Anyone
that knows me, even as a vague Facebook friend they haven’t spoken to
in years, probably has a pretty solid understanding of my opinions on
two specific subjects, (most-likely against their will). Those two
subjects are vaccines, and GMOs. In fact, it’s surprising that my first
two posts to this blog didn’t mention either of those subjects. I’ve
often been not quoted ever as saying that it is time to buy stock in the
anti-GMO movement, because that puppy is ramping up. The GMO debate is
2008, while the anti-vaccine movement is 2000-late. Now that I’ve worked
that horrible sentence into my blog, it’s time to move on.
Upon logging onto Facebook this morning, I was greeted pretty quickly by a story out of Los Angeles. The L.A. Times story is titled “L.A. council is considering ban on genetically modified crops.”(link: http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-gmo-ban-20141021-story.html). The story itself is mildly informative at best, though I’m not sure what I expected from an online news article. Wait, I know exactly what I expect from a news organization. I expect a news organization to give me the facts and not just tell me what the debate is with quotes or sound bytes from both sides. Stories on scientific topics have no place for misinformed and uneducated opinions. News organizations have gone in the wrong direction over the years. They’re too concerned with giving the public exactly what they say they want, even if they clearly don’t know what that is. News organizations used to tell people what the news was. Now, like distressed boyfriends or girlfriends desperate to save a dying relationship, news outlets try to give the public everything under the sun. Please subscribe or watch us, we promise we’ll be better! News organizations need to go back to the dominatrix-style relationships of years ago. They need to say, “This is the News, these are the facts, and this is exactly what you need to know. Oh, and fuck safe words as those are for pussies.” That last part was all in quotes because I’m pretty sure I heard Walter Cronkite say those exact words at some point.
So why am I so concerned about GMOs you didn’t ask? Why would I be against keeping crops “natural” and “pesticide-free”? I’ll tell you why. I am against those things because they simply do not exist. First I’d like to discuss term “natural.” Natural is a buzz word with no exact definition. It doesn’t take long in the supermarket to notice that almost all the products you buy anymore have this written on the label. The reason you see it everywhere is because is doesn’t have an exact definition. It is a completely subjective term, and therefore cannot be quantified in any meaningful way. If you think that General Mills suddenly changed your child’s Lucky Charms opting for “natural ingredients” over the “toxic chemicals,” (or whatever fallacious viewpoint you had about them earlier), then strap in because you’re in for a world of disappointment. The point is that like a bachelor’s degree in philosophy, the term “natural” means nothing.
So what about the evil pesticides you ask? What about the crazy mad scientists that are putting fish genes into my tomatoes? My pesticide-free organic un-fishified tomatoes are better for you and more delicious! Don’t get me wrong, I’d be more than happy to concede to any of those things is any of them were true. If evidence existed to show that pesticide levels in our foods were hurting children or robbing us of amazing flavors, I’d happily march in that protest, (in spirit from the comfort of my couch of course, let’s not get crazy). To take the somewhat accurate argument I just put into other people’s mouths one piece at a time, I’ll start with pesticides. First, it is an overwhelming fact that no health issues have ever been linked to the extremely low residual levels of pesticides on our fruits and vegetables. Any pesticides left over on your produce can easily be washed away as well. These pesticides are simply not hurting anyone. I used to think the opposite was true. I used to buy organic produce almost exclusively. However, once I did my research I found out that not only is there no evidence to support the health claims of organic, but farmers use pesticides on organic produce anyway! In fact, they actually use probably MORE pesticides! WHAT??!
Hear me out before you flush my argument down the toilet. Hopefully everyone would agree that it would be physically impossible for any farming to be conducted on a massive scale without the use of pesticides. Just think about for a second. Is it really possible for farmers to go through a whole field of crops? Could one person embark on a non-stop bug-squishing tirade 24 hours a day for months while your cucumbers grow? Do farmers have some magic, non-pesticide liquid to spray onto plants falling victim to a pest you can’t rid the plant of with two fingers? The answer to all of these questions is “No.” The reason almost every major supermarket in our country is able to sell organic produce is because it is being grown on a massive scale. The only way to achieve this is through large-scale farming operations. It is a fact that to achieve the “organic” label from the government, pesticides used on these farms must be “derived from organic sources.” Basically this means that the same chemicals in the artificially created pesticides must be created less-efficiently and less accurately than a laboratory could create them. This means that the pesticides used on organic crops are very similar to those used on traditional crops. The difference is they are less effective due to how they have to be made, which in-turn means that more of them need to be used. You heard me. Not only is it likely, but it is almost a certainty that all of those organic crops have more pesticides used on them than traditionally grown produce. It should also be noted that the only reason that some of the levels of pesticides found on organic produce appear lower than those found on traditional produce is because the tests are looking for very specific pesticides. The pesticides found on organic produce are different enough that traditional tests don’t look for them. This is why doctors have to do multiple blood tests when they’re looking for several different things. Different testing is needed to find things. I realize this blog entry is entirely too long already, and I’ve only scratched the surface with my uncomfortably feminine nails.
So what about the fish genes in my tomatoes? That’s against nature, and God, and my colon can’t handle it! This one is fairly easy to tackle in my opinion. The reason is because anyone with some background in genetics will simply tell you, “too late.” The reason they would tell you this is because basically every living thing on our planet shares some of their genetic code with everything else. This means that your tomato already shares about 40% of its genetic code with fish. Adding one more tiny gene sequence to that tomato may give it the ability to be more cold tolerant. This results in cheaper prices at the market due to less freeze-loss. If you think doing this is going to turn you into a mutant, or a fish, or a fish mutant, well… umm… it’s not. I honestly wouldn’t know how to react because that is a dumb thing to think. Yea, I thought that and I’m an idiot… not really. Yes I did… not.
To try and bring this post back full-circle, this L.A. council ban proposal is clearly coming from a place of severe misinformation. I know I never got around to talking about GMO seeds and Monsanto, and Dr. Evil. I didn’t get into the labeling of GMOs, (which is a deliberate attempt to undermine GMOs and not simply “informing the public as to what they’re eating”). Clearly I could continue on this subject. I could attempt to debunk everything, but I doubt it would help much. I could publish a book on all the fallacious Facebook posts I’ve attempted to debunk over the years, often with the poster leaving frustrated, (but hopefully a tiny bit more educated). I’m certain I will continue to tackle this issue in subsequent blog posts in the future. In the mean time, I’ll leave you with this photo I often think of while pleasuring myself.
TL;DR: Banning gmo’s in any form comes from a place of misinformation and fear, two things I depend on daily to maintain an erection.
STL; DR: GMO corn cobs used as sex toys perform just as well, if not better than non-GMO cobs. Plus they’re cheaper!
IHTASOAN; DR: Nickleback loves organic farming.
Upon logging onto Facebook this morning, I was greeted pretty quickly by a story out of Los Angeles. The L.A. Times story is titled “L.A. council is considering ban on genetically modified crops.”(link: http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-gmo-ban-20141021-story.html). The story itself is mildly informative at best, though I’m not sure what I expected from an online news article. Wait, I know exactly what I expect from a news organization. I expect a news organization to give me the facts and not just tell me what the debate is with quotes or sound bytes from both sides. Stories on scientific topics have no place for misinformed and uneducated opinions. News organizations have gone in the wrong direction over the years. They’re too concerned with giving the public exactly what they say they want, even if they clearly don’t know what that is. News organizations used to tell people what the news was. Now, like distressed boyfriends or girlfriends desperate to save a dying relationship, news outlets try to give the public everything under the sun. Please subscribe or watch us, we promise we’ll be better! News organizations need to go back to the dominatrix-style relationships of years ago. They need to say, “This is the News, these are the facts, and this is exactly what you need to know. Oh, and fuck safe words as those are for pussies.” That last part was all in quotes because I’m pretty sure I heard Walter Cronkite say those exact words at some point.
So why am I so concerned about GMOs you didn’t ask? Why would I be against keeping crops “natural” and “pesticide-free”? I’ll tell you why. I am against those things because they simply do not exist. First I’d like to discuss term “natural.” Natural is a buzz word with no exact definition. It doesn’t take long in the supermarket to notice that almost all the products you buy anymore have this written on the label. The reason you see it everywhere is because is doesn’t have an exact definition. It is a completely subjective term, and therefore cannot be quantified in any meaningful way. If you think that General Mills suddenly changed your child’s Lucky Charms opting for “natural ingredients” over the “toxic chemicals,” (or whatever fallacious viewpoint you had about them earlier), then strap in because you’re in for a world of disappointment. The point is that like a bachelor’s degree in philosophy, the term “natural” means nothing.
So what about the evil pesticides you ask? What about the crazy mad scientists that are putting fish genes into my tomatoes? My pesticide-free organic un-fishified tomatoes are better for you and more delicious! Don’t get me wrong, I’d be more than happy to concede to any of those things is any of them were true. If evidence existed to show that pesticide levels in our foods were hurting children or robbing us of amazing flavors, I’d happily march in that protest, (in spirit from the comfort of my couch of course, let’s not get crazy). To take the somewhat accurate argument I just put into other people’s mouths one piece at a time, I’ll start with pesticides. First, it is an overwhelming fact that no health issues have ever been linked to the extremely low residual levels of pesticides on our fruits and vegetables. Any pesticides left over on your produce can easily be washed away as well. These pesticides are simply not hurting anyone. I used to think the opposite was true. I used to buy organic produce almost exclusively. However, once I did my research I found out that not only is there no evidence to support the health claims of organic, but farmers use pesticides on organic produce anyway! In fact, they actually use probably MORE pesticides! WHAT??!
Hear me out before you flush my argument down the toilet. Hopefully everyone would agree that it would be physically impossible for any farming to be conducted on a massive scale without the use of pesticides. Just think about for a second. Is it really possible for farmers to go through a whole field of crops? Could one person embark on a non-stop bug-squishing tirade 24 hours a day for months while your cucumbers grow? Do farmers have some magic, non-pesticide liquid to spray onto plants falling victim to a pest you can’t rid the plant of with two fingers? The answer to all of these questions is “No.” The reason almost every major supermarket in our country is able to sell organic produce is because it is being grown on a massive scale. The only way to achieve this is through large-scale farming operations. It is a fact that to achieve the “organic” label from the government, pesticides used on these farms must be “derived from organic sources.” Basically this means that the same chemicals in the artificially created pesticides must be created less-efficiently and less accurately than a laboratory could create them. This means that the pesticides used on organic crops are very similar to those used on traditional crops. The difference is they are less effective due to how they have to be made, which in-turn means that more of them need to be used. You heard me. Not only is it likely, but it is almost a certainty that all of those organic crops have more pesticides used on them than traditionally grown produce. It should also be noted that the only reason that some of the levels of pesticides found on organic produce appear lower than those found on traditional produce is because the tests are looking for very specific pesticides. The pesticides found on organic produce are different enough that traditional tests don’t look for them. This is why doctors have to do multiple blood tests when they’re looking for several different things. Different testing is needed to find things. I realize this blog entry is entirely too long already, and I’ve only scratched the surface with my uncomfortably feminine nails.
So what about the fish genes in my tomatoes? That’s against nature, and God, and my colon can’t handle it! This one is fairly easy to tackle in my opinion. The reason is because anyone with some background in genetics will simply tell you, “too late.” The reason they would tell you this is because basically every living thing on our planet shares some of their genetic code with everything else. This means that your tomato already shares about 40% of its genetic code with fish. Adding one more tiny gene sequence to that tomato may give it the ability to be more cold tolerant. This results in cheaper prices at the market due to less freeze-loss. If you think doing this is going to turn you into a mutant, or a fish, or a fish mutant, well… umm… it’s not. I honestly wouldn’t know how to react because that is a dumb thing to think. Yea, I thought that and I’m an idiot… not really. Yes I did… not.
To try and bring this post back full-circle, this L.A. council ban proposal is clearly coming from a place of severe misinformation. I know I never got around to talking about GMO seeds and Monsanto, and Dr. Evil. I didn’t get into the labeling of GMOs, (which is a deliberate attempt to undermine GMOs and not simply “informing the public as to what they’re eating”). Clearly I could continue on this subject. I could attempt to debunk everything, but I doubt it would help much. I could publish a book on all the fallacious Facebook posts I’ve attempted to debunk over the years, often with the poster leaving frustrated, (but hopefully a tiny bit more educated). I’m certain I will continue to tackle this issue in subsequent blog posts in the future. In the mean time, I’ll leave you with this photo I often think of while pleasuring myself.
TL;DR: Banning gmo’s in any form comes from a place of misinformation and fear, two things I depend on daily to maintain an erection.
STL; DR: GMO corn cobs used as sex toys perform just as well, if not better than non-GMO cobs. Plus they’re cheaper!
IHTASOAN; DR: Nickleback loves organic farming.
No comments:
Post a Comment