Stop Doubting The Science Behind GMOs. That's Exactly What Russia Wants

[progressoid]

Russia isn't just interested in meddling with American politics. Now, it has come to light that Russia has also been attempting to sow scientific misinformation and mistrust among the American public. As if we needed any help with that.

According to researchers at Iowa State University (ISU), Russia has been paying for online articles that question the safety of genetically modified crops and biotechnology - all in a dirty attempt to further divide the American public on the issue.

The study revealed there are more news articles mentioning genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in the U.S. versions of just two Russian-backed news sites than five other American news organizations combined, including Breitbart News, Huffington Post, Fox News, CNN and MSNBC.

Among all seven news sites examined, the two Russian-backed sites - Sputnik and RT - produced more than 50 percent of all GMO-related articles. Furthermore, the Russian news site RT was responsible for "nearly all" of the articles where the term GMO appeared as "click bait."

...

Thanks in large part to the lack of scientifically accurate media coverage, public understanding and awareness of GMO technology in the U.S. is low, leaving plenty of room for Russian interference.

...https://www.scienceaf.com/russia-science-public-opinion-america-gmo-fake-news

[Squinch]

1. .

[progressoid]

3. DUers fell for it...

The researchers also found RT and Sputnik used "GMO click bait" embedded in articles that most people would consider "negative or distasteful" to create an intentional negative reaction.

For example, the researchers pointed to an RT article titled, "Complex abortion debate emerges over Zika virus-infected fetuses" that included a link to another article, titled "GMO mosquitoes could be cause of Zika outbreak, critics say."

ahem...https://www.democraticunderground.com/10027573386

[Historic NY]

2. People have been eating GMO food for decades....

its what hybrid plants are, its what make plants survive disease and pestilence. Even down on the old family farms people cross bred plants for better yields. Ask France if their wine industry would have continued to exist w/o Americans and the engineering of grape stock. Fat Russians gladly consumed American grain & food stuffs.

[Farmer-Rick]

4. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day

Most GMOs are altered to allow Round Up to be poured all over them without dying. That is only a benefit to Monsanto. Europe has outlawed many of Monsanto's products and because of their excessive use in the US, it is almost impossible to buy GMO free feed in the states. I have to import it to get it clean.

Monsanto is conducting a huge experiment and the American public is their guinea pig. It's not science we are afraid of with Monsanto and their GMOs. It's the huge amount of poisons you have to pour on GMOs that makes them dangerous.

Russia also instigated protests and egged on the Black Lives Matter movement but it doesn't make the organization wrong. Putin trolls were also involved in some of the MeToo tweets. It doesn't make the movement totally wrong.

[progressoid]

5. Nope.

Most GMOs are altered to allow Round Up to be poured all over them without dying. That is only a benefit to Monsanto.

The adoption of GM insect resistant and herbicide tolerant technology has reduced pesticide spraying by 553 million kg (−8.6%) and, as a result, decreased the environmental impact associated with herbicide and insecticide use on these crops (as measured by the indicator the Environmental Impact Quotient (EIQ)) by19.1%. The technology has also facilitated important cuts in fuel use and tillage changes, resulting in a significant reduction in the release of greenhouse gas emissions from the GM cropping area. In 2013, this was equivalent to removing 12.4 million cars from the roads.

Also

GMO eggplant reduce use of insecticides by 80% and decreases loss due to pests. In 2013, Bangladesh commercialized Bt Eggplant, also known as Bt Brinjal, a genetically modified eggplant that is resistant to the fruit and shoot borer pest. This technology not only allows farmers to drastically reduce their use of insecticides by 80% or more, it also decreases yield loss due to pest damage.

Also

Canada approved GM canola in 1995 and following 2 years of seed multiplication, farmers started growing GM canola in 1997. By 2004, 75% of canola farmers in Canada were growing GM varieties.

~ the environmental impact of the chemicals applied to canola dropped by 53% when compared to the chemicals that were previously used on canola;
~ the volume of chemicals applied to canola dropped by 3 million kg per year; and
~ 1 million tonnes of carbon were either sequestered by the soil or no longer released from implement passes.

I have to import it to get it clean.

If you are importing your feed to get it "clean". How do you know it hasn't had other chemicals "poured all over them"?

Non-GM crops crops use LOTS of pesticides and herbicides (including glyphosate).

Miller has found that 2.5 quarts of Bicep, 2 quarts of glyphosate, 1 quart of Princep and 1 pint of 2,4-D per acre controls weeds well in his non-GMO corn.

On non-GMO soybeans last year he applied 1.5 pints of Dual, 5 ounces of Sencor, 2 quarts of glyphosate and 1 pint of Super HC per acre.

His fertilizer dealer recommended he use DuPont’s Envive in replacement of Sencor for control on broadleaves this year, so he held the rate down to the lowest recommendation to avoid getting into a carryover issue with his cover crops.

Miller recommends no-tillers considering non-GMO crops seek out experts who can recommend herbicides used before glyphosate came along.
- See more at: http://www.no-tillfarmer.com/articles/493-fighting-weeds-boosting-profits-with-non-gmos#sthash.dAR5IC33.dpuf

Even "organic" crops use them...

The USDA National List of allowed pesticides for organic growers is quite long. The list includes some substances that one would assume would be relatively harmless, such as mulch, dairy cultures or vitamin B. But others on the list should raise eyebrows: Copper sulfate, elemental sulfur, borax and borates are all known to cause some harm to humans and are approved members of the organic list. Among “synthetic” pesticides, pyrethrums are still allowed, and Vitamin C that is chemically derived (and therefore synthetic) is allowed, as are various forms of alcohol.

Whether “natural” or “synthetic,” these chemicals have unintended side effects. As to safety differences between the two categories, “You can’t generalize that broadly,” said Rob Wallbridge, an organic farmer in Quebec, Canada. “Every pesticide has a different profile, and there are many different ways to define safety.”

Acute toxicity (measured by half of a lethal dose, or LD50) is very often used, but rates of exposure, persistence in the environment, chronic chemical effects, and impact on off-target animals and plants also are important considerations. One criticism of organic pesticides, in fact, is that a farmer has to use a lot of them to get the same effect as conventional pesticide. If it’s true that “the poison is in the dosage,” then some organic pesticides (like sulfur or copper) do not look very benign.

~~~

In addition to these pesticides, organic farms are, in certain circumstances, permitted to use chemicals that are supposedly banned for organic use. One of these is methyl bromide, a fumigant that is used to boost strawberry growth. Although use of methyl bromide was banned several years ago, conventional growers can still use it if no viable alternatives are available. But organic farmers can also use it, for largely the same reasons. For “perennial planting stock,” those plants that are grown throughout the year, there aren’t many organic sources of the initial seedlings. So, organic farmers are allowed to use non-organic strawberry plants, complete with methyl bromide injected into the ground, and grow them as “organic” strawberries, as long as the plants are replanted and/or organically managed starting a year before harvesting.

huge experiment and the American public is their guinea pig

Ah, tired old saw.

These two debunk that particular bit of fear-mongering...http://frankenfoodfacts.blogspot.com/2015/11/open-letter-to-christie-brinkley.html?m=1

[Farmer-Rick]

6. Half of what you post does Not address anything I wrote

And the other half makes no sense.

But listen if you think pouring Round Up on our food is a good idea, I dare you to drink a cup of it. Go ahead drink it down, then tell me how you feel.

GMOs are designed to make money for Monsanto, nothing else. That's why when their monster plants get away and spreads through out the rest of the plant life, we get unkillable monster weeds and never ending swarms of more destructive and voracious insects. They are using the US as their test site and the American people as guinea pigs.

[progressoid]

7. Sorry it doesn't make sense to you.

You said that GMOs only benefit Monsanto because they allow Roundup to be poured all over them. That's blatantly not true. The examples I used show that GMOs benefit us all by actually reducing the overall use of pesticides and greenhouse gas emissions. Additionally, there are many GMOs that have nothing to do with Monsanto or Roundup at all. Ever eat a papaya? It's probably genetically modified. Or do you know anyone who get insulin shots? Genetically engineered insulin has been on the market for 35 years. Neither have anything to do with Monsanto.

Regarding your sophomoric statement to "drink a cup of it". If you are concerned with ingesting pesticides, perhaps you shouldn't eat at all. About 99.9 percent of the chemicals humans ingest are natural.

The amounts of synthetic pesticide residues in plant food are insignificant compared to the amount of natural pesticides produced by plants themselves. Of all dietary pesticides that humans eat, 99.99 percent are natural: they are chemicals produced by plants to defend themselves against fungi, insects, and other animal predators.

We have estimated that on average Americans ingest roughly 5,000 to 10,000 different natural pesticides and their breakdown products. Americans eat about 1,500 mg of natural pesticides per person per day, which is about 10,000 times more than the 0.09 mg they consume of synthetic pesticide residues.

http://potency.berkeley.edu/pdfs/Paracelsus.pdf

[NickB79]

8. My family's been farming for a hundred years

You'd shit bricks if you saw the volume of herbicides sprayed on crops in the 80's before GMOs took off.

[NNadir]

9. While I have no doubt that promoting American stupidity is in Russia's interest...

...we have plenty of stupid people in this country who can comment on GMOs without Russian interference.

An interesting point made by neurobiologist Sam Wang in a lecture I recently attended, is that the repetition of an outright lie reinforces the lie and gives it the patina of truth.

There is a lot of very, very, very noxious ads run by air head advertising executives on GMOs, all of which have a pernicious effect on the fate of humanity.

Genes always have been and always will be modified, naturally. It's called "evolution." "Directed evolution" subject to objections by people who long to live in caves and die before the age of 30 on average is perhaps "natural" or was, but it's also criminally ignorant.

[DetlefK]

10. It's not just GMO. Same with Bitcoin.

One day RT writes articles how great Bitcoin is, the next day how shitty it is, the next day how great it is, the next day how shitty it is...