Does anyone besides me take this?

olylifter420

olylifter420

Well-Known Member
You have selective reading.

thats why i call you a retard JTRIPE





olylifter420 said:
Sorry jtripe, but what sources are those man. I thought you were smart.

these indicate there is no difference between the two

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21929333

http://annals.org/article.aspx?articleID=1355685

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12002790

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16403682

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19640946


however, (thats what you need to saycjtripe so people will assume you said something as set in stone)

there are plenty as well that indicate orgsnic is better then conventional. Its a mixed a feel cause there are just as many saying it is the same and plenty that say they are not


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17297755


and start using pubmed if you want to be taken seriously
Click to expand...
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
jtprin said:
kinetic already posted something on this thread to that I believe, but no long-term studies have been done on humans. Studies have also shown that when animals are given a choice between organic and GMO's, the vast majority choose the organic foods.

I also listed three links in my response to minne.

http://www.liveinthenow.com/article/are-gmo-foods-bad-for-you-why-you-should-be-concerned

Read that too.
Click to expand...
The link is precisely the sort of thing I cannot use. There's no confidence that this isn't an interest-group "echo chamber". And I have not found one peer-reviewed finding of harm from GM foods and humans. In fact, i could not even verify the claims someone else made that GM feeds were harming livestock. cn
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
jtprin said:
Dude, one of your own links (annals) says "Consumption of organic foods may reduce exposure to pesticide residues and antibiotic-resistant bacteria". DUMBASS!
It is however not related to the GM v. non-GM question.
I'd say when there's a reduced chance of consuming pesticide and bacteria, that means it's healthier.
Click to expand...
kinetic said:
Hey Bear.

Link http://biointegrity.org/list.html

Read through. Lots of stuff to read.
Click to expand...
I spent some time scanning this, and could find nothing directly to point. I could have missed a lot though. cn
 
J

jtprin

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
The link is precisely the sort of thing I cannot use. There's no confidence that this isn't an interest-group "echo chamber". And I have not found one peer-reviewed finding of harm from GM foods and humans. In fact, i could not even verify the claims someone else made that GM feeds were harming livestock. cn
Click to expand...
Watch the Monsanto documentary. I have posted plenty of links throughout this thread on GMO's and kinetic posted one as well. There are no long-term studies done on humans, but the studies that have been done on animals as well as other tests show that GMO's aren't healthy. Even one of the government links provided admits that organic food has more nutritional value. But going beyond nutritional value, the gene in the seeds used by most farmers causes tons of horrible diseases, including cancer.
 
J

jtprin

Well-Known Member
Why would you continue to consume large amount of foods that could potentially be very dangerous (due to lack of long-term studies), especially when the evidence we do have is leaning heavily towards them being very harmful?
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
jtprin said:
Dude, one of your own links (annals) says "Consumption of organic foods may reduce exposure to pesticide residues and antibiotic-resistant bacteria". DUMBASS!

I'd say when there's a reduced chance of consuming pesticide and bacteria, that means it's healthier.
Click to expand...
jtprin said:
Why would you continue to consume large amount of foods that could potentially be very dangerous (due to lack of long-term studies), especially when the evidence we do have is leaning heavily towards them being very harmful?
Click to expand...
I would need to be presented with evidence. So far I have seen nothing I trust. I have only seen writings in enviro blogs: polemics and not research.
Don't forget that I am the guy who loves fast food. cn
 
J

jtprin

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
I would need to be presented with evidence. So far I have seen nothing I trust. I have only seen writings in enviro blogs: polemics and not research.
Don't forget that I am the guy who loves fast food. cn
Click to expand...
Some people only believe what they want to believe. You were presented with a lot of evidence but are choosing to ignore it.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
jtprin said:
Some people only believe what they want to believe. You were presented with a lot of evidence but are choosing to ignore it.
Click to expand...
Prove it. Show me one piece of peer-reviewed evidence from a journal and not an echo chamber. i am receptive to what you say but need something more durable than science-by-journalists. Your saying that "I was presented evidence but chose to reject it" is another throwaway. Science-by-journalists is antiscience. Now I am less sure about your intellectual honesty. cn
 
J

jtprin

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
Prove it. Show me one piece of peer-reviewed evidence from a journal and not an echo chamber. i am receptive to what you say but need something more durable than science-by-journalists. Your saying that "I was presented evidence but chose to reject it" is another throwaway. Science-by-journalists is antiscience. Now I am less sure about your intellectual honesty. cn
Click to expand...
Have you watched the near two-hour long Mansanto documentary? If not, then you shouldn't even be talking. Go watch the video and then come back and have this discussion. Trust me, it'll be much easier.

Go back and look at my posts, even the government admits it on their website.
 
olylifter420

olylifter420

Well-Known Member
Thanks neer. This kid does not understand what you saying.

what are your thoughts on pubmed as a resource?



cannabineer said:
Prove it. Show me one piece of peer-reviewed evidence from a journal and not an echo chamber. i am receptive to what you say but need something more durable than science-by-journalists. Your saying that "I was presented evidence but chose to reject it" is another throwaway. Science-by-journalists is antiscience. Now I am less sure about your intellectual honesty. cn
Click to expand...
 
olylifter420

olylifter420

Well-Known Member
Man you retarded. Neer is a very well respected chemist who knows his shit far more then you do. Shut up while you are still ahead



jtprin said:
Have you watched the near two-hour long Mansanto documentary? If not, then you shouldn't even be talking. Go watch the video and then come back and have this discussion. Trust me, it'll be much easier.

Go back and look at my posts, even the government admits it on their website.
Click to expand...
 
olylifter420

olylifter420

Well-Known Member
Cool. Discredit an authority who knows the chemical make up of the things you call gmo and how they interact at the molecular level.

hey, but i guess your dumbass resources are far more credible, lol



jtprin said:
I honestly could not care less what he is, he's wrong if he thinks GMO's aren't harmful.
Click to expand...
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
jtprin said:
Have you watched the near two-hour long Mansanto documentary? If not, then you shouldn't even be talking. Go watch the video and then come back and have this discussion. Trust me, it'll be much easier.

Go back and look at my posts, even the government admits it on their website.
Click to expand...
I have never once seen a documentary that wasn't made by journalists andor film majors. Perhaps if you directed me to its bibliography. It'll have that if it's for real.
I also admit, I'm not good with video. it grates on my ability to pay attention and leaf back through the interesting bits. I say this not as complaint but admission. cn
 
J

jtprin

Well-Known Member
olylifter420 said:
Cool. Discredit an authority who knows the chemical make up of the things you call gmo and how they interact at the molecular level.

hey, but i guess your dumbass resources are far more credible, lol
Click to expand...
My resources are far more credible than any individual here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top