The Unfortunate Truth About GMOs | Genetically Modified Foods 

See also: bear attacks. Very natural. Also very bad for you!

Oxygen is a known carcinogen, not only natural but also necessary for our survival.

Black widow venom: natural. Chloromycetin and cresomycin: artificial.

CN is the third most common molecule in the Universe, after H2 (a really flammable gas) and CO (another toxic gas)

And digitalis!

Or ones who put botox in their skin which is proven to haven really bad toxins in them that can be lethal But trying to have delusional standards of beauty isnt as harmful as GMOs to them

Generally if someone is against GMO foods they eat minimal fast food. At least in the circles I run.

@@mcjess9843 That's likely the ones who are heavily against GMOs. Those who have the random feeling that it's not safe and don't spend hours trying to ensure their entire diet is made of so called 'safe' foods are plenty likely to go to fast food.

I love the GMO labels. They help me find what I want to eat.

People that go to farmers markets to buy produce thinking the food there is as natural and organic as it was back in the 1800’s don’t know what the O in GMO means. 🤣

Bravo!! Keep educating the dolts.

I totally agree. I'm all for synthetic chemicals because they can be made quite pure and free from contaminants compared to naturally sourced chemicals. One big thing a lot of people disagree with me about is hydroponic nutrients. A lot of people want "natural", I want as synthetic as possible for purity and contamination reasons. Sadly, there are a lot of misinformed and ignorant people out there that just don't understand what they even believe in. What's worse is these same people can vote.

@@MmmmDatAss Oh ye I fully agree, the funny thing is i've had this argument even with fellow colleagues, those "medical plant extracts" don't exist for "mother nature to save you", thats literally poison made so that the plant gets avoided by predators, the fact that we've isolated a bunch of things from plants like say the digitalis lanata cardiac glycosides that we use for certain heart conditions (under very strict supervision) is a coincidence, and people keep working to improve the compound, or try to find a variant based on it and so on... but people are stupid. Example currently there's being worked the lab based meat, where they grow it out of induced cancer cells (perfect in nutrition as in actual meat minus a bunch of alergens), but people hear "from cancer cells" and go oh no i don't want to eat cancer (thats not how you get cancer), or my favorite "hormones in X Y Z" pure hormones are not orally active, no matter how much you drink, there's a reason why all those pills come in ester/prodrug forms like propionates,acetates ... but somehow this animal had X small amount and the water here had Y amount ... its just internet fear merchants that keep fanning the flames.

There is a difference in foods that are sprayed with a glyphosate-containing herbicide and those that are not. His failing to even mention glyphosate in a video on GMOs shows he's either a paid mouthpiece for the industry or that he's only studied their propaganda. Either way it's very deceptive.

@@tbradtbrad There is "no difference" in those crops, both crops are safe. Glyphosate is safe, the sewer dwelling Rat Lawyers are not.

Yeah, these business practices are one of the two real issues that I have - the other being Monsanto's heavy development in glyphosate resistant crops to encourage the use of glyphosate (which they created) in weed management which given that we no know is pretty horrible stuff that causes cancer is a big problem. It's funny, the crops themselves have no evidence of causing any harm, but the glyphosate is very bad for the workers exposed to it (though I don't know if there's any direct risk to the consumer). I think an awful lot of the PR issues can be laid at the feet of Monsanto since they are the figurehead for these issues that weaken support within the groups that would ordinarily be pro-GMO. I think that anything that improves efficiency in agriculture is very important, but the IP issues do not make agriculture better it just allows these huge corporations take ever larger cuts of the whole industry and the glyphosate resistance was to encourage a dependence on that herbicide to ensure farmers kept buying it - enriching Monsanto and the other big corporations, without benefiting the rest of the industry enough to justify it.

Yep. That's a big issue because Monsanto is number one in bioengineered food. They also want to patent food like tomatoes and wheat so they can actually own all the food. They fight against your right to buy heirloom seeds. I urge everyone to read how Monsanto has destroyed the lives of so many farmers in the US and in third world countries.

@@elizabethwitt2621 I know at least one country (or province maybe?) turned down their "food aid" at one stage, preferring to struggle through a famine rather than get dependent on patented seeds

Except no farmer has to buy their seed from Monsanto, so I don't know why I should care that there are more choices out there, and if a farmer thinks the new seed is worth it, who am I to say they are wrong?

@@PeteQuad because they are trying to force out other seed sellers and make it harder and harder to source from anyone other than themselves.

true

Yes fr! 😂

Absolutely

Gwyneth has Orthorexia

LoL

Most foods would be basically inedible if they'd never been modified. We'd have exactly one type of orange and it would be green, small, and sour.

@@cbpd89wouldn’t be much of an orange

This just isn't true. Genetic modification has a specific definition which breeding does not fit.

​@@chettlar212 Cross-breeding two different breeds or species of plants does. The only difference is you're modifying genes at random instead of aiming for specific chunks of DNA.

@@chettlar212 That "specific" definition is also vague and applied unequally because it is the anti-science groups that purposefully push it as meaning something specific. Meanwhile, the definition they use excludes a bunch of stuff (including organic crops) for no reason other than it doesn't fit their preconceptions. They don't like to admit that all modern cultivars, including heirloom crops, are the result of things like radioactive mutagenesis done in the early 1900's to create new useful traits.

Salt isn't an O, so it has no Gs to M.

@@sonicpsycho13 salt isn’t an O therefore cannot be GMO

@@danzjz3923 Why'd you rephrase what they just said?

Bravo!!

How do I shop for food based on the least amount of pesticides? I shop organic to avoid pesticides but this video just made me insecure again.

@@talyahr3302 You don't need to shop for the food with the least pesticide, all of our crops are safe from a pesticide residue standpoint. Organic farmers spray pesticides too. Regards.

US and western EU countries have the WORST, by far the WORST fruits and vegetables I have EVER tasted... They are so bland in taste that they are almost tasteless and the little taste that is there, is absolutely hideous, which is confirmed to be a direct result of HEAVY pesticide use... Also, there's a certain, non-natural/artificial-like taste that you can taste in both their vegetables and fruits, which I'm guessing comes either from HEAVY, HEAVY pesticide use OR as a result of the unnatural process of genetic modification, whatever the case is, point of the story is that GMO fruits and vegetables have been labeled AS A HEALTH RISK by Japanese scientists - and in case you didn't know, when it comes to food and drinks, Japan has the most strict and best scientists/regulations in the entire world. (And Japanese are not only the healthiest nation on the planet but also have the healthiest foods on the entire planet on top of that) so if Japanese scientists say GMO's are a HEALTH RISK, then they are a health risk, period...

But I think some of his statements about GMOs r misleading as well. There r MANY different ways to produce & use modified plants & those differences r what make them 'safe' or 'unsafe'

It's illegal, in most places in the U.S. (IIRC) to use this method for genetically engineering crops. However, you can irradiate crops in order to modify them.

@Pork98 which is quite ridiculous, because irradiating means you cannot control the changes that happen at all. Europe now marks Cas9-edited products as GMOs, although in terms of risk and predicyability, they are wildly different

nice! I worked with the group that introduced a gene for blight resistance in the American Chestnut. They are still facing regulatory hurdles.

@@manuelsegundomarquez7093 Personlly, I think that people are stupid to be afraid of gene editing, but that's just my opinion

People are quick to judge anything they don't (want to) understand.

I read that in a Texan accent, while starting with "y'know"

​@@flarethetitanpea5358i can't unheard it now

I have worked with farmers for 20+ years to try and grow the best quality crops they can with a yield that will provide excellent on their investment. I have never met a single farmer who didn't want to do right by the people there crop was going to feed and care for the environment that made their crop possible in the first place. People need to give folks credit and understand there are lots of good people out their trying to make sure we have something safe and healthy to eat every day

@@Anyone-but-him It's especially important when it doesn't just end up on the public's plate. Too many people just narrow the situation down to one thing. GMO isn't some conspiracy to poison your food. It's great to see understanding in people like you.

​@@Anyone-but-himfarmers are under the thumb of Monsanto and they don't get to choose many of their seeds. Get real, they have to follow whatever big food tells them so it doesn't matter what their intentions are.

!!!!Bravo!

Yes, I’ve just been educated

When will your parents make plants bear meat fruit

@@angelitomasalta869 lol dad is retired now, so GM meat plants in his future

Eating bugs are the future

Right? It gives vibes of a weird sci-fi experiment when that’s not what GMOs are

to be fair. if insects aren't eating it, then why should human do ?

@@rahmadrenaldi2624well because human are not insects?

​@@jamesmcgill3268yeah but we do eat the same food right? at least for the same diet, insect can be used for early detection. it's the same as using rats as test subjects.

Good job!!

Good for you! If your project had been the response by the industry from the start, instead of stonewalling, the industry could have kept more of their credibility intact. Simply "deny, deny, deny" is a strategy that raises suspicion.

!!

A great example to use would be corn from colonial central and South America vs the cobs of corn we have today

​@@smnbrgss, lol, There wouldn't be enough kernels on the cob to make half a meal with. Let them try eating the corn from way back, that was half the size. We wouldn't have enough food for everyone. Carrots would still be purple. Farmers have alot of rules and regulations we have to follow to make food safe for eating.

@@smnbrgss a great example would be Oranges.... Oranges are a fruit that is man made... it's a cross between apples and pamplemouse that does not exist in nature

If they knew about the humble lemon. It were selective breeding that made the lemon. It didn't exist as its own fruit until people started to cross citrons and bitter orange.

@lovedragons1961 hi! My reserve to GMOs is more on the longevity of the crops. As far as I have read, the speed of growth is also aligned with the speed of the impact to the soil. Which results in faster deforestation of the land, as it becomes unstable sooner. Did you find that while growing these crops?

The problem with people "doing their own research" is that a lot of the "info" can come from misleading sources. I'd rather get my info from credible sources like Dr. Mike or someone who doesn't spread the bs.

@@JasonICECarson Correct. People need to be taught to "do their own research" properly, and to evaluate research and information. I got lucky and was taught that early in my college education, but most aren't. That is the real problem. If you don't know how to weed through all the information out there, I can kind of understand why people get sideways. After all, the ones with an agenda are better at grabbing attention than actual peer reviewed research is. I tell people, if you have to guess, boring is better.

@@JasonICECarson Yeah, just googling is going to bring up trash sites like Natural News and Mercola.

it's the anti-vax mentality that's in fashion.... was the same with MSG, Gluten, Sugar.... people need something to be scared about.... processed food is just as silly of fear tactic...

You should read Vandana Shiva then and not a biased RU-vid video of someone trying to ridiculise a point.

!!

Good for you! Actual discussion of GMOs and the science behind it is healthy and good. The EU has a history of banning substances it has determined to be unhealthy, while those same subtances are in use in the U.S. It is reassuring to consumers in Japan to see the EU's actions, and there is more discussion of the science behind GMOs here than in the U.S. (It doesn't help that videos like this tend to pick the least scientific commentators to "prove" there is no problem with GMOs.. Just because some commentators are making stupid arguments does not mean that there is nothing wrong.)

@@MNkno You wrote, "The EU has a history of banning substances it has determined to be unhealthy, while those same subtances are in use in the U.S." What are those substances? You wrote, "Just because some commentators are making stupid arguments does not mean that there is nothing wrong." Ok, exactly what is wrong with GMO crops?

!

That's funny because baby carrots are just just turned down to a smaller diameter. They use a bigger one to make multiple smaller baby carrots

are you regularly going to hospitals yelling at nurses at the end of the month because they want to be paid for their work? If not you being mad at a company for doing the same thing is incredibly irrational... people and companies are allowed to profit off of their labor/products even in a communist society that holds true.... so seems like "lack of intelligence" not horrible business practices are a big motivator

@@LoFiAxolotl If you're siding with a multi billion dollar corporation who routinely sues small farmers over what any rational minded person would recognize as nothing then you're not motivated by intelligence, you're motivated by the boot you're licking.

​@@LoFiAxolotlterrible comparison..if something you will have to compare yelling at nurse for getting paid commiting malpractice. It is perfectly rational to be angry at a corporation that is profiting while causing harm

Those accusations about Monsanto and patents are false firetruck.

Sorry, Dr. Mike. I love most of your videos, and I’m no fan of Gwenyth Paltrow and Goop, but I know too many cell biologists who won’t eat gmo foods to go back to growing them in my garden now. I’m just worried the natural seeds will become impossible to get for those of us who want them. Saving my own, but sometimes there aren’t enough.

Exactly. Even broccoli is man-made

Not a single agency or pesticide regulator in the world rates it a known carcinogen or even anything else harmful at the tiny real world levels we are exposed to. Regards.

@DukeGMOLOL Do you know what you're talking about? Do you work for Monsanto? Because you are most surely not an attorney or a scientist. January 2024: Philadelphia jury awards $2.25 billion to a Pennsylvania man who claimed Roundup caused his non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The verdict followed five other successful plaintiffs' cases in 2023.

@@docgammycat While I don't know if RoundUp is a carcinogen, basing an argument around jury decisions is not a good argument. A jury is not experts and they will always have their own bias.

@@nickbourgade8473If Europe bans it, that’s a pretty good indication that it really is toxic. They do much better than Americans at this type of regulation.

Thank you. I'm not against GMOs at all, but I'm buying my food centered around the use of pesticides. So I should keep buying organic because at least the pesticides will be organic. I know a lot about Monsanto and RoundUp which is why I'm scared out my boots to avoid them. The other people in these comments should look into them, they are an evil company.

@jonathanstern5537 Genuinely curious, could you point me to where you got this information about the success of golden rice? My basic google search didn't turn up anything concrete and my understanding of this for years has been that the rice was caught up in research setbacks and bureaucracy purgatory and just hasn't been widely implemented yet. I would be excited to know if things have changed.

I buy organic because they don't have as much in the way of pesticides and herbicides, not because of GMO. I would buy GMO food that was organic in every other way. eg. as few chemical poisons as possible. And no, I get my information from reading the laws about organic foods, not some silly guru.

@@shakeyj4523 except organic foods actually use a lot of pesticides, herbicides, insecticides as well.. just different ones. If you wash your produce before you eat it, there’s no reason to fear them.

Same. If I see something sold as organic I refuse to buy it. So stupid. Same with labelling something gluten free when it's not even possible. Aka sugar.... wtf

The only threat I see is that GMO might add some chemicals that can have side effects but that can also happen whenever something new is used as an ingredient without anything being GMO

biologist here, but similar ideas. When I hear all this nonsense I can't help but just think "stomach acid does not care about the genetics of the material it digests...".

God Created us, we sinned (lying, stealing, adultery, and hate) and deserve hell because God punishes sin. But God, in his love sent Jesus to die on the cross for our sins and whoever turns from sin and believes in Jesus will not perish but have life after death.

yes and they become H. P. Lovecraft and write a cosmic horror story about an air conditioner

How do you educate people who don't want to be educated? That's the dilemma.

No, I think most people are just lazy and compliant. If you were to ask a person if they think GMO food is bad for them most will say yes, because they know something is different about it, but they are actually clueless, same for organic, people know that organic is somehow better for them but most wouldn't be able to yell you why. GMO, Round-up, and CRISPR, are just.... yeah.... you know.... SAFE AND EFFECTIVE, right? Trust 'the science' ... and of course the product that was pushed on people in 2021.... if you've taken that you've already voluntarily signed up to be modified your self, with a high probability of 'it' being taken into your own DNA, especially with the vials contamination which they, ah, didn't bother to tell anyone. Don't worry, it's Safe and Effective And very soon, you will eat lab created meat, already in production in the Netherlands. We just had Pairwise team up with Bayer, to make CRISPR salads, that may taste better/make them addictive - oh but don't worry, eating salads is good for your health.... you just have to ignore scientists silenced screams warning about cancer and contamination into other species. No, it's alll good. Every thing juuust fine. Go eat your bio-engineered crops, sprayed with Glyphosate, CRISPR edited foods and a side of lab created meat. You'll own nothing and be happy Let's keep believing these sponsored video's? Oh wait, weren't we going to after mis-information?

I fear math

Facts.

GMO products are bad for the body because of the glyphosate residue accumulated in them. That's the reason they get modified to be glyphosate resistant in the first place, for the farmer to be able to use glyphosate on them to eliminate unwanted weeds. And that's a proven fact, there is research on the harm of the glyphosate residue found on crops on the human body.

This is why the movie "Don't Look Up" made me so uncomfortable. It's this generation's "Idiocracy", except way more plausible, and it's terrifying to think about.

No. Breeding does not alter genes fundamentally like genetic engineering allows. GMO is a specific definition and the conflation with breeding is a talking point pushed by a number of companies with vestes interest in ensuring their practices are not scrutinized.

Also because every modern cultivar was developed in the late 1800's, early 1900's through the use of methods like radioactive mutagenesis. That includes all the "heirloom" varieties.

​@@chettlar212 It does, that's literally the definition of selective breeding, genetic modification just speeds up the process immensely and allows for very fine tuning, it is the best option.

@@dud3655 Yeah I have to agree we have been cross breeding plants since around 8000 BC and that does fundamentally change the genetics of the plants. As mentioned above genetic engineering allows this process to be quicker and more precise but it is really no different. We aren't actually making up our own genetic code or anything. Geneticists use look for common traits among plants who share the same genetic blueprint and reuse what nature has already done on its own to add desirable traits to new plant species.

​@@chettlar212 Broccoli, cauliflower, and asparagus are all the same species of plant that has been genetically bred to make it different depending on what we wanted. Dog breeds are a type of gmo

Bravo!!

don't forget the label Bio...

Patent of seeds, soil degradation, deforestation, monocultures, pesticides and pollinators, loss of biodiversity, of course the country that most benefits will have all the propaganda in schools and media as "this is the best solution"

billions... multiple billions... in the 80s Norman Borlaug already became known as the man who saved a billion lives... eventually he'll even hit a trillion... people still screaming GMOs being bad

@@LoFiAxolotlthat was cross breeding which is not GMO

Thats cool. Except big ag literally doesnt do it for people. They do it for profit and do it in an unethical, unedible means

No producer has ever sued for "naturally spread".

Monsanto's policy before they were bought out... and one that still exists for bayer is that if an individual finds GMO crop on their land... the company will go out and clean it up on their dime. The situation people tend to point to was a guy who had previously grown roundup ready canola saved the seeds of that canola when his user license ran out and then replanted them. Pollination exists. Everything pollinates. no court is going to allow a lawsuit through on the basis of cross pollination. It's not something that can be regulated.

"Can" and "will" aren't the same thing. From what I understand, they tend to start out by asking the person to sign the usual licensing agreement. They only get litigious if you knowingly violate their patent. If only because lawyers are expensive, and the PR is bad.

@@stevenalexander6033 Yep!! Except the Thieving Schmuck Schmeiser actually took GM canola from next door that had blown into his margins and ditches (he also said they might have fallen off a passing truck) and purposely used those seeds to plant a thousand acres of GM canola without paying for it.

A problem that also applies to medicine

This 100%

This is the problem and the root core of gmos, idk why it wasnt made at least a footnote in the vid

That issue isn't unique to GMOs though. Every modern cultivar is patented and their usage controlled, including organic crops. The nice thing about patents though is that they expire and only last for about 20 years. Which is why all the earlier varieties of GMOs from the 90's are off-patent now and can be used freely.

This just shouldn't happen. I understand patenting an engine design or something alike, but we didn't come up with these genes, we merely switched them around. You should not be able to patent biological material, period.

The Internet democratized the dissemination of information. Maybe there was a good reason why not everyone was able to get an audience before. Not everyone is worth listening to.

If you are not working on ways to reduce population than you are kinda evil.

Okay, but like... that's just a front for your *real* project, Project Mind-Controlling Bacterial Ray, right? 😂

I'm not authorised to comment on that

@@Svnipni :))

Microbial Molecular Biology sounds pretty high tech, and evil is a value judgement.

Thank you! I thought comments like this would be all over the comment section, but no. This is exactly why I don't support GMO's. Not because of health concerns.

This was my biggest issue with GMO. This is still a good video, but unfortunately doesn't touch on this aspect at all.

It wasn't always like this. Look at GMO papayas, which were developed in an academic setting and are credited with saving the entire papaya industry in Hawaii (which is the only place in the US that grows them) from the ring spot virus. I wish there were some good way to advocate for government/public funded and academic research for GMO development. Agribusiness corporations aren't going to be developing the drought, flood, and disease resistant crops people really need because the people who need them most can't pay for them.

This isn't an argument against gmos, it's an argument against predatory capitalistic practices that exist in the current gmo market. Besides, this critique applies to a majority of manufactured products sold in the US

@@kennaleeorme4454 You're fundamentally correct. The criticism has been placed squarely on GMOs and not questionable business practices.

😂😂😂

TBF I’m sure he’s delivered multiple babies-just on the catching side rather than the pushing!

Deliver what, Monsanto sponsored disinformation?!

@@rtek8318ye he said that he has delivered over 30!

That's wonderful. More for you and Dr. Mikhail. Although I have a feeling Mikhail ears organic. I'll be sticking to natural and unaltered. Seems like everything Mike says is a talking point pushed by corporate interests.

@@jaygio Judging by your comment and others on this video, it seems you must have failed science class. Mikhail gave plenty of examples of genetically modified organisms that have been developed over millennia. If DNA never changed from one generation to the next, most, if not all species would fail to exist. So genetic mutations, whether naturally occurring or through genetic manipulation with methods like crossbreeding, selective breeding, or even in a lab, are perfectly normal and help secure nutritious, disease resistant food for many parts of the world. If there was not crossbreeding, selective breeding, or any method other than a lab, then the produce section in the supermarket would be quite tiny. Another example of this is the plant Brassica oleracea, which is the scientific name for multiple vegetables like Cauliflower, Brussel Sprouts, Kale, Broccoli, and a few others. Although the genetic changes happened through a different method than modern farmers use, it still does not mean that your foods are "GMO Free". They most certainly modified in one way, shape, or form. Only the method is different.

Actually, golden rice could be doing that but it is not allowed in any of the countries suffering from severe VitA deficiency, primarily due to the spread of fear by organizations like green peace who protested it despite nearly 2.7 million children dying in a single year due to low immune response due to the deficiency. In fact, the protests against Golden Rice was one of the major causes of the anti-GMO fear mongering that we are still experiencing today. IMO the anti-GMO stance comes from a place of immense privilege, and I find it deeply unethical that people are willing to dismiss literal dying children in their self-centered quest to "eat clean." It literally makes me feel sick just talking about it.

​@@itsbecca Thank you for saving me the research time on golden rice! I remembered it was not used because of anti GMO stances and was doubting myself.

​@@jaygioclearly you didn't watch the video, or you'd have learned enough to make you realise that your stance is braindead

!!!

GM Corn and soy products have little to no nutritional value and are a significant cause of health issues in lower income/ lower education parts of USA.

At a pro-science rally several years ago, one scientist had a sign on her dog that said "I'm a GMO."

@@Tracymmo I love it!

It will be quite a battle in those groups.

u sure?

Yes, when I studied this back in 2008 one of the biggest issues was that crops grown from Monsanto seeds could not produce viable seeds. They could however cross polinate with farmers nearby who wanted nothing to do with Monsanto creating major problems.

Funnily enough, Monsanto doesn’t exist anymore. They were bought by Bayer

@@CrankyWizard true. daily business in all types of industries.

Keep Poland out of this, you monster!

Which EU country you from?

People wouild rather believe conspiracies then cold hard facts.

@@ashleygoggs5679It's easier to say something like: "GMOs are bad" than to explain why they’re not that bad.

Being modified to last longer doesn't inherently mean they are less nutritious. Have you checked their nutrition content, or you are just assuming? Tasting and looking better doesn't mean more nutritious. Is this another conspiracy theory?

Thank you! This was an important side of the equation that was important for context, yet he completely ignored it with the classical one-sided arguments that have been served ad nauseum by the industry PR.

The crops in grocery stores are less nutritious than growing personal small batches for various reasons relating to the business of harvesting large crop batches for profit. Is that a correct understanding of your point?

@@AJGraham83 But it's wrong.

Born and raised in California. Everything causes cancer. So, nothing causes cancer. Those warning labels mean nothing.

Kurzgesagt also did a video on GMO a few years back that is still relevant if you want another video on the subject along with their sources.

Exactly it’s a lot deeper than we’re just as healthy, trust us. Yes so many foods are GMO there’s pretty much no way to avoid it in the American diet. But the fact that these companies are super shady and trying to monopolize the food industry not only in this country but spreading to other countries as well, while taking down small farms all over, this is one of the biggest reasons I have a problem with GMO and the companies that hold the patents on them.

But that problem stems from capitalism, not from gmo foods themselves

Let me say this: The first GMO crops were produced in roughly 1980. The first seed patent was granted in around 1930. Today, there are about 200ish GMO seed varieties under patent, but also many that are not. But this is a hugely small number of overall seed varieties under patent. In fact, there are currently more "organic" seed varieties under patent than GMO varieties! Rage against seed patents if you must, but the issue is far from GMO specific.

Exactly, the problem is capitalist incentives, not the GMO concept itself. This is why many GMO foods are designed for long shelf life and attractive appearance OVER flavor. You can't even buy a tomato anymore in grocery stores in the US and Europe, only red balls that look vaguely like tomatoes but don't taste anything like them.

Yes, exactly this. Having the entire food chain rely entirely on GMO variants owned by companies would be extremely dangerous in my opinion. GMOs I'm fine with, as long as the supply isn't limited by a private entity. You only have to look to the tech sector to see the consequences of what happens when big companies get to shape every day life according to their profit margins. Little by little items you've come to rely on start to come with caveats. You bought a TV? Here comes an update to feed you ads directly, so you can't block it. Accept the TOS or your TV won't work. Bought a new car? We'll just track your driving habits and send the data to your insurance company. Expect an adjustment of your premium in the mail. Try to disable our data collection and we'll disable your car. Want a robot vacuum? Great! It comes with forced cloud integration, so we can get a live feed from the cameras at all times. An internet connection isn't needed for it to work but it is needed for us to be able to sell your data. Want a phone with strong privacy options and an assurance that we won't remove privacy options in the future? I guess you need to learn how to root your device and install custom firmware. By the way, your warranty is forfeit. Profit hungry companies have essentially removed our privacy and the concept of ownership from almost all everyday items. If food companies find themselves in a position where people are forced to use their products if they want to live a normal life, then they will do exactly the same as has happened in tech.

Reading through the comments and from other discussions I've see about GMO, Monsanto definitely comes up a lot so it does seem the mistrust is of them (or large companies in general) is a big factor. I also see a lot of accusations that the studies/people saying their products are safe are all funded by them.

Gene-free corn? That's impressive! Back in my high school biology lab, we once extracted the DNA from our own cheek swab cells and stored it in alcohol in a little glass vial, attached to a necklace, so we could wear our purified DNA around our necks. I wonder if there's a little glass vial for every ear of corn they removed the DNA from, or just one big one with all the chromosomes stacked together? 😂

@@zelfzuchtig Well...yes. Someone has to fund the research somehow. And the FDA doesn't usually hand out grants to people to verify this stuff, so far as I know. If you're a corporation, and you want to disprove a study claiming that your food is harmful, you usually have to pay someone to do it. Not many scientists are going to do it pro bono.

LOL, Gene free corn!! 😂

Yep, at the you of it at capitalism ruins civilization changing inventions just to make more money

You are still wrong. Research glyphosate, Kevin 🙄

@@codyrcollins Don't need to research it, I have a whole jug of it in my garage. What's your point?

@@KevinTheID go spray it all over your food then eat it and see what happens !

@@codyrcollins Sounds like you are the one who needs to do a little research, buddy.

@@codyrcollins I did. It's fine. Everyone agrees. Except IARC, but they're paranoid.

Same here.

It's marketing, plain and simple. I'd really prefer a "grown hydroponically" label. That'd have some actual meaning, since it's one of the most environmentally friendly and efficient forms of farming. And produces very nutritional produce, more than normal farming.

I mostly avoid the "organic" section at the market because these products are too pricey. I tried avoiding the "GMO-free" labels as well, but nearly everything gets labelled like that where I live. At least, the phrase's often demoted to fine print on the back of the package. And the fruits and veggies without packaging may be all-GMO for all it's worth. 😊

!!

Now 😅 mutate it to have meat fruit

Atomic gardening is awesome, though. Way cooler than just exposing plants to mutagens and hoping for the best.