California Prop 37 (GMO FOOD labeling)

[exploited]

This is just such an obvious, common sense issue that it is shocking to see any debate at all. Of course GMOs should be labelled. I can't think of a single reason why not. People have the right to know if they are eating a tomato or a man-made fruit similar to a tomato.

[Spider]

To be fair, most of our domesticated food plants have been heavily modified by humanity through centuries or millenia of selective breeding. The changes we are making genetically are relatively minor in comparison. Its tweaks on an existing organism, rather than something created.

But yes. Nothing wrong with labeling as such. Great big obvious labels.

[wormwood]

[Spider]

Ya. I know.

I was merely pointing out that exploited's example of a man-made tomato isn't really such a big deal compared with the changes we've made through breeding.

I wasn't equating.

[exploited]

[Spider]

[exploited]

[Spider]

(Should be noted that I've said nothing about "threats" or "danger". I won't allow you to change the narrative to suit your position. I said what I said and that is all. Anything else is on you.)

As I said above, 'most of our domesticated food plants have been heavily modified by humanity through centuries or millenia of selective breeding. The changes we are making genetically are relatively minor in comparison."

The most obvious example would be corn. Before and after:


This is a tremendous change. A genetic edit that makes the plant resistant to pesticides for example is relatively trivial.

Another example is wheat, which we've been tinkering with for 10,000 years, and which is actually a very functionally different plant today. Chickpeas are another. Used to actually ripen at the opposite time of year, and at less than a third of the yield. Tomatoes were originally a small, yellow, grape sized fruit from a feild shrub. Now they are hugely transformed into a thousand varieties, some of which are gigantic. I've personally grown tomato plants that have reached 7 feet in height.

Many domesticated plants and animals would be unable to survive without human assistance these days. Corn of course also being the key example of this...it would snuff itself out in short order without humans to do the harvesting and planting. It has been structurally transformed into a very different plant.

In point of fact, genetic engineering has caused only very minor changes in food plants in comparison.

[exploited]

[Spider]

So...you now realize that when I specifically said,



that I was verifiably correct? Right? If not, reread the post. Its all there.

I didn't say anything at all about anything at all being "drastic". That is all on you.

But yes, AS I SAID,

It is very obvious that transforming a plant into something else altogether represents a far greater change than something insignificant like making it produce an extra vitamin. Through selective breeding we have created gigantic, sweeping changes. Through genetic engineering we have only made very small, usually completely invisible edits.

Its just the facts. You can google if you don't believe me.

So far you've been verifiably incorrect on nearly every point. I'd use that google if I were you.