Why Africa needs GMO crops

huh? it did succeed, rickets declined.

also,
As I already said Rickets declined due to the addition of Vitamin D. Have never heard of GMOs having anything to do with it. I also take these claims with a sack of salt nowadays. Just like with the wild banana claim if you go back far enough you'll probably find the "domestic" variant always existed. History isn't written down like a novel and people can make lots of claims that are unsupported.
 
As I already said Rickets declined due to the addition of Vitamin D. Have never heard of GMOs having anything to do with it. I also take these claims with a sack of salt nowadays. Just like with the wild banana claim if you go back far enough you'll probably find the "domestic" variant always existed. History isn't written down like a novel and people can make lots of claims that are unsupported.

a bit of a misunderstanding there i think. tbh im bored of this now, so much information for and against.

imo, with all the things claimed to cause cancer i doubt our everyday gmo plays a signficicant part, if any. with the amount of gmo consumed world wide it should surely have much greater affect if it did.
 
People don't seem to realise that organic farming uses some very nasty chemicals. They're both dangerous and polluting, but get a green light because they come from nature rather than being invented by humans.

Subsistence farming is inefficient and generally a bad idea if your aim is to feed a lot of people.

There may well be excessive usage of pesticides and herbicides, but the culprit isn't so much whether crops are genetically modified as whether farming is being done by massive agribusiness that has a general disregard for the environment and the long term health of those who consume the food, caring only about short term profit. Take away crops modified in a laboratory and you'd still have a similar problem.

If cancer rates are growing there could be myriad reasons and it is not possible to simply pin it on genetic modification of crops.

Eureka is the only flour which doesn't give me health problems. Eating the normal flour bread gives me respiratory and other health issues.
Went to Europe last year in countries with more GMO restrictive laws, I could eat everything without needing to read labels, or feel **** for the next 8h.
My Endocrinologist told me to stop eating pasta, bread etc. I asked him , but how Italians , French and others live on such a diet healthily, he said GMO. And he is all for science, just he have huge data base of patiences with health issues, getting glutten intoleranse and other allergies , which used to be very rare and now are very common.
And he's analysed that data? How many people with no health issues are visiting this endocrinologist?

It isn't really possible to discount placebo/nocebo in these scenarios. People who imagine they are gluten intolerant will get sick when they eat something they believe contains gluten regardless of whether it does or their has any real intolerance.
 
People don't seem to realise that organic farming uses some very nasty chemicals. They're both dangerous and polluting, but get a green light because they come from nature rather than being invented by humans.
source for this?
 
People don't seem to realise that organic farming uses some very nasty chemicals. They're both dangerous and polluting, but get a green light because they come from nature rather than being invented by humans.

Subsistence farming is inefficient and generally a bad idea if your aim is to feed a lot of people.

There may well be excessive usage of pesticides and herbicides, but the culprit isn't so much whether crops are genetically modified as whether farming is being done by massive agribusiness that has a general disregard for the environment and the long term health of those who consume the food, caring only about short term profit. Take away crops modified in a laboratory and you'd still have a similar problem.

If cancer rates are growing there could be myriad reasons and it is not possible to simply pin it on genetic modification of crops.


And he's analysed that data? How many people with no health issues are visiting this endocrinologist?

It isn't really possible to discount placebo/nocebo in these scenarios. People who imagine they are gluten intolerant will get sick when they eat something they believe contains gluten regardless of whether it does or their has any real intolerance.

No organic never uses pesticides... Don't be daft it uses complimentary farming and the tears of angels.
 
Is your keyboard broken? Or just the device between it and the chair? Look for Spinosad, sulphur as as pesticides and you'll start realising that it's not all birds and bees.

One link
https://www.washingtonpost.com/life...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.cb9d145a0d4b
Read your own article the guy keeps on talking about how there is no data and throws up one anecdote. It's in human nature to try and BS the system so some people will screw with organic stuff especially the government screwing with the very definition of what organic even means. This in no way means organic = bad and GMO = good.
 
Then you get the good guys like Eureka Mills threatened to remove their Non-GMO labeling off their flour packs, or PicknPay won’t stock their products. Ridiculous!
When did this happen?
 
No organic never uses pesticides... Don't be daft it uses complimentary farming and the tears of angels.

you are being ridiculous, pests simply respect organic crops and dont eat them.
 
People don't seem to realise that organic farming uses some very nasty chemicals. They're both dangerous and polluting, but get a green light because they come from nature rather than being invented by humans.

Subsistence farming is inefficient and generally a bad idea if your aim is to feed a lot of people.

There may well be excessive usage of pesticides and herbicides, but the culprit isn't so much whether crops are genetically modified as whether farming is being done by massive agribusiness that has a general disregard for the environment and the long term health of those who consume the food, caring only about short term profit. Take away crops modified in a laboratory and you'd still have a similar problem.

If cancer rates are growing there could be myriad reasons and it is not possible to simply pin it on genetic modification of crops.


And he's analysed that data? How many people with no health issues are visiting this endocrinologist?

It isn't really possible to discount placebo/nocebo in these scenarios. People who imagine they are gluten intolerant will get sick when they eat something they believe contains gluten regardless of whether it does or their has any real intolerance.
Gluten is a well known stresser (even organic) this goes for everybody. The reason why it never affected people in the past is that they processed their flours and breads a little differently. BTW The rise in cancer rates is attributed to over consumption of sugar.
 
More than one billion acres of farmland around the world have been used to grow crops that have been genetically engineered with proteins from the soil bacteriumBacillus thuringiensis (Bt).

The Bt protein’s insecticidal properties allow farmers to control pests without having to spray their fields with harmful chemicals. But the use of Bt crops has been criticized by opponents of agricultural biotechnology who say that they could have unintended effects on non-target organisms, including insects that may pose no danger to the crops but prey upon those do. This perceived threat has led to accusations that Bt crops damage ecosystems.

https://allianceforscience.cornell....-acres-bt-crops-zero-unintended-consequences/
 
Last edited:
GMOs as with everything else should be properly labelled.
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X