How many of you guys here really, really enjoy cooking and planning meals?

[IslandTractor]

How's it different? Selecting genes in a lab or selecting them in a field, its still manipulating one thing to get another thing.

Here's a link to an article in this month's issue of National Geographic to a story about why do many reasonable people doubt science. One of the things they discuss is genetically modified foods. Its a good read.

Why Do Many Reasonable People Doubt Science? - National Geographic Magazine

Excellent article. May I suggest that the moderators have everyone on the "friendly politics" forum read it.

 

[tcreeley]

I am not suspicious of science, but I am suspicious of people marketing new products that reflect new processes.
Science is a wonderful tool Recently I was at a research facility where the waste sludge from paper mills was being converted into fuel and a new material was being synthesized for industrial applications.
Why am I suspicious - because every toxin that finds its way into our environment did so inadvertently. Nobody set out to pollute, to poison anything- but the chemicals utilized did so - some more than others. DDT, Mercury, PCBs, Dioxin, lead, asbestos. They were all "safe" as used, but time and more science later tells the rest of the story.
Monsanto wants us to trust them on GMO's, roundup. Tobacco was once "safe" as well. To be blunt - I don't trust them, not because of the science, but because I think they are liars out to make a fast buck, regardless of safety.

 

[IslandTractor]

I am not suspicious of science, but I am suspicious of people marketing new products that reflect new processes.
Science is a wonderful tool Recently I was at a research facility where the waste sludge from paper mills was being converted into fuel and a new material was being synthesized for industrial applications.
Why am I suspicious - because every toxin that finds its way into our environment did so inadvertently. Nobody set out to pollute, to poison anything- but the chemicals utilized did so - some more than others. DDT, Mercury, PCBs, Dioxin, lead, asbestos. They were all "safe" as used, but time and more science later tells the rest of the story.
Monsanto wants us to trust them on GMO's, roundup. Tobacco was once "safe" as well. To be blunt - I don't trust them, not because of the science, but because I think they are liars out to make a fast buck, regardless of safety.

There have definitely been many instances of toxic compounds entering the environment that were at the time not recognized as toxic. The science of toxicology is a fairly recent one so much of those disasters were not really preventable using existing knowledge or understanding of how to look for toxic side effects. We've come a long way since those days.

Tobacco was never, in the modern era, considered safe. The Tobacco companies lied and tried to undermine scientific and medical evidence about tobacco toxicity but science never declared tobacco to be a safe product. Same is true of asbestos and lead. They may not have been recognized as toxic initially but methods that are standard today would have detected their toxicity before they were widely introduced. Penicillin by the way would never be licensed today because the incidence of serious allergy would be detected in even early phase FDA trials. Same goes for sulfa drugs and aminoglycosides.

GMO foods are not "Frankenfood". Science and specifically plant genetics have allowed development of food plants that are heartier, more tolerant of both drought and flood, higher in desirable nutrients and even resistant to pests without need for pesticides and with genetically transferred qualities that limit food waste/spoilage. We need GMO foods to safely and adequately feed the many billions of people on this earth. Not everyone has access to or the money to feed their family from Whole Foods or farmer's markets.

A far bigger concern IMO is the trend of allowing companies like Monsanto to dominate the seed market. We need to stimulate GMO food research at university and government institutes so that new GMO foods remain in the public domain.

 

[downsizingnow48]

Coming back to this thread after a while. Maybe there should be a thread on GMO. On the topic of cooking, 2Lane (post 51) mentioned a green chili stew. Please post the recipe. I make a simple green chili using green chiles (anaheim and jalapeno), onions, garlic, and pork roast. I serve it in bowls, or in burritos, or in tacos, or for breakfast with eggs and tortillas. A family favorite for many years. Always looking for new options though.

 

[TomSeller]

GMO foods are not "Frankenfood". Science and specifically plant genetics have allowed development of food plants that are heartier, more tolerant of both drought and flood, higher in desirable nutrients and even resistant to pests without need for pesticides and with genetically transferred qualities that limit food waste/spoilage. We need GMO foods to safely and adequately feed the many billions of people on this earth. Not everyone has access to or the money to feed their family from Whole Foods or farmer's markets.

A far bigger concern IMO is the trend of allowing companies like Monsanto to dominate the seed market. We need to stimulate GMO food research at university and government institutes so that new GMO foods remain in the public domain.

The world needs to do something about population growth before we need frankenfood that grows faster and larger to feed more and more people. We have a finite amount of space and we are destroying the planet with too many people as it is. For anyone that is going to disagree, what do you expect the earth to be like in 100 years at this rate? 200 years? 300 years? Roundup ready seed is being made primarily to sell more Roundup, not grow more crops.

 

[dave1949]

How's it different? Selecting genes in a lab or selecting them in a field, its still manipulating one thing to get another thing.

Here's a link to an article in this month's issue of National Geographic to a story about why do many reasonable people doubt science. One of the things they discuss is genetically modified foods. Its a good read.

Why Do Many Reasonable People Doubt Science? - National Geographic Magazine

GMO techniques can and do include splicing in genetic material that would never occur under natural pollination or selective cross breeding. That's the difference.

Doubting science is not the issue. I have no doubt plant geneticists can splice a variety of genetic material into a crop plant--including make it glow in the dark. Doubting whether that is a good idea or not over the long run is not doubting science; it is doubting societal values that acquiesce to questionable trade-offs.

 

[TomSeller]

GMO techniques can and do include splicing in genetic material that would never occur under natural pollination or selective cross breeding. That's the difference.

Doubting science is not the issue. I have no doubt plant geneticists can splice a variety of genetic material into a crop plant--including make it glow in the dark. Doubting whether that is a good idea or not over the long run is not doubting science; it is doubting societal values that acquiesce to questionable trade-offs.

Well said

 

[tcreeley]

Organic farming can feed the world if done right, scientists claim
Organic farming can feed the world if done right, scientists claim - Environment - The Independent

Organic farming is much more productive than previously thought, according to a new analysis of agricultural studies that challenges the conventional “biased” view that pesticide-free agriculture cannot feed the world.

The study says that organic yields were only 19.2 per cent lower, on average, than those from conventional crops and that this gap could be reduced to just eight per cent if the pesticide-free crops were rotated more frequently.

Furthermore, in some crops - especially leguminous plants such as beans, peas and lentils - there were no significant differences in yields, the researchers from the University of California, Berkeley found.

“In terms of comparing productivity among the two techniques, this paper sets the record straight on the comparison between organic and conventional agriculture,” said Claire Kremen, professor of environmental science, policy and management at Berkeley.

The study comes amid rising concerns that intense farming practices are damaging the environment, with the widespread use of nerve agent pesticides frequently blamed for declining populations of bees and other pollinators. Meanwhile, fertilizers are producing smaller and smaller increases in yields because they are now so effective they are difficult to improve upon.

“With global food needs predicted to greatly increase in the next 50 years, it’s critical to look more closely at organic farming because, aside from the environmental impacts of industrial agriculture, the ability of synthetic fertilizers to increase crop yields has been declining,” said Prof Kremen. ...........

 

[IslandTractor]

You would probably enjoy reading this: Tomorrow's Table: Organic Farming, Genetics, and the Future of Food by Pamela C. Ronald (Author), R. W. Adamchak (Author). The main author is an agricultural geneticist and the second author (her husband) is the head of the organic farm at UC Davis. They do a nice job of explaining how the two concepts, GMO and organic farming, are synergistic. It isn't really a polemic but rather a folksy but scientific exploration of pros and cons of the practical and theoretical issues. Fast read. Get it used from Amazon for about $5

 

[TomSeller]

Organic farming is much more productive than previously thought, according to a new analysis of agricultural studies that challenges the conventional “biased” view that pesticide-free agriculture cannot feed the world.
.

Agree. What I grow in my garden is organic and when I raise commercial crops it is organically. The grocery store I shop at has an organic produce section which is now at least 40% of the produce area. There is a slight premium at the consumer level and the store is working hard to increase the organic selection due to the profit levels. The produce tastes better and is only slightly blemished compared to the rest of the produce.

 

[JDgreen227]

The world needs to do something about population growth before we need frankenfood that grows faster and larger to feed more and more people. We have a finite amount of space and we are destroying the planet with too many people as it is. For anyone that is going to disagree, what do you expect the earth to be like in 100 years at this rate? 200 years? 300 years? Roundup ready seed is being made primarily to sell more Roundup, not grow more crops.

I don't have any expectation of being around 20 years from now, let alone 100...:laughing: How do you propose the world reduce the population growth? Shall be begin by reversing all the advances made in health care that enable people to live much longer lifespans than was formerly the norm? Yes, let's do that rather than have the geezers live past 70 years old...they are such a drain on the health care and Social Security systems.

 

[dave1949]

I don't have any expectation of being around 20 years from now, let alone 100...:laughing: How do you propose the world reduce the population growth? Shall be begin by reversing all the advances made in health care that enable people to live much longer lifespans than was formerly the norm? Yes, let's do that rather than have the geezers live past 70 years old...they are such a drain on the health care and Social Security systems.

You have to admit we are in uncharted territory now when people can expect to live longer than ever before while someone or something supports them beyond their own means. I wonder how many people over the age of 75 have already received all the SS and Medicare benefits they ever contributed, for example. And they could easily live another 10 years with escalating healthcare and general services needs.

Global population growth will only be voluntarily curtailed through education and economic security.

 

[JDgreen227]

You have to admit we are in uncharted territory now when people can expect to live longer than ever before while someone or something supports them beyond their own means. I wonder how many people over the age of 75 have already received all the SS and Medicare benefits they ever contributed, for example. And they could easily live another 10 years with escalating healthcare and general services needs.

Global population growth will only be voluntarily curtailed through education and economic security.

Here is a really interesting point: During my working career I paid a total of $44,630 into SS and $10,310 into Medicare. My yearly SS benefit for 2014 was $16,104. My calculator says that since I began collecting at age 62, by the time I hit age 65 I will have recouped about $48300 plus any additional annual increases for SS...meaning that when I am 65 I will have been repaid most of what I paid into SS and Medicare, and after about age 66 it's pure gravy.

Hey...this thread sure has gone off topic....shall I start another one about being lucky to have a secure retirement?

I HAVE NO IDEA WHY THE ORIGINAL THREAD ON THAT TOPIC WAS CLOSED !!!!!

 

[tcreeley]

I don't have any expectation of being around 20 years from now, let alone 100...:laughing: How do you propose the world reduce the population growth? Shall be begin by reversing all the advances made in health care that enable people to live much longer lifespans than was formerly the norm? Yes, let's do that rather than have the geezers live past 70 years old...they are such a drain on the health care and Social Security systems.

They have noticed that 3rd world countries when given access to birth control stop expanding their populations.

This has global capitalists worried because their economic model is presaged on continuous growth driven by the demand of an increasing population.

In the US, our population growth has been driven by immigration. As new families have adjusted here, their family sizes decrease- but this is offset by more immigration. It is fairly easy to achieve a balanced mortality/birth scenario if access to birth control is available.

 

[JDgreen227]

tcreeley...perhaps one of the benefits about being elderly is that nobody can blame you for population growth...maybe that should dilute some of the outrage from the younger generation who feels we are costing them too much for our Social Security and Medicare?

 

[tcreeley]

GMO's contain foreign substances that were never part of the original DNA sequence of that species. "Franken foods" is a good descriptor. As for nutritional benefits - our snake oil salesmen promised us a world of cures - but we knew better.
This in a day when ill health is almost the norm- cancer, heart disease, autism, ms, etc..
They want to give us "another mother's little helper" as the Stones used to sing. Eat some more gmo.

Death of the Bees. Genetically Modified Crops and the Decline of Bee Colonies in North America

The genetic modification of the plant leads to the concurrent genetic modification of the flower pollen. When the flower pollen becomes genetically modified or sterile, the bees will potentially go malnourished and die of illness due to the lack of nutrients and the interruption of the digestive capacity of what they feed on through the summer and over the winter hibernation process.

Death of the Bees. Genetically Modified Crops and the Decline of Bee Colonies in North America | Global Research

 

[tcreeley]

tcreeley...perhaps one of the benefits about being elderly is that nobody can blame you for population growth...maybe that should dilute some of the outrage from the younger generation who feels we are costing them too much for our Social Security and Medicare?

I had my 2 kids! - If the federal government would not spend the SS money as fast as it comes in we would not have a problem. They simply don't want to change their ways, and they don't want to pay it back.

SS money funding war produces fat contracts. SS money for special earmarks gives a politician bragging power.

Sending SS money to a recipient - no one wants that! I get 76 dollars a month of SS because I am in the Maine state retirement. -You can spend what they don't ever give me!

I've never received so many requests for income verification on that 76 dollars a month! - I would hope that they would pursue non-taxpaying corporations with the same vehemence!

 

[IslandTractor]

GMO's contain foreign substances that were never part of the original DNA sequence of that species. "Franken foods" is a good descriptor. As for nutritional benefits - our snake oil salesmen promised us a world of cures - but we knew better.
This in a day when ill health is almost the norm- cancer, heart disease, autism, ms, etc..
They want to give us "another mother's little helper" as the Stones used to sing. Eat some more gmo.

Death of the Bees. Genetically Modified Crops and the Decline of Bee Colonies in North America

The genetic modification of the plant leads to the concurrent genetic modification of the flower pollen. When the flower pollen becomes genetically modified or sterile, the bees will potentially go malnourished and die of illness due to the lack of nutrients and the interruption of the digestive capacity of what they feed on through the summer and over the winter hibernation process.

Death of the Bees. Genetically Modified Crops and the Decline of Bee Colonies in North America | Global Research

Every single living thing on this planet has DNA mutations that were "never part of the original DNA sequence of that species". The whole "FrankenFoods" hysteria is a confabulation of concerns, some real and some just flat out ridiculous. Your great grandparents would think virtually ALL the produce in our supermarkets today was "FrankenFood"! The genetic manipulation of food has been going on for millennia. Have you ever seen what corn looked like when first cultivated? We have Neanderthal DNA in our own bodies. DNA is DNA. It's what the DNA codes for that counts, not where it came from.

 

[Cat_Driver]

Yes the Government LOVES when you look at it this way and how "happy" it makes people feel, BUT if you took that same 44K and purchased Apple stock when it was $24.00 a share you could have purchase 1,833 shares. Today those 1,800 shares would be worth over 1,100,000.00.
So now look at it the REAL way. SS prevented you from retiring an ACTUAL MILLIONAIRE, but doles out 16K a year and makes you FEEL LIKE A MILLIONAIRE - see the difference. You would need to live ANOTHER 68 years to collect what you LOST. But don't worry my friend, because the government is happy to give what you lost to our neighboring illegals who never paid a dime into SS and are collecting SS for breaking into this Country. Feel better now.

 

[RobertN]

Yellow Heirloom Tomato Bloody Mary
Buy the ugliest yellow tomatoes that you can find late in the day at the farmers market. Once they've been picked over, the farmers generally sell them to you at a lower price.

Grind the tomatoes in a blender with lemon, cayenne, prepared horseradish, grainy mustard and salt, then pour over ice.