Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Lime
That's quite a bold statement with an topic where the overwhelming issue with the science is reliable sources and lack of clarity.
Climate change and evolution, for example, aren't assailable because of absolute transparency and third party research. Industries that do their own studies, or selectively offer data can't really be defined as simply science.
GMO's may very well be harmless. But we will never be allowed to be sure, except in very specific cases, where a company desires affirmation, and these never seem to include the largest producers, which clouds the waters and really harms the rest of the industry.
There is another thread here somewhere with a CPuser who has worked with a GMO product for decades and offered more clarity than some companies have offered in the entirety of their operation. As long as companies like Monsanto keep operating like the KGB, this industry is always going to have issues with people needing more information.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashartus
I think the reason GMO belongs on the list is that a lot of people are calling it bad based on ideological grounds rather than actual evidence (as well as lumping all GMO together without looking at specific products).
|
Correct. Monsanto =/= GMOs. Are mortgages evil because of Bank of America?
GMOs are the best way to solve many of the world's food problems