Guest guest Posted February 13, 2002 Report Share Posted February 13, 2002 I love eating my kiwi and soy cake after my maincourse of curried cauliflower on a portabella patty while my black lab and shettland pony frolic in the orchids and peas in my garden. THE question concerning GM is not if we should do it but it is How we should procede from a long history of GMing . We have been GMing our food and animals ever since the transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture. Free the Green Bunny if you really want to see where we are right now www.ekac.org isn't it beautiful Test Tube Vegans Unite Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 13, 2002 Report Share Posted February 13, 2002 Hi Pastiche27 (what should we call you?) > I love eating my kiwi and soy cake after my maincourse of > curried cauliflower on a portabella patty while my black lab and > shettland pony frolic in the orchids and peas in my garden. > THE question concerning GM is not if we should do it but it is > How we should procede from a long history of GMing . What you are talking about is not genetic modification, but genetic selection through breeding - the two concepts are very different. For instance, you can encourage certain vegetable to grow in a certain way - but what you will never be able to do through basic cross breeding is have a fish breed with a strawberry - it just doesn't happen! I have several concerns with regard to GM (for UK Vegans, I had a letter in the Vegan Magazine about a year ago about it!) - firstly, the fact that we don't know the consequences of breeding fish with strawberries - if we eat these products, will they do us harm? Even the basic cross-breeding " playing with nature " that man does causes problems - after dairy, the main cause of allergies in the UK is the cross-bread wheat used in most bread - how much worse is it going to be when its basic genetic structure is altered? " Scientists " say it's safe, but then they said radiation caused no harm for over 80 years, and tobacco was harmless for over 4 centuries! Secondly, the environmental damage is potentially catastrophic - the main aim of GM crops is so that they kill certain predatory insects - because of this the whole food chain is affected - there is already evidence that certain species of butterfly are being seriously affected by the few GM crop fields in the UK. Now, here's the question - does it really fit in with a vegan ethic to be purchasing products which are causing this sort of harm to animals? BB Peter --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.323 / Virus Database: 180 - Release 08/02/02 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 13, 2002 Report Share Posted February 13, 2002 what took generations and thousands of years to create(english peas, shetland ponies) happened thru nature, even if man helped now, will a tomato ever mate with a halibut in nature? no we are heading willy nilly toward breaking down all the barriers nature put up, and a lot of folks don't seem to care.... this isn't aboput shetland ponies, and chihuahuas..this is about the patenting of our genetic code, this is about the shotgunning of genes into places they shouldn't be, this is about major multinational conglomerates not only controlling food production,but every single facet involved in wot we eat, this is about destroying the environment as we know it or, amybe that german company should have released that bacteria that would have probably killed us all cheers fraggle " pastiche27 " <miahmore wrote: > >I love eating my kiwi and soy cake after my maincourse of >curried cauliflower on a portabella patty while my black lab and >shettland pony frolic in the orchids and peas in my garden. > > THE question concerning GM is not if we should do it but it is >How we should procede from a long history of GMing . We have >been GMing our food and animals ever since the transition from >hunting and gathering to agriculture. > >Free the Green Bunny > >if you really want to see where we are right now > > >www.ekac.org > >isn't it beautiful > >Test Tube Vegans Unite > > > > > > > > > > >To send an email to - > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 13, 2002 Report Share Posted February 13, 2002 u put it so much more eloquently then me!! sorry, got a bit emotional in the last e-mail..tooo early in the day i guess, haven't had my morning beer yet fraggle " Peter " <Snowbow wrote: >Hi Pastiche27 (what should we call you?) > >> I love eating my kiwi and soy cake after my maincourse of >> curried cauliflower on a portabella patty while my black lab and >> shettland pony frolic in the orchids and peas in my garden. >> THE question concerning GM is not if we should do it but it is >> How we should procede from a long history of GMing . > >What you are talking about is not genetic modification, but genetic >selection through breeding - the two concepts are very different. For >instance, you can encourage certain vegetable to grow in a certain way - but >what you will never be able to do through basic cross breeding is have a >fish breed with a strawberry - it just doesn't happen! > >I have several concerns with regard to GM (for UK Vegans, I had a letter in >the Vegan Magazine about a year ago about it!) - firstly, the fact that we >don't know the consequences of breeding fish with strawberries - if we eat >these products, will they do us harm? Even the basic cross-breeding " playing >with nature " that man does causes problems - after dairy, the main cause of >allergies in the UK is the cross-bread wheat used in most bread - how much >worse is it going to be when its basic genetic structure is altered? > " Scientists " say it's safe, but then they said radiation caused no harm for >over 80 years, and tobacco was harmless for over 4 centuries! > >Secondly, the environmental damage is potentially catastrophic - the main >aim of GM crops is so that they kill certain predatory insects - because of >this the whole food chain is affected - there is already evidence that >certain species of butterfly are being seriously affected by the few GM crop >fields in the UK. Now, here's the question - does it really fit in with a >vegan ethic to be purchasing products which are causing this sort of harm to >animals? > >BB >Peter > > > >--- >Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >Version: 6.0.323 / Virus Database: 180 - Release 08/02/02 > > > >To send an email to - > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 13, 2002 Report Share Posted February 13, 2002 , " Peter " <Snowbow@b...> wrote: > Hi Pastiche27 (what should we call you?) > > > I love eating my kiwi and soy cake after my maincourse of > > curried cauliflower on a portabella patty while my black lab and > > shettland pony frolic in the orchids and peas in my garden. > > THE question concerning GM is not if we should do it but it is > > How we should procede from a long history of GMing . > > What you are talking about is not genetic modification, but genetic > selection through breeding - the two concepts are very different. For > instance, you can encourage certain vegetable to grow in a certain way - but > what you will never be able to do through basic cross breeding is have a > fish breed with a strawberry - it just doesn't happen! > > I have several concerns with regard to GM (for UK Vegans, I had a letter in > the Vegan Magazine about a year ago about it!) - firstly, the fact that we > don't know the consequences of breeding fish with strawberries - if we eat > these products, will they do us harm? Even the basic cross-breeding " playing > with nature " that man does causes problems - after dairy, the main cause of > allergies in the UK is the cross-bread wheat used in most bread - how much > worse is it going to be when its basic genetic structure is altered? > " Scientists " say it's safe, but then they said radiation caused no harm for > over 80 years, and tobacco was harmless for over 4 centuries! > > Secondly, the environmental damage is potentially catastrophic - the main > aim of GM crops is so that they kill certain predatory insects - because of > this the whole food chain is affected - there is already evidence that > certain species of butterfly are being seriously affected by the few GM crop > fields in the UK. Now, here's the question - does it really fit in with a > vegan ethic to be purchasing products which are causing this sort of harm to > animals? thank you. i understand what i was refering to . There are no differences in the ethical questions raised between the two types of genetic modification. yes " killer " bees are a " negative " bi-product of such meddling but .... reflect on all the positives. when all the ethical questions have been considered , i believe genetic engineering will provide us with equivelant results. Unfortunately, I dont believe that all the necessary ethical questions are being weighed by people required to do so. since you are using a computer for the purpose of this communication, i will assume that you are accustom to and believe in the benifit of giving up a little to gain a lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 14, 2002 Report Share Posted February 14, 2002 > the Vegan Magazine about a year ago about it!) - firstly, the fact that we > don't know the consequences of breeding fish with strawberries - if we eat > these products, will they do us harm? Should we not eat natural growing species of plants that have not been consumed by woman because we do not know the consequences of eating them. Even the basic cross-breeding " playing > with nature " that man does causes problems - after dairy, the main cause of > allergies in the UK is the cross-bread wheat used in most bread - how much > worse is it going to be when its basic genetic structure is altered? So negative.... maybe it is possible to remove the compounds that have caused these allergies. I'm allergic to cats... but im not allergic to the GFP bunny. Another positive for Alba ;-) > " Scientists " say it's safe, but then they said radiation caused no harm for > over 80 years, and tobacco was harmless for over 4 centuries! not to mention the free radicals created by cooking food. They are now being considered as a significant cause of cancer.or alcohol. Or sunlight . its not that suprising that even something necessary for living can taketh away life. Melenoma is the second largest killer were i was born....... or bananas or sugar. the point is everything naturally occuring in this universe down to the particles that make up quarks and electrons are potentially harmful to all living creatures. > > Secondly, the environmental damage is potentially catastrophic - the main > aim of GM crops is so that they kill certain predatory insects - This is not exactly true . THe Main goal is to provide a sustainable more efficient crop that can yeild more with less recources. This is a quest that is necessary with our ballooning surplus human population. Adding " insecticide " is only one facet of GEing food. Though i agree it is a bad one because of > this the whole food chain is affected - there is already evidence that > certain species of butterfly are being seriously affected by the few GM crop > fields in the UK. Now, here's the question - does it really fit in with a > vegan ethic to be purchasing products which are causing this sort of harm to > animals? > > BB > Peter BTW. my name IS Pastiche so you can call me that if you like. my GEing family and I share a unique sense of humor ;-). oh.. and i am a raw foodist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 14, 2002 Report Share Posted February 14, 2002 Hi Pastiche I won't comment on every single one of your points because it would take all day, but I think you need to realise the most important point of GM... > thank you. i understand what i was refering to . There are no > differences in the ethical questions raised between the two types > of genetic modification. yes " killer " bees are a " negative " > bi-product of such meddling but .... reflect on all the positives. The positives of GM are quite simple - more profits to big companies like Monsanto who don't care at all about feeding the world of improving the environment. Because they only care about their own wallets, they will never be interested in producing things which benefit people or animals or the environment. For all of the things that you highlighted in your other post - some are necessary to living in the modern world. In order to survive I need to work - in order to work I need to use certain resources which are not always perfectly environmentally friendly. This is a fact of life. Where to draw the line? Quite simple really - let nature get on with its job - it managed for millions of years before man started screwing around with it - it is only in the past 50 to 100 years that man has caused a problem for nature, and we are constantly making it worse by playing around with nature. GM is just another example of how man has decided to act as a god, and it will end up destroying the planet because the people involved in GM don't have the intelligence to look beyond their own profits. Giving up " a little " to gain a lot is great. Destroying everything for future generations is not a price worth paying for anything - not even for seeing the MD of Monsanto have a comfy retirement. BTW, did everyone know that Monsanto was born out of I.G. Farben - the company who ran the Nazi concentration camps? Thought it worth mentioning since it shows the morality of the companies involved in this issue! BB Peter --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.323 / Virus Database: 180 - Release 08/02/02 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 14, 2002 Report Share Posted February 14, 2002 almost in every trial so far, GMO crops actually show less of a yield then their organic counterparts and, isn't there a better way of feeding the world then messing with genes with some of sort of shotgun approach? " pastiche27 " <miahmore wrote: > >> the Vegan Magazine about a year ago about it!) - firstly, the fact >that we >> don't know the consequences of breeding fish with >strawberries - if we eat >> these products, will they do us harm? > >Should we not eat natural growing species of plants that have >not been consumed by woman because we do not know the >consequences of eating them. > >Even the basic cross-breeding " playing >> with nature " that man does causes problems - after dairy, the >main cause of >> allergies in the UK is the cross-bread wheat used in most >bread - how much >> worse is it going to be when its basic genetic structure is >altered? > >So negative.... maybe it is possible to remove the compounds >that have caused these allergies. I'm allergic to cats... but im >not allergic to the GFP bunny. Another positive for Alba ;-) > >> " Scientists " say it's safe, but then they said radiation caused no >harm for >> over 80 years, and tobacco was harmless for over 4 centuries! > > >not to mention the free radicals created by cooking food. They >are now being considered as a significant cause of cancer.or >alcohol. Or sunlight . its not that suprising that even something >necessary for living can taketh away life. Melenoma is the >second largest killer were i was born....... or bananas or sugar. >the point is everything naturally occuring in this universe down to >the particles that make up quarks and electrons are potentially >harmful to all living creatures. > > >> >> Secondly, the environmental damage is potentially >catastrophic - the main >> aim of GM crops is so that they kill certain predatory insects - > >This is not exactly true . THe Main goal is to provide a >sustainable more efficient crop that can yeild more with less >recources. This is a quest that is necessary with our ballooning >surplus human population. Adding " insecticide " is only one facet >of GEing food. Though i agree it is a bad one > >because of >> this the whole food chain is affected - there is already evidence >that >> certain species of butterfly are being seriously affected by the >few GM crop >> fields in the UK. Now, here's the question - does it really fit in >with a > >> vegan ethic to be purchasing products which are causing this >sort of harm to >> animals? >> >> BB >> Peter > > > > >BTW. my name IS Pastiche so you can call me that if you like. >my GEing family and I share a unique sense of humor ;-). oh.. >and i am a raw foodist. > > > > >To send an email to - > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 14, 2002 Report Share Posted February 14, 2002 pastiche27 > Should we not eat natural growing species of plants that have > not been consumed by woman because we do not know the > consequences of eating them. I'm not sure what you're saying here, can you enlighten me please? > So negative.... maybe it is possible to remove the compounds > that have caused these allergies. but why bother - gm foods are not needed. It is politics that keep millions of people starving, not bad food production. There is plenty of food for the whole world. I'm allergic to cats... but im > not allergic to the GFP bunny. Another positive for Alba ;-) I don't know what this is about either, but I do know that they are trying to genetically modify cats so they don't cause allergies. As most people know here, I am not a particular fan of cats, but do you think this is right. Doesn't a cat have a right to be as nature intended, and not genetically modified? > not to mention the free radicals created by cooking food. They > are now being considered as a significant cause of cancer. and there any people who I am sure can put the case for rawfoodism. >or > alcohol. Don't drink it. > This is not exactly true . THe Main goal is to provide a > sustainable more efficient crop that can yeild more with less > recources. This is a quest that is necessary with our ballooning > surplus human population. Bal....derdash! Jo --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.323 / Virus Database: 180 - Release 08/02/02 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 15, 2002 Report Share Posted February 15, 2002 .. In order to survive I need to > work - hahahahahaha...not true. But I am 100% in tune with everything else you posted in this rant,Peter. I can't see how anyone with even half a brain could be in favor of genetically modifying anything. Chris X Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.