Genetically modified animals

[HeyYou]

Man is an omnivore not a vegetarian, giving up meat to satisfy a singular ethical point of view would make the rise of our species somewhat a specious climb to the top of the food chain. I for one would not want to impugn the efforts of our hominid ancestors that managed to avoid becoming a meal for the better equipped predictors to rise to this pinnacle.

Our ancestors are dead. Just because they did something to help the human race evolve, does not mean that humans should do it as well thousands of years later.

For some strange law of attraction you always choose my posts to respond too, intellectual masochism? It was droll Tongue in Cheek humor, it seems in addition to your many fine intellectual qualities you have now added no discriminable detection of humor. It must be the moth and the flame type of thing but if you really want to be singed ..go ahead and make this another one of your cause d'etres. Me ..I'm just going to have another bacon cheeseburger and not worry about the cow or the pig that gave their all to make my lunch.

 

I chose your posts to reply to since I almost always disagree with what you have to say, don't start feeling special. I could easily reverse that argument on you as well.

 

Care to explain how your post was supposed to be humorous?

 

If your post really was made out as you claim, you could of avoided being rude about it. You were once incorrect about a post I made, mistaking something I said as satire as something I really meant. It really shows weakness when you can't refrain from being rude all the time.

 

Also at ginny, I thought that a lot of store products are already genetically modified, I could be wrong.

 

As I said before, I think genetic engineering in a bad idea with a profit motive. I think it could work if you had different goals besides profit.

 

Is there any evidence to show that genetic engineering is unsafe? I don't see why it would be any less safe, unless it gets into more serious gene modifications.

 

Is there any evidence to show that it is safe? I would point out, that the FDA regularly approves drugs, (after a lengthy regime of testing) that are later determined to be 'bad' for us. You see new lawsuits/class action suits nearly every day on some drug that has been on the market for a few years, that we approved for human use, that is later discovered to cause more problems than the ones they were originally designed to treat.

 

Also, what's worse? Genetically altering food animals, or, all the hormones and such they are fed to the producers can reap more profit per animal?

[marharth]

Man is an omnivore not a vegetarian, giving up meat to satisfy a singular ethical point of view would make the rise of our species somewhat a specious climb to the top of the food chain. I for one would not want to impugn the efforts of our hominid ancestors that managed to avoid becoming a meal for the better equipped predictors to rise to this pinnacle.

Our ancestors are dead. Just because they did something to help the human race evolve, does not mean that humans should do it as well thousands of years later.

For some strange law of attraction you always choose my posts to respond too, intellectual masochism? It was droll Tongue in Cheek humor, it seems in addition to your many fine intellectual qualities you have now added no discriminable detection of humor. It must be the moth and the flame type of thing but if you really want to be singed ..go ahead and make this another one of your cause d'etres. Me ..I'm just going to have another bacon cheeseburger and not worry about the cow or the pig that gave their all to make my lunch.

 

I chose your posts to reply to since I almost always disagree with what you have to say, don't start feeling special. I could easily reverse that argument on you as well.

 

Care to explain how your post was supposed to be humorous?

 

If your post really was made out as you claim, you could of avoided being rude about it. You were once incorrect about a post I made, mistaking something I said as satire as something I really meant. It really shows weakness when you can't refrain from being rude all the time.

 

Also at ginny, I thought that a lot of store products are already genetically modified, I could be wrong.

 

As I said before, I think genetic engineering in a bad idea with a profit motive. I think it could work if you had different goals besides profit.

 

Is there any evidence to show that genetic engineering is unsafe? I don't see why it would be any less safe, unless it gets into more serious gene modifications.

 

Is there any evidence to show that it is safe? I would point out, that the FDA regularly approves drugs, (after a lengthy regime of testing) that are later determined to be 'bad' for us. You see new lawsuits/class action suits nearly every day on some drug that has been on the market for a few years, that we approved for human use, that is later discovered to cause more problems than the ones they were originally designed to treat.

 

Also, what's worse? Genetically altering food animals, or, all the hormones and such they are fed to the producers can reap more profit per animal?

I am not sure if there is any evidence either way, but I don't think that slightly alerting genes would be worse then the hormones.

[Aurielius]

@Marharth

You really don't know when you are ahead, you choose to respond because you just can't help your self...even a blind squirrel collects a few nuts but in your case I'm afraid you would starve. Humor is subjective and Satire is elective, evidently you can't fathom the former but the later is something that you plainly like being the butt of, so I elect to accommodate you.... it relieves the tedium of reading your pearls of wisdom. I am willing to bet that this is something that you would like to go 'tit for tat' once again, it must be because you think that THIS time it will be different from all the other prior failures If you really want to continue this level of pointless exchange then create a thread in the lounge called 'My Collected Pearls of Wisdom' and you can be assured that it will gain a satirical following but this is a debate about genetically engineered animals and it should be allowed to continue if you can see your way to not diverting it farther..meet you in the Lounge when you feel up to it. :wallbash:

[marharth]

@Marharth

You really don't know when you are ahead, you choose to respond because you just can't help your self...even a blind squirrel collects a few nuts but in your case I'm afraid you would starve. Humor is subjective and Satire is elective, evidently you can't fathom the former but the later is something that you plainly like being the butt of, so I elect to accommodate you.... it relieves the tedium of reading your pearls of wisdom. I am willing to bet that this is something that you would like to go 'tit for tat' once again, it must be because you think that THIS time it will be different from all the other prior failures If you really want to continue this level of pointless exchange then create a thread in the lounge called 'My Collected Pearls of Wisdom' and you can be assured that it will gain a satirical following but this is a debate about genetically engineered animals and it should be allowed to continue if you can see your way to not diverting it farther..meet you in the Lounge when you feel up to it. :wallbash:

You always reply to me as well, so don't say I "can't help myself."

 

You seem to think a bit too highly of yourself, I don't always have "failures" you just seem to think you win everything. Seems to be where all your rude replies come from as well.

 

If you really believed you were on a higher scale of intellect, why can't you restrain yourself from throwing out mindless insults?

 

Also do you not know how satire works? If you want to do satire you should not make a well known argument that is supported by many people to mock it.

 

There is a large difference between satire (which would relate to a subject.) And insults. Your replies rarely relate to anything I say, and are simply your attempts at intellectual insults. I could make a post in the off topic section further explaining the difference if you do not wish for me to do it in the debate section.

 

I hope I won't have to respond to your reply to this, but of course its going to be the same rude replies were you seem to think you are correct based solely on your interpretation of my opinions.

 

To go back on topic, could you at least make a real post on your opinions on genetically modifying animals?

Edited June 5, 2011 by marharth

[ginnyfizz]

@ both Marharth and HeyYou

 

- I come from Britain where the situation is quite different to the USA vis a vis both hormones in animal production and GM of either animals or their feed. The EU has an ongoing ding dong going on with the US because US beef is banned for using growth hormone, just for one example. Furthermore in Britain particularly, there is a general resentment at GM foods being shovelled down us without us being told and a big suspicion that it is being foisted on us by large corporations for their profits, rather than for the greater good of us all.

 

On GM I believe there is not enough evidence over a prolonged period to show that it is safe. On hormones there is a suspicion that they are getting into the water supply and ...err...modifying all kinds of things. Over here there is a big stink about the attempt to introduce super farms where pigs and cattle are kept permanently indoors and where they would almost certainly have to be pumped full of all kinds of drugs and hormones (and maybe be GM) in order to survive the awful conditions they will live in. All this sounds just so un-natural to this particular yokel, some of whose rellies manage to rear some tasty meat and produce milk and eggs by feeding them grass,forage and (non GM) corn. (Yes of course the animals all have the required vaccines and tests, and the vet to see to them when they're ill.)

 

And before you ask, no I am not very well off at all, but I do make sure that I buy "free range" as it were.

[HeyYou]

We already have the mega farms, and all the problems that go with them. There is a fair bit of controversy over them here as well, and just recently, a couple where I live were shut down, due to non-payment of fines for 'excessive dumping'. Which basically means they were dumping animal waste on the fields, to the point that the run-off was contaminating ground water. A major no-no here. (but, these are just the guys that got caught...... there are probably 50 that don't, for every one that does.)

 

The problem, as I see it, is the megafarms are hugely profitable, and so can sell their products at a lower price than the traditional farmers. The traditional farmers can't really compete, and stay solvent.... so, they get bought up by the megafarms, and the cycle just accelerates. The days of the family farm here in the states are numbered, and I do NOT see that as a good thing. Dumping all those odd chems into our food chain can't be a 'good' idea......

[Aurielius]

And before you ask, no I am not very well off at all, but I do make sure that I buy "free range" as it were.

 

Ginny I am always amused when I see the title Free Range Chickens it must be that I have missed this herd's pasturing grounds because I am fairly certain that there have been no non domesticated chickens for centuries. You at least I am sure will know the difference between humor and serious discourse.

[ginnyfizz]

Errr....I guess. What we mean over here by Free Range means chickens that are actually allowed out of their housing to scratch in the fields/yards, not non-domesticated ones, but no battery ones, thank you! Similarly free range porkers that can root around outdoors, with a hutch to go to to keep from sunburn. Cattle munching grass and forage out of doors. Sheep likewise. And venison...Gawd I'm getting hungry!

 

Fortunately, the peasants here keep revolting against the monster farms and there are signs of revival on the small scale specialist front. If it wasn't for the bizarre EU agri-policy that on the one hand lavishes subsidies and on the other hand forces us to import from other EU countries (who are not always truthful about their levels of animal diseases) whilst finding every excuse under the sun to ban our stuff (if all else fails they have been known to roast lorryloads of our lamb without slaughtering it first), Britain could probably produce more than it needs.

[marharth]

@ both Marharth and HeyYou

 

- I come from Britain where the situation is quite different to the USA vis a vis both hormones in animal production and GM of either animals or their feed. The EU has an ongoing ding dong going on with the US because US beef is banned for using growth hormone, just for one example. Furthermore in Britain particularly, there is a general resentment at GM foods being shovelled down us without us being told and a big suspicion that it is being foisted on us by large corporations for their profits, rather than for the greater good of us all.

 

On GM I believe there is not enough evidence over a prolonged period to show that it is safe. On hormones there is a suspicion that they are getting into the water supply and ...err...modifying all kinds of things. Over here there is a big stink about the attempt to introduce super farms where pigs and cattle are kept permanently indoors and where they would almost certainly have to be pumped full of all kinds of drugs and hormones (and maybe be GM) in order to survive the awful conditions they will live in. All this sounds just so un-natural to this particular yokel, some of whose rellies manage to rear some tasty meat and produce milk and eggs by feeding them grass,forage and (non GM) corn. (Yes of course the animals all have the required vaccines and tests, and the vet to see to them when they're ill.)

 

And before you ask, no I am not very well off at all, but I do make sure that I buy "free range" as it were.

I am not aware of any evidence either way for GM, but we do know that the hormones are bad.

 

I would think almost anything would be better then the hormone stuff they do.

 

I would like to see some kind of study or something on the effects of GM, I don't see how minor altering of genes could be very harmful.

[brokenergy]

We already have "genetically modified" animals in our homes. They are called cross-bred animals and we keep them as pets. We breed them to have certain traits because pure-bred don't have these traits. Genetically modified doesn't mean injecting chemicals. Sometimes we cross-breed animals to get certain traits that we want, like increasing the muscle mass in cows (yes that really has happened). I know GM foods are a hot topic but there is no way we should throw it away, we should learn and understand more about it.