 2,005
Quote:
Originally Posted by THOR114 View Post
Ok here is one of the sources

http://youtu.be/T-IJikX1144

It's from the Health Ranger
This is not a credible source at all. All they do is claim what they say is true. Youtube is not a valid source.
__________________
"When i die, bury me with my jeep. Its never been in a hole it can't get out of"
Black Jeep Society
My JEEP helped win a War > Your Honda mows my grass!!
Mechanical Engineers Build weapons Civil Engineers build targets

Quote:
Originally Posted by cyberpyrot View Post
is it a plink plink kerrrrdunk? or more of a brrrrrconk doc doc miiiidge pang!!!? or is it a badonk ka donk? if it is the latter its just the normal fat *** of the JK

COLOUXJ is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 04-14-2013, 05:54 AM   #66
THOR114
Web Wheeler
 
THOR114's Avatar
2004 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: , CA
Posts: 2,090
Quote:
Originally Posted by COLOUXJ View Post
And just because you got me interested....

Conclusion: GE (Genetically Engineered) Foods do not pose a greater risk than foods produced in traditional methods. (Source: http://anrcatalog.ucdavis.edu/pdf/8180.pdf)

Conclusion: There are at least 42 publications extractable from the PubMed database that describe research reports of feeding studies of GM feed or food products derived from GM crops. The overwhelming majority of publications report that GM feed and food produced no significant differences in the test animals. The two studies reporting negative results were published in 1998 and 1999 and no confirmation of these effects have since been published. Many studies have been published since 2002 and all have reported no negative impact of feeding GM feed to the test species. (Source (says generated from peer reviewed journals but is only a webpage, this was the first link on google): http://www.agbioworld.org/biotech-in...ewed-pubs.html)


Here is one that compares Genetically Engineered and Genetically modified, and claims that the later is better as it naturally breeding vs modifying of the genetic code of GE foods. Thats something I did not know. So their conclusion was that GE crops were proven (through sourcing) to cause problems in the animals (in many cases rats) where as GM crops do not have those problems since plants are breed together to get traits of each other, essentially forced evolution. SOURCE: http://earthopensource.org/files/pdf...ruths_1.3a.pdf

So that was just on the first page (of a google search for public journals) and all of these are contradicting the points you are making. You may actually be talking about GE crops, which apparently there are a few studies out there showing that they can cause complications. But most are saying that they are just as safe. I would add more but I get access through school to journal articles that the general public has to pay for.

GO SCIENCE!
This is from the USC Davis paper:
Are safety concerns associated with genetic engineering and StarLink corn, the lectin potato, and L-tryptophan?
One commercialized GE crop that has been subject to recall is StarLink corn. This corn variety was engineered to produce Bt, a protein from a naturally occurring soil bacterium, Bacillus thuringiensis, that is an effective insect control agent against lepi- dopteran insects such as the European corn borer. However, studies on heat stability and protein digestion indicated that a unique Bt protein known as Cry9c could not
be excluded as a potential human allergen (EPA 2001). As a result, StarLink corn was initially approved only for animal consumption pending further analyses of allergenic- ity. Difficulties segregating feed corn from corn that could be consumed by humans resulted in small amounts of StarLink corn entering the human food supply.
THOR114 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 04-14-2013, 05:58 AM   #67
THOR114
Web Wheeler
 
THOR114's Avatar
2004 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: , CA
Posts: 2,090
Quote:
Originally Posted by COLOUXJ View Post
And just because you got me interested....

Conclusion: GE (Genetically Engineered) Foods do not pose a greater risk than foods produced in traditional methods. (Source: http://anrcatalog.ucdavis.edu/pdf/8180.pdf)

Conclusion: There are at least 42 publications extractable from the PubMed database that describe research reports of feeding studies of GM feed or food products derived from GM crops. The overwhelming majority of publications report that GM feed and food produced no significant differences in the test animals. The two studies reporting negative results were published in 1998 and 1999 and no confirmation of these effects have since been published. Many studies have been published since 2002 and all have reported no negative impact of feeding GM feed to the test species. (Source (says generated from peer reviewed journals but is only a webpage, this was the first link on google): http://www.agbioworld.org/biotech-in...ewed-pubs.html)


Here is one that compares Genetically Engineered and Genetically modified, and claims that the later is better as it naturally breeding vs modifying of the genetic code of GE foods. Thats something I did not know. So their conclusion was that GE crops were proven (through sourcing) to cause problems in the animals (in many cases rats) where as GM crops do not have those problems since plants are breed together to get traits of each other, essentially forced evolution. SOURCE: http://earthopensource.org/files/pdf...ruths_1.3a.pdf

So that was just on the first page (of a google search for public journals) and all of these are contradicting the points you are making. You may actually be talking about GE crops, which apparently there are a few studies out there showing that they can cause complications. But most are saying that they are just as safe. I would add more but I get access through school to journal articles that the general public has to pay for.

GO SCIENCE!
Concern for safety has likewise been linked to L-tryptophan, a nutritional supplement used to treat a variety of conditions. In 1989, 1,500 people ingesting L-tryptophan manufactured by a single Japanese company reported negative health effects, and 37 people died. While the company had previously used GE bacteria to produce L-tryptophan with- out incident, the outbreak of health effects coincided with the company’s decision to change its manufacturing process and use a new strain of GE bacteria (Roufs 1992). The revised manufacturing process also resulted in the elimination of certain filtration steps and a reduction in the amount of active carbon used to purify the L-tryptophan. It is likely that the illnesses resulted from the presence of chemical impurities rather than the use of GE bacteria (Mayeno et al. 1994; Smith and Garrett 2005).
THOR114 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 04-14-2013, 08:09 AM   #68
88hatchy
Registered User
1997 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Florida, Colorado
Posts: 849
Wow, you really want to think that GMOs are bad for you. Good for you.
__________________
1991 YJ - 2" front springs, SRS, JKS discos, stainless steel brake lines... rear four link with TJ axle and springs, and JK arms.
1997 TJ - Current project: Simple build --> LCG, 35s
1988 Civic Hatch - Runs 12's, gets 30 mpg
88hatchy is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 04-14-2013, 05:39 PM   #69
LoneJeeper
i wear foil underwear too
 
LoneJeeper's Avatar
1999 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: earth, mostly.
Posts: 2,083
Man, do you have some weird ideas about food and health.... I don't even know where to begin. Have you ever talked to a medical doctor from an accredited school about any of this stuff?

You know how many "normal" foods have been genetically modified for centuries? Broccoli is man made. Bananas have been selected for small seeds.

Your body doesn't recognize modified foods? How do babies survive? Their poor bodies don't recognize anything.

I.. just.. wow. I'm the one with a tinfoil hat.
__________________
ಠ_ಠ
LoneJeeper is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 04-14-2013, 05:45 PM   #70
Jrdchiropractic
Registered User
2009 JK Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Jersey
Posts: 330
When you genetically modify something like corn, it's not really corn anymore.
GMO's are known in some instances to absorb differently. Most foods are genetically modified to withstand large doses of pesticide and herbicide. Yummy, I want my veggies to be grown by soaking up round-up laced water.
Sounds like the babies being born with flippers all over again. You can go to mercola.com to learn more. I'm gonna go dunk my jeep in the pond.
__________________
09 JK w/ a winch and duratracs
Just enough to get through most of the time,
get stuck sometimes, and still get home
Jrdchiropractic is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 04-14-2013, 05:53 PM   #71
LoneJeeper
i wear foil underwear too
 
LoneJeeper's Avatar
1999 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: earth, mostly.
Posts: 2,083
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jrdchiropractic View Post
When you genetically modify something like corn, it's not really corn anymore.
GMO's are known in some instances to absorb differently. Most foods are genetically modified to withstand large doses of pesticide and herbicide. Yummy, I want my veggies to be grown by soaking up round-up laced water.
Sounds like the babies being born with flippers all over again. You can go to mercola.com to learn more. I'm gonna go dunk my jeep in the pond.

From the chiropractor.
__________________
ಠ_ಠ
LoneJeeper is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 04-14-2013, 07:00 PM   #72
Unlimited04
This post/info=my opinion
 
Unlimited04's Avatar
2004 LJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 23,367
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoneJeeper View Post
Man, do you have some weird ideas about food and health.... I don't even know where to begin. Have you ever talked to a medical doctor from an accredited school about any of this stuff?

You know how many "normal" foods have been genetically modified for centuries? Broccoli is man made. Bananas have been selected for small seeds.

Your body doesn't recognize modified foods? How do babies survive? Their poor bodies don't recognize anything.
x2. I probably know more about the actual science behind this kinda stuff than most around here. The ignorance, depth of rampant inaccuracies, and mythical bullsh!t is so encompassing, I don't even want to begin forming an argument. It would be pointless, and fall on deaf ears of a close minded brain anyway.

I don't even think we could have an intelligent conversation until half the folks in this thread took about three years of undergraduate biology, human physiology and biochemistry.
Unlimited04 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 04-14-2013, 08:02 PM   #73
EugeneTheTJ
Tar Heel
 
EugeneTheTJ's Avatar
2003 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 6,729
If you are that damn worried about chemicals and **** in your food then you should kill your own chickens, catch your own fish, and grow your own fruits and veggies. That is, unless THEY have gotten to the seeds already
EugeneTheTJ is online now   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 04-15-2013, 07:01 AM   #74
LoneJeeper
i wear foil underwear too
 
LoneJeeper's Avatar
1999 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: earth, mostly.
Posts: 2,083
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unlimited04 View Post

x2. I probably know more about the actual science behind this kinda stuff than most around here. The ignorance, depth of rampant inaccuracies, and mythical bullsh!t is so encompassing, I don't even want to begin forming an argument. It would be pointless, and fall on deaf ears of a close minded brain anyway.

I don't even think we could have an intelligent conversation until half the folks in this thread took about three years of undergraduate biology, human physiology and biochemistry.
You should read the juice fast thread.
__________________
ಠ_ಠ
LoneJeeper is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 04-15-2013, 01:29 PM   #75
THOR114
Web Wheeler
 
THOR114's Avatar
2004 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: , CA
Posts: 2,090
... yes go and read it. There is recipes on there too....homemade pizza from scratch ( YES PIZZA!!!), ice cream from banana, stir fry, etc... so enjoy!!!
THOR114 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the JeepForum.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid e-mail address for yourself.
Note: All free e-mails have been banned due to mis-use. (Yahoo, Gmail, Hotmail, etc.)
Don't have a non-free e-mail address? Click here for a solution: Manual Account Creation
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.


Thread Tools






Jeep, Wrangler, Cherokee, Grand Cherokee, and other models are copyrighted and trademarked to Jeep/Chrysler Corporation. JeepForum.com is not in any way associated with Jeep or the Chrysler Corp.