# Shut up and eat



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Should this not be a consumers choice? It tells me how much they think of our lives compared to their wallets. I had forgot how good Coke tastes until I bought a Coke made in Mexico. They don't want to give us the choice of sugar in the United States either. Shut up and drink your high fructose corn poison.



> Washington (AFP) - US farmers joined with the food industry Thursday to launch a united front against labeling genetically modified products, amid mounting consumer pressure and an ongoing trade dispute with China.
> 
> More than half of US states introduced bills aimed at requiring GMO labeling last year, in a country where 80 percent of the food contains ingredients that were made with genetically modified organisms.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

What's wrong with GMO's? Everything has been genetically modified since humans started cultivating crops.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

blhunter3 said:


> What's wrong with GMO's? Everything has been genetically modified since humans started cultivating crops.


Maybe nothing with some, and maybe something with some. What annnoys me is that anyone would think the consumer has no right to know and have a choice. Very poor public relations on the part of agriculture. It ticks me off when they think their profit is more important than my health or choice.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

Plainsman said:


> blhunter3 said:
> 
> 
> > What's wrong with GMO's? Everything has been genetically modified since humans started cultivating crops.
> ...


Name a food source that hasn't been modified. Wheat, beans, corn, tobacco, fruits, veggies, everything. So to make labels is something is GMO would be pointless. This is just a tactic that to try to scare people into organic, vegetarian or vegan life style.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I think in all cases the consumer should know what they are getting. Every time that is opposed it creates distrust. For example I could see nothing wrong with GMOs, but now it looks like they are hiding something. If nothing else it's extremely poor pr. It reminds me of Obama's transparency.


----------



## indsport (Aug 29, 2003)

Note of clarification. GMO plants like GMO corn and soybeans are transgenic, whereas plants coming from traditional plant breeding and hyrbidization are cisgenic. There is a difference in how the genetic modification is taking place.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Any time someone doesn't want you to know something there is a problem.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

Plainsman said:


> Any time someone doesn't want you to know something there is a problem.


Not always. Not everyone needs to know everything


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

blhunter3 said:


> Plainsman said:
> 
> 
> > Any time someone doesn't want you to know something there is a problem.
> ...


We will just have to disagree on this subject. When I put something into my mouth I have a right to know what's in it. That's why I called this post "shut up and eat". That's what we are being asked to do. That's all it takes for me to oppose GMOs. Up to this point I supported them, but if they don't think I have a right to know what I eat then we need to take steps against them.

Only guilty hide things.


----------



## People (Jan 17, 2005)

Selecting seeds that produce a better plant is one thing. Playing with its gens is a completely different animal. We know much about genetics but even our best scientists are really amateur hour. They are the first to state they do not know what all the genetic switches are capable of. When I was in school a long time ago they said attached and detached ear lobes was one gene. The latest on the subject they think it is 5 of them.

We have ideas of that is going on with our experiments but we are not there yet. I do not know about you but when I was in 6th grade there was one girl who had breasts. I have a friend who has a daughter in 6th grade and she and all of her friends have them. So in 20years they are trying to tell me we have evolved where sexual maturity has brought breasts two plus years early?

What truly sickens me is the amount of garbage the US government allows producers to put in food without having to state it. Back in the 80's Dr Pepper had petroleum products as one of the last items on the last items. A little closer to home. Look at cloverdale summer sausage. The ingredients now state something like pork beef some other crap. It used to say pork hearts, beef hearts, pork then other crap.

Chuck Norris can taste lies.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

Plainsman said:


> blhunter3 said:
> 
> 
> > Plainsman said:
> ...


Personally don't think they are hiding anything. I don't see the point in labeling GMO and non-GMO.
It would be a nightmare to separate the GMO and non-GMO grain. There would first have to be a test to figure out if its GMO or not. Then you would have to have separate elevators, separate trains, separate processing facilities and so on.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> We have ideas of that is going on with our experiments but we are not there yet. I do not know about you but when I was in 6th grade there was one girl who had breasts. I have a friend who has a daughter in 6th grade and she and all of her friends have them. So in 20years they are trying to tell me we have evolved where sexual maturity has brought breasts two plus years early?


Yes, and it's girls more than boys. I had a college professor tell me that the growth hormones in beef has girls maturing two years earlier than they had in the 1960's. When farmers don't want to tell us what's in our food they create a lot of distrust. If they don't want to label it, then perhaps it's time to tell them they can't sell it. It can go the road of DDT. We are not simply organisms made to eat what people want to shove in our face for their profit.

I'm sorry blhunter3, but your response just creates more distrust for me and I don't want anything to do with GMOs anymore. I guess now I move from pro GMO to anti GMO today.


----------



## indsport (Aug 29, 2003)

Another note: separation of GMO and non GMO as well as organic already happens at most major elevators and shippers ADM, Cargill, etc.) and they are already processing it. The technical term is identity preservation. Even the North Dakota State Mill handles and processes organic flours and is organic certified, again using the same techniques they use for identity preservation.


----------



## north1 (Nov 9, 2010)

Dang it Plainsman. I agree with you on a lot of things, but you have a serious dislike and distrust of farmers. I do not add anything to the grain I raise after it has been sprayed for invasive weed species. I produce a raw product, which is then hauled to an elevator. It is then shipped to a middleman or processor and they turn it into whatever they turn it into. I have absolutely no say in what happens to it after it leaves my farm. I also have no say in how it is processed or labeled. My contribution on the food labels are wheat, barley, canola, oil sunflowers or flax. I too wish processors would stop dinking with additives and such, but people have to stop buying it or nothing will change.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

indsport said:


> Another note: separation of GMO and non GMO as well as organic already happens at most major elevators and shippers ADM, Cargill, etc.) and they are already processing it. The technical term is identity preservation. Even the North Dakota State Mill handles and processes organic flours and is organic certified, again using the same techniques they use for identity preservation.


Certified organic is completely different then non-GMO.

Organic soybeans
Conventional soybeans
RR soybeans, or 2,4D soybeans

Two can be hauled to the same elevator, one cannot.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

Plainsman said:


> > We have ideas of that is going on with our experiments but we are not there yet. I do not know about you but when I was in 6th grade there was one girl who had breasts. I have a friend who has a daughter in 6th grade and she and all of her friends have them. So in 20years they are trying to tell me we have evolved where sexual maturity has brought breasts two plus years early?
> 
> 
> Yes, and it's girls more than boys. I had a college professor tell me that the growth hormones in beef has girls maturing two years earlier than they had in the 1960's. When farmers don't want to tell us what's in our food they create a lot of distrust. If they don't want to label it, then perhaps it's time to tell them they can't sell it. It can go the road of DDT. We are not simply organisms made to eat what people want to shove in our face for their profit.
> ...


Nothing has ever been linked between growth hormones in animals and boys and girls maturing faster. There has been many people to speculate, but nothing has been proven.

If you want to go down that road, then you must also want to get rid of "the pill" there has been more links to negatives outcomes then hormones in animals.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

north1 said:


> Dang it Plainsman. I agree with you on a lot of things, but you have a serious dislike and distrust of farmers. I do not add anything to the grain I raise after it has been sprayed for invasive weed species. I produce a raw product, which is then hauled to an elevator. It is then shipped to a middleman or processor and they turn it into whatever they turn it into. I have absolutely no say in what happens to it after it leaves my farm. I also have no say in how it is processed or labeled. My contribution on the food labels are wheat, barley, canola, oil sunflowers or flax. I too wish processors would stop dinking with additives and such, but people have to stop buying it or nothing will change.


I get your point, and believe what your saying. I don't understand why farmers are standing with those who don't want to tell us what we are eating. Your post tells me your not one of those. It's not personal. As a matter of fact I like blhunter3, but his responses build distrust. I like talking with him because I think I get an honest answer. This resistance against labeling builds distrust. It's not that I don't want to not trust, but I find it disrespectful of all involved. I would guess the blame falls on different groups at different times, but for this particular subject it includes the farmers that don't want the labeling.

I'm trying to fight the distrust thing north1. Most times my beef with farmers is just a particular practice, and even friends and relatives use some of those practices. It's not like I want them to fail. However, we had one guy on here that would call me an ag basher when I complained about things like the channel A into Devils Lake. Now I know those people have to make a living, but passing problems down stream they don't go away, they just pass the problem along and it always gets bigger. I think that has to be solved by society as a whole and not just the farmers. I'm not saying plug the drain and let them drown, but when they make a couple of more dollars per acre while the taxpayer pays billions there needs to be another solution. I would say to get farmers to agree we pay them 100% plus per acre for those wetland so they don't get drained while at the same time providing more than a fair price to farmers. When one or two guys always call me an ag basher for those ideas I know they are being dishonest. Perhaps others don't see it, but I do. So that builds distrust. Honest posts like yours help me resist that distrust. Now if we could get everyone to do that we could get somewhere to the benefit of all.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

The resistance is from the added cost to everything. Like I said, separate elevators. Which would mean possibly longer lines, or longer hauls. More certification to have conventional crops, possibly lower prices for certain crops, higher prices in the grocery store for food.

I would love if there was labeling, because I would buy strictly GMO food, but its not feasible to do it this late in the game. Kinda like shutting the barn door after the cows are out.

When there are issues like this, you have to look at the whole picture, not just dead center.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

blhunter3 said:


> The resistance is from the added cost to everything. Like I said, separate elevators. Which would mean possibly longer lines, or longer hauls. More certification to have conventional crops, possibly lower prices for certain crops, higher prices in the grocery store for food.
> 
> I would love if there was labeling, because I would buy strictly GMO food, but its not feasible to do it this late in the game. Kinda like shutting the barn door after the cows are out.
> 
> When there are issues like this, you have to look at the whole picture, not just dead center.


Look at it this way blhunter. Your expressing your concern for your wallet, and I am expressing my concern for my health. I can see that both are important, but since science only knows about 10% of what it thinks it knows I'm concerned.


----------



## duckp (Mar 13, 2008)

Make up your own minds about GMOs.Perhaps start by reading the book 'Wheat Belly' by Dr Davis.To paraphrase his followers,'It's not great grammas muffins you're eating anymore'.
For those not inclined or unable to read much,here's an overview.
http://thehealingproject.us/2012/09/22/ ... -davis-md/

Or you could go out and check a few fields that have been 'treated' for years and that host GMOs.Smell like 'earth' anymore?Anything alive in the soil?Even a worm?
Think about it.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

duckp said:


> Make up your own minds about GMOs.Perhaps start by reading the book 'Wheat Belly' by Dr Davis.To paraphrase his followers,'It's not great grammas muffins you're eating anymore'.
> For those not inclined or unable to read much,here's an overview.
> http://thehealingproject.us/2012/09/22/ ... -davis-md/
> 
> ...


Lots of soil biology out in fields. Whether they are organic farmers or conventional farmers.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

Plainsman said:


> blhunter3 said:
> 
> 
> > The resistance is from the added cost to everything. Like I said, separate elevators. Which would mean possibly longer lines, or longer hauls. More certification to have conventional crops, possibly lower prices for certain crops, higher prices in the grocery store for food.
> ...


Maybe if science was better we would know if GMO's were 100% safe. Until then, we have to just the scientists working on them. Look at it this way, would you rather go hungry or not.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

blhunter3 said:


> Plainsman said:
> 
> 
> > blhunter3 said:
> ...


The choice isn't going hungry or not. The choice is safe food or not. If we needed GMO to survive we wouldn't be making ethanol out of food.

We are both conservative blhunter. Liberals would paint us as money worshipers. I don't think we are. So tell me would a capitalist conservative believe that consumers should have a choice, or would capitalist conservatives think the rights all belong to the producer? When I worked at a sport shop the first thing the owner told me was "remember that the customer is always right and you have it made". It would appear that farmers are telling the customer to kiss off, shut up and eat.


----------



## duckp (Mar 13, 2008)

"would you rather go hungry or not."
I hope you don't really believe that's the choice re GMOs vs non-GMOs.
Go to a Mall today,look around,obesity is an epidemic with somewhat predictable outcomes in terms of long term health for our society-and costs we will NOT be able to bear.
Face it,it's time to research and think a bit on our own,not rely on pablum(cereal pun intended) fed us by any industry or Govt agency.It sure is time not to rely for info found on an internet forum-my info included.Take the time,form your opwn opinions.


----------



## north1 (Nov 9, 2010)

I have said it before and will say it again. People are lumping all farmers in with each other on these issues. I know for a fact most if not all my friends whether they are farmers, cattleman or both want their products labeled. Remember the melamine in the dog food from China. Ever go to Walmart and see how many food products for humans come from China? Would love for people to have the choice to know where their product they purchase is from and what is in it. You know who doesn't want it. Meat packers, companies like Monsanto, Bayer, Syngenta and your government. Is that my fault too? My brethren in agriculture have been getting screwed by every business we deal with since my great grandfather homesteaded in the late 1800's. Be it the railroad, grain merchandisers, seed companies, chemical companies, petroleum industry, our government , you name it. We have very little control over anything in the food supply. I still have the nonpartisans league card my greatgrandfather carried from the 1920's. It sickens me in one respect(socialism) but serves to prove just what lengths one will go to, to try to have some form of control over what happens to your livelihood(even if it is the wrong approach).

Now we have a another new worthless farm bill which simply continues the control government and other entities have over our lives. The taxpayer pays for a portion of it simply to assure a constant food supply. Doesn't matter if it is a necessarily safe, but that doesn't seem to matter to THEM. Not me as a farmer, THEM. I wrote to all my representatives and said in no uncertain terms I will not support ANY lawmaker who votes for the bill. Several of my friends did the same. Never heard a word from them. No surprise, I didn't really expect I would. I can't offer the campaign contributions that adm, Cargill, Monsanto, petroleum companies and other corporations can.

So where are we as concerned citizens. Without representation. I sell my grain and a tax is automatically taken out to support groups that I don't support and don't support my positions. Is that taxation without representation? The foundation which this country was formed on. So what are we left with, Revolution. Oh crap, that word probably just triggered the CIA and IRS on my butt. Probably better shut up for now.


----------



## duckp (Mar 13, 2008)

North 1,
Well stated IMO.
God bless ya. :beer:


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

north1 judging you by your posts I will never lump you in with all farmers, nor will I simply lump all farmers together. Judging by your post I find so much to agree with. Your background sounds so much like my own.



> Would love for people to have the choice to know where their product they purchase is from and what is in it. You know who doesn't want it. Meat packers, companies like Monsanto, Bayer, Syngenta and your government. Is that my fault too?


Absolutely not. Your getting shafted by many of these things. Perhaps it's much like the people who join unions only to see the union give money to politicians they do not like. Sort of like my parents and relatives being conservative, but belonging to Farmers Union because it was the only game in town. My parents would have preferred ND Farm Bureau. I like 90% of the ideas from Farm Bureau, but when I criticize the things I don't like some call me an ag basher.



> I still have the nonpartisans league card my greatgrandfather carried from the 1920's. It sickens me in one respect(socialism) but serves to prove just what lengths one will go to, to try to have some form of control over what happens to your livelihood(even if it is the wrong approach).


I understand. See above again.



> Now we have a another new worthless farm bill which simply continues the control government and other entities have over our lives.


Not only that, but the under informed liberals will think that money all goes to you when the truth is 80% is a form of welfare hidden within the farm bill (food stamps). Now Obama will tell everyone how much he has done for farmers.



> The foundation which this country was formed on. So what are we left with, Revolution. Oh crap, that word probably just triggered the CIA and IRS on my butt. Probably better shut up for now.


Ya, they wouldn't like me either. Keep this in mind. For all the debate among people on this thread right now- if poop hits the fan every one of us would stand with you. I hope you find some hope in that. :thumb:

I also want to thank you for not calling me an ag basher simply because I don't like the idea of "shut up and eat". I see by your posts you want a choice when your the consumer too. I have no bone to pick with you. Your the type of person I desire to be counted with.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

Plainsman said:


> Plainsman said:
> 
> 
> > Look at it this way blhunter. Your expressing your concern for your wallet, and I am expressing my concern for my health. I can see that both are important, but since science only knows about 10% of what it thinks it knows I'm concerned.
> ...





Plainsman said:


> The choice isn't going hungry or not. The choice is safe food or not. If we needed GMO to survive we wouldn't be making ethanol out of food.
> 
> We are both conservative blhunter. Liberals would paint us as money worshipers. I don't think we are. So tell me would a capitalist conservative believe that consumers should have a choice, or would capitalist conservatives think the rights all belong to the producer? When I worked at a sport shop the first thing the owner told me was "remember that the customer is always right and you have it made". It would appear that farmers are telling the customer to kiss off, shut up and eat.


Why wouldn't it be safe? Because its not natural? All the scientists did was speed up nature. Many plants without assistance from humans have become resistant to many herbicides, insects became resistant to insecticides, and fungi have become resistant to fungicides. Hell look at human disease, how they have evolved because an over reliance to medications.

I do think that consumers should have a choice of what to buy, but again, are you willing to spend even more money that we don't have to label GMO or non GMO? My guess it would cost billions to label everything. But in order to do the labeling idea, there would have to be a test created that shows if something is GMO or not.

I personally would rather eat inspected food from this country and have GMOs in there versus no-GMO food grown outside of this country where nothing is inspected for health.

Don't even get me started on ethanol. That is possibly the worst idea that has ever came along since the dawn of time in my opinion. It ruined hunting, farming practices, pretty much anything else that it affects. The only people that agree with it, are the people that own the designs to make the ethanol plants.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> Don't even get me started on ethanol. That is possibly the worst idea that has ever came along since the dawn of time in my opinion. It ruined hunting, farming practices, pretty much anything else that it affects. The only people that agree with it, are the people that own the designs to make the ethanol plants.


 :rollin: Ya, that was below the belt wasn't it. :thumb:



> I do think that consumers should have a choice of what to buy, but again, are you willing to spend even more money that we don't have to label GMO or non GMO?


Yes.

The last person in the chain of events (the consumer) always pays everything. If you think about it even your seed, diesel, fertilizer, are only a temporary expense. When you sell your product you get paid for all of that plus hopefully a profit. This is not just farming either, it's everything. Even the tax that government puts on corporations ends up paid by the consumer. That's where liberals screw up. They think they are actually taxing a corporation, and they are cutting their own throat. Oh, well that's the product of as Rush says "the under informed". :thumb:

Oh, heck I am editing so I can't see what you wrote. Something about you would rather have unlabeled GMO than imported non GMO. I would like to buy American products, but faced with the choice I would purchase the import. Until I read those headlines where people were fighting labeling I would have agreed with you. Now I would buy the import. There must be a reason Europe and other nations will not buy GMOs from us. If it's not good enough for them why is it good enough for me? I think we are also the only country to use high fructose corn syrup in many things. Wow that Coke from Mexico is the old Coke I remember. What crap we drink. Really, if you get the chance try a Coke from Mexico. Taste like music will hit your memory and I can almost smell the old drug store with the soda fountain.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

Actually the EU is against GMO food because of the aftermath of the mad cow disease. There is actually some very interesting articles about how the EU responded to the mad cow disease and why they are against GMOs.


----------

