24
78

[–] klobos 24 points 78 points (+102|-24) ago 

For all you GMO fans out there, don't worry, there will be a "scientist" from Monsanto in here shortly to claim this is false and GMO's are perfectly safe and don't need labeling since it is all based on science.

[–] [deleted] 6 points 28 points (+34|-6) ago 

[Deleted]

3
10

[–] turngiant 3 points 10 points (+13|-3) ago 

I've just concluded my research. Everything is a-ok. You are clear to eat our food.

3
23

[–] ThePieAssassin 3 points 23 points (+26|-3) ago 

He may be late, apparently my State representatives are busy getting their dicks sucked by them.

3
3

[–] turngiant 3 points 3 points (+6|-3) ago  (edited ago)

When you say "getting their dicks sucked" ...what does "their" mean in the context of sucking, pursuant to the clause of "getting", as it regards the "sucked" accusation mentioned heretofor when said sucking too place allegedly? QED.

Am I legaling right?

3
13

[–] InyourfaceNancyGrace 3 points 13 points (+16|-3) ago  (edited ago)

Where does the article say GMO's are unsafe? It's my understanding that large doses of the herbicide often sprayed on GMO's (and non-GMO's) - Round Up - is the container of the carcinogen glyphosate (not the crops, or GMO-crops themselves). I have some in my garage to spray on the plants growing through the gaps of my concrete driveway. I would drink it about as soon as I'd drink the gasoline it sits next too.

The title is clickbait for organic purity nuts, and here's how you can tell:

Actual article and science: "Glyphosate linked to cancer in sufficiently large doses"

Title of Article: "MONSANTO herbicide in GMO CROPS is CARCINOGENIC: WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION'S full report."

Bolded/capped to point out clickbait buzzwords. From the same people that will tell you WHO is covering up the real data on vaccination and actual GMO crop studies...

[–] [deleted] 1 points 6 points (+7|-1) ago 

[Deleted]

6
-4

7
10

[–] penguincheerleader 7 points 10 points (+17|-7) ago 

You should be able to debate this issue without personalized attacks, the only reason to claim that all people who disagree with you are shills is because you do not want to have the discussion of value yourself.

4
3

[–] lawofchaos 4 points 3 points (+7|-4) ago 

You have a good point but I haven't exactly seen many GMO supporters debating with any more humility. I thought it was a funny comment, a bit of irony and rubbing it in their faces at the same time and I took it as such.

24
74

[–] mcwilshire 24 points 74 points (+98|-24) ago  (edited ago)

*Monsanto Herbicide with which some particular GMO crops are designed to be used is likely carcinogenic at high concentrations

200 to 400 mg/kg is the typical range of experimental dosages. That would be like a 180 lb human drinking a shot glass of Roundup. You can expect that if you drank a shot glass of Roundup, if they ran some blood tests 24 hours later, they'd find some abnormalities associated with increased cancer risk. That's the take home.

One study had 400 mg/kg injected daily.

The actual facts: High doses of glyphosate are likely carcinogenic.

The headline: GMO's CONTAIN CARCINOGENS.

[–] [deleted] 18 points 15 points (+33|-18) ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

1
41

[–] mcwilshire 1 points 41 points (+42|-1) ago  (edited ago)

And it says that the herbicide is "in GMO crops". In other words, GMO's contain carcinogenic herbicides, in other words, GMO's contain carcinogens. Isn't that what I wrote as the hysterical headline? Ah yes it is.

  1. Glyphosate can be used, and is in fact often used, when growing non-GMO crops.
  2. GMO crops do not necessarily contain glyphosate, Roundup-ready is but one line of GMO crops.

The headline gives the impression that the carcinogenic herbicide is something intrinsic to some, if not all, GMO crops. Sort of like BT toxin in BT-corn, which is engineered to produce insecticidal proteins via genes sourced from a bacterium. This isn't the case at all. Roundup may be present in Roundup-Ready crops - but only if it was used to grow them, and not always even then - just like any other crop.

[–] [deleted] 3 points 21 points (+24|-3) ago 

[Deleted]

0
1

[–] whatthehelldamnguy 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

"Roundup Ready" crops are designed to be used with Roundup but the Roundup itself [glyphosate] is the carcinogen.

That is exactly what I got out of the headline. Did anyone else really not get that?

3
8

[–] Jahonay 3 points 8 points (+11|-3) ago 

They link to the full study, and yet people still wont read it.

0
1

[–] arrggg 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Monsanto recommends spraying the crops down with poison 3 days before harvest in order to kill and desiccate the plants for an easier harvest. (pg32) Dry beans absorb water like a sponge when cooking them, and the same thing happens if they have dried on the vine before harvest. For the ready to harvest beans that get sprayed with this poison the dosage could very well be in the 200 to 400 mg/kg range.

0
2

[–] Cuddlefluff 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago  (edited ago)

The report says that during testing of 75 000 different household products, the highest level was recorded at 1.1mg/kg (Brazilian Soy)

0
0

[–] ovix 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

To me the title sounded like when they use a herbicide on a GMO crop combined effect produces carcinogenic effect. Sleazy.

7
36

[–] RockAndNoWater 7 points 36 points (+43|-7) ago  (edited ago)

They put in group 2A, which includes sunlight, bacon, shift work, frying, and wood fires. Also super glue.

Context is always important.

Edit: I do not work for Monsanto or any company associated with Monsanto, nor do I own any stock in Monsanto (except possibly indirectly as a result of owning index funds).

[–] [deleted] 4 points 13 points (+17|-4) ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

1
9

[–] Fox_Tango 1 points 9 points (+10|-1) ago 

I mean, why eat a GMO crop with the same cancer risk as bacon? I rather eat the bacon.

1
4

[–] Iforgotmy_other_acct 1 points 4 points (+5|-1) ago 

So, to be clear:

Glysophate might be carcinogenic. Which is reason enough to vilify a corporation for marketing it as safe when used properly. That's not good enough for you, though. You need to bring them down.

Meanwhile: Alcohol is in fact classified as a Class 1 carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. Class 1 means that it is definitely carcinogenic to humans. It is in this same group that we find other substances such as:

asbestos

formaldehyde

sulfur mustard (mustard gas)

oh, and what do you know - Gamma Radiation

So, naturally, you and your internet comrades rise up against trace amounts of a potential carcinogen, and then proceed to pat yourselves on the back by consuming copious amounts of a Class 1 carcinogenic substance.

0
9

[–] Fox_Tango 0 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago  (edited ago)

As a ginger, fuck sunlight, cancer from sunlight to me is very fucking real. And if Bacon wasn't so god damn good, people would avoid it. People usually eat vegetables to avoid the health dangers associated with their guilty pleasure foods.

0
4

[–] Irony_Dan 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

As a Ginger, bacon > sunlight.

0
1

[–] trolleyfan 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Group 1 - known carcinogens - of course, contains alcohol.

So if you've had a beer lately, shut up about glyphosate.

0
0

[–] tobasoft 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

aaaand more v/conspiracy bait in "news".

context? ...logic? ....hmm...gotta be a shillll man.

anymore who doesn't believe monsanto is a subsidary of hydra run by cobra commander and headquartered in the death star (source: naturalnewsspiritscienceheathynetwork.com) is like, totally a shill bro.....I like, feel bad for you sheeples.

3
24

[–] stevenxdavis 3 points 24 points (+27|-3) ago 

The herbicide is isn't "in" the crops; it's designed to be used "on" the crops. These GMOs, designed by Monsanto, are called "Roundup-ready" because they are resistant to Roundup, which is a carcinogenic herbicide developed by Monsanto. In other words, the crops contain carcinogens because they are heavily sprayed with an herbicide, not because they are genetically modified.

2
14

[–] l-emmerdeur 2 points 14 points (+16|-2) ago 

Your logic. 'Twill fall upon ears that are deaf, methinks.

4
2

[–] Sorahzahd 4 points 2 points (+6|-4) ago  (edited ago)

So you're claiming that soft skinned fruit and vegetables don't absorb anything?

That's a bold claim, not backed up by any science.

0
11

[–] stevenxdavis 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago 

No, I imagine that crops absorb a significant amount of the herbicides that are sprayed on them whether the plants are genetically modified or not. Roundup is used on all kinds of crops, not just Roundup-ready ones.

0
1

[–] Irony_Dan 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

And yet, there's a huge difference between claiming that some fruits and or vegetables can absorb an amount of Roundup vs saying that Roundup is in GMO crops. It's a slight but meaningful distinction that is only ignored when there's a desire to mislead.

[–] [deleted] 5 points 15 points (+20|-5) ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

3
8

[–] MuensterMonster 3 points 8 points (+11|-3) ago 

you consume any number of cancer causing agents in a day in all of the foods you eat. the reason you're not dropping dead from cancer is that you don't consume them in high enough concentrations to actually have much of an impact on your biology. ffs, eat a great enough amount of anything and something bad is likely to happen because it contains x amount of x bad substance.

0
6

[–] hedgehogforafoot 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

Not too mention most pesticides used in conventional crops are way more hazardous to human health than glcophosphate. Screw the facts though, lets all panic!

[–] [deleted] 1 points -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

[Deleted]

6
-1

[–] l-emmerdeur 6 points -1 points (+5|-6) ago 

No, they cannot explain it to you, because you don't want to hear fact and will not be persuaded by evidence.

The fact that a company that engineers GMO's uses an herbicide which is dangerous has nothing to do with the safety of the plants they are trying to protect with said herbicide.

The herbicide is dangerous. Not the plant.

I know thinking is hard but I promise you it becomes easier the more you do it.

1
8

[–] Sorahzahd 1 points 8 points (+9|-1) ago 

Some people don't consider Monsanto funded "studies" with predetermined conclusions to be science. Alarming, I know, that some people aren't so easily fooled by bought and paid for pseudoscience which so easily confuses people like yourself and your buddies over at /v/GMOMyths.

[–] [deleted] 3 points 2 points (+5|-3) ago 

[Deleted]

0
0

[–] RedStormbringer 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

If a chemical is designed to be used in conjunction with a plant, then the safety of said chemical is relevant to the discussion of said plant. Especially since crops don't exist in magical bubbles where they never interact with their surrounding environment.

[–] [deleted] 2 points 8 points (+10|-2) ago 

[Deleted]

[–] [deleted] 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
1

[–] Sorahzahd 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

There are some of those here too, but luckily they get mostly downvotes. See @Biohazard.

4
1

[–] Sorahzahd 4 points 1 points (+5|-4) ago  (edited ago)

The Monsantards are here too, they just tend to brigade larger threads only. See @JF_Queeny, /v/GMOMyths, etc.

3
8

[–] Outamyhead 3 points 8 points (+11|-3) ago 

Time to start growing my own food, because nothing will stop the Monsanto machine.

[–] [deleted] 5 points 2 points (+7|-5) ago 

[Deleted]

0
2

[–] mvartan 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

What's that have to do with individuals?

0
0

[–] warpdesign 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Hove fun with that.

6
8

[–] jerm 6 points 8 points (+14|-6) ago 

Why am I not surprised by this news?

[–] [deleted] 3 points 7 points (+10|-3) ago 

[Deleted]

0
9

[–] jerm 0 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago 

I want to agree with you, except for the fact that I'm not opposed to GMO's. I am, on the other hand, opposed to Monsanto's practice of mucking with the genetic makeup of food that we ingest and poisons that are harmful to us. Genetically modifying crops to survive in rain adverse areas? F**k yeah! Genetically modifying crops so your company can sell more weed killer? No thank you.

load more comments ▼ (20 remaining)