EU changes rules on GM crop cultivation [Should GMO's be labelled?]

[sir dooble]

Don't force anything

They should need to label them as GMO.
A "Warning" isn't the correct word though.

Having your food be transparent and its source identifiable is a good thing. Helps consumers choose the products they want, and it helps traceability.
Wouldn't want another horse-food scandal.

[Ad Bot]

[Nonnel]

I'd eat horse
Nothing should be necessary in life.

[sir dooble]

I'd eat horse
Nothing should be necessary in life.

Yeah, except in the horse-food scandal, the horses were entirely un-traced, and there was risk that they were ex-race horses, which are usually subject to Phenylbutazone, a horse painkiller.
Phenylbutazone is banned from being used on food animals in the UK/US, as the drug itself can cause things like anemia in humans.

Traceability of food is necessary, even if people are happy to eat without actually knowing what is they're eating.
It's absolutely nothing for food suppliers to label their food, but it puts consumers at ease and greatly helps make food safer.

Imagine if a specific GMO food was found to be unsafe, for whatever reason, and it had to be recalled.
But no one knew if they had actually consumed/purchased it, because it wasn't labelled at all.

[Headcrab Zombie]

Why? What's your definition?

It's the food (or rather, the seed the food comes from) that is being modified, not your cells.
The DNA from this modified food (/seed) never reaches your body's cells
Your body goes "oh thanks for the food" and breaks it all down for energy

Scientists don't even know what effects these will have on humans

[citation needed]
http://geneticliteracyproject.org/2013/10/08/with-2000-global-studies-confirming-safety-gm-foods-among-most-brown townyzed-subject-in-science/#.U3lMsiimWxV

[Oasis]

sir dooble's got it right. The more information on products the better, at least on the consumer side of things.

[Katla]

and as said by sir dooble, ad(h)d is used to define waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too many issues

I don't get this. Why do you, apparently, think you should be the one defining what ADD and ADHD mean, rather than doctors defining them? That's so weird. What if someone tried to tell you that "cancer" is used to define way too many diseases? I'm certain you'd think they were being ridiculous.

[Cappytaino]

There is a study that says vaccines cause autism, doesn't mean it's true. You need multiple studies to have even a chance of proving something.

[Oasis]

I don't get this. Why do you, apparently, think you should be the one defining what ADD and ADHD mean, rather than doctors defining them? That's so weird. What if someone tried to tell you that "cancer" is used to define way too many diseases? I'm certain you'd think they were being ridiculous.

Well I mean... cancer is a generic term for a plethora of different diseases...

[sir dooble]

I don't get this. Why do you, apparently, think you should be the one defining what ADD and ADHD mean, rather than doctors defining them? That's so weird. What if someone tried to tell you that "cancer" is used to define way too many diseases? I'm certain you'd think they were being ridiculous.

The distinction is that ADD/ADHD has vague symptoms that can belong to a crap-load of different diseases/neuroses, or just be related to character, or be a result of bad parenting/behaviour (consider having too much freedom, not enough control).

Cancer is pretty definitive to diagnose.
You either have a cancer, or you don't.
It's a physical thing you can find in the body, that physically effects the body, and you can identify it in the blood, or urine, or through CT/MRI scans, or even see it on a persons body.

You can't do any of that for ADD/ADHD. It is literally a case of a doctors opinion based on a persons behaviour.
And behaviours, by the way, can also be put on on purpose.

[Katla]

Well I mean... cancer is a generic term for a plethora of different diseases...

Right. And ADHD is a vague disorder.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attention_deficit_hyperactivity_disorder_predominantly_inattentive#Signs_and_symptoms
Like the article says, that's the DSM-V's definition of it. Just like the word "cancer" it is very broad, by definition. If you don't like its broadness, join the APA, work your way up, and have the next version of the DSM use a new definition. But right now it's diagnosed just as often as it needs to be. Whether or not people need specific help from others or medication, because they have it, is a different problem, and I imagine it's what most people who complain about ADHD being diagnosed "too much" are actually upset about.

The distinction is that ADD/ADHD has vague symptoms that can belong to a crap-load of different diseases/neuroses, or just be related to character, or be a result of bad parenting/behaviour (consider having too much freedom, not enough control).

How is "bad parenting" an argument against it? The idea of environmental issues causing mental disorders isn't even remotely new or unusual.

[otto-san]

the point is, we can definitively track and assess legitimate physical conditions such as cancer, but many mental conditions are difficult to observe without extensive, specific testing or other means of discernment, at least with our current knowledge about the human mind. i completely disagree with the sentiment that mental disorders are less valid than physical ones, but there's a very clear difference in approach, as well as in the very nature in which they come to be.

you can very easily observe that a pathogen introduced into an individual causes a specific disease, however, a mental disorder can stem from so many different kinds of stimuli and complications that even psychologists can fail to completely agree about their exact origin.

[sir dooble]

How is "bad parenting" an argument against it? The idea of environmental issues causing mental disorders isn't even remotely new or unusual.

It's not that environmental issues might not cause it, but rather that if they are the cause, they should be treated rather than the child. Not pumping a kid full of drugs, just because you as a parent leave them without supervision or never punish them.
It can easily be used an excuse. Oh, the reason my child bites people in school and flips tables and runs out of rooms is because he has ADHD, not because I never told him off in his life and allow him to get away with the same stuff at home.

[McZealot]

lol this topic erupted fast

[Tetro Block]

As long as they don't do that crap that punishes people who want to grow non-modified foods in the event of accidental cross-contaimination, whatever.

GM crops are good.

This, much this. I'm sure we'd all be more accepting if we knew the companies weren't doing it just for the monopoly.

[Mr.Noßody]

I would agree with this if only they didn't contaminate everyone else's crops.

You dont like the copywrites in effect on certain crops, not the modifications.
I agree that the copywrite protected bullstuff is indeed bullstuff, but I doubt that any kind of modified foods hasn't undergone extensive testing. At this point I'm pretty sure we know about how most substances react with the body.