The Truth About GMOs

[@RealEngineering]

This feels like a huge moment! So proud of all the work Stephanie has put into this. She is writing and editing the videos on this channel, so it's only right she narrates them.

[@sean_silvers]

Thanks to you both for such excellent and informative videos. Excited to see more of her videos!

[@ansh6370]

Thanks! just discovered your channel recently and now this! This is a treasure for a curious nerd like me. Thank you for taking your part into educating people and making this world a better place, very cool.

[@mazenmady1136]

Is she Irish aswell

[@jacobtorris3428]

But I prefer your voice

[@vagishsivaramakrishnan4885]

I also really like the second logo, it kept the same core design as the first but changed it up to make it a DNA helix. Im excited for this channel.

[@Wendoverproductions]

This channel seems like it has real promise! I can actually understand the narrator on it (unlike that engineering guy)

[@bloodyglitch1777]

That damn engineering guy

[@rivaledrandom1282]

Roasted

[@Kebab_with_extra_garlic_mayo]

mega oof

[@brendanbruno7024]

I do hope he’s joking. Idk if wendover productions and real engineering are friends or something

[@rivaledrandom1282]

@@brendanbruno7024 they are friends, he's definitely joking

[@pbkillstrike]

11:42 We live in an era where we've started deploying weaponized memes. Amazing.

[@blackreaper2343]

"Russian bots and trolls" its not like everyone who has some free time does it xD

[@luongmaihunggia]

That's actually a thing. Watch CGP grey's video on the topic: kzbin.info/www/bejne/qHaWm5KIfdCkgMU

[@grantlauzon5237]

Yeah... It’s called propaganda. I don’t mean that in a conspiracy way I mean Propaganda is memes. Napoleon was actually 5ft 7in.

[@Dichtsau]

_CAREFUL._ this video is so heavily biased, it counts as "disinformation". BARELY any1 is scared of "direct damage" (as in "can't be digested, goes other ways"). we are scared of LONG TERM DAMAGES, as in "children born with 5 arms". also, BARELY any1 cares if a potato-gene is put into another potato. what we care about, is when u put tulip-genes into wheat - u also wouldn't wanna eat "pig with dolphin-genes" or "jalapeno with elefant-genes" (or, speaking for farmers, they wouldn't wanna raise "cows with shark-genes").

[@PureLogic777]

@@Dichtsau Why not? Adding a gene or two from another species isn't inherently harmful. What about adding beta carotene genes to rice? Would you be scared of eating that? If so, would you also be scared of eating beta-carotene-containing carrots together with rice? People need to understand that GMO products need to be considered on a case by case basis instead of being against GMO in general. It depends on what genes are added to a crop. It's possible to produce harmful GMO crops if we wanted to. For example, we could add a poison ivy gene to a crop. But we can also add a beta carotene gene to a crop for good. So it makes no sense to fear and oppose GMO in general. That type of fear is based on ignorance.

[@dougyoung221]

Small veg farmer here. Was just watching this vid before going out to pick my summer squash. Passed my first tomato planting on the way and no surprise, all the leaves are succumbing to disease pressure as a result of recent heavy rains and now high temps and humidity. I'm all for GMOs to fight insects and disease but it certainly needs to be done wisely with best of intentions in mind, not corporate greed running the show. Human consciousness needs to evolve right along with the science. Thanks for an open minded look. I'm so tired of listening to people who've never held a hoe in their life, let alone raised a garden, espouse know it all opinions about growing food.

[@popeyegordon]

"Corporate greed" is the most popular mantra of the millions of consumers duped by the organic farming lobbyists. Organic IS the single largest corporate entity. *Organic industry tyranny for 32 years and counting:* "Although GMOs are regarded as safe as their conventional counterparts by every major food safety authority in the world, the organic industry spends nearly $3 billion a year through over 330 different organizations leading with fear and “information spin” as an industry to sell their products. By creating an unfounded fear that requires tighter regulations on GMO crops, they are hoping to force them out of the food supply, thereby creating a bigger market share to sell more products in their more than $65 billion wheelhouse. The unfortunate consequence of these [non-GMO] labels is that the food companies and lobbyists tend to create an unnecessary “us vs. them” divide. When food companies use fear against competitors to sell a product, farmers take it personally." www.agdaily.com/insights/farm-babe-label-trends-end/ Now why do you suppose organic food is so expensive?? Imagine what 3 billion dollars could do for humanitarian goals - end a different disease forever every year.... End all hunger in at least one country...... Funding nasty propaganda? Really??

[@davidtuchscherer6276]

This! It's tiring to be moralised by people who have no idea about the job, but have a very strong opinion about it all because they read some "totally not biased" articles. I crave for a time when science would be listened more, instead of just being cherrypicked by each person to confirm their own opinion.

[@reginahudzik5533]

Is trute.I am hard working in my practing study.GMO is not bad people need a better plant.😔😔😔😔.

[@cosmicHalArizona]

Yes. Creating GMO plants patenting them & making seeds property of the "creator" seems ruthless & a crime. After all the real creator doesn't charge people.

[@whowereweagain]

Me too, but I am struck by is how these "fair and balanced" videos never seem to mention is how the vast majority of GMO opponents are peasant farmers in the global south. The people euphemistically refered to as subsistence farmers (they proudly call themselves peasants) are against GMOs because they are dispossessed and suffer political violence so speculators can grow GMOs for biofuels and ingredients in nutritionally poor processed foods for animals. Never do they seem to mention that GMO seeds are only grown to feed corporations and "asset owners" (aka the scum of the earth) many farmers have grown bankrupt and turn to suicide due to the dependency on the external inputs these corporations are forcing on them. Why is this why are there so many videos like this? Why do they talk about Golden rice when the entire thing has been shown to be a contrived PR stunt based on lies from the beginning? Does it have anything to do with the open and shameless corruption of the academic authorities and the science communication media industry by the corporations that are selling these seeds and pesticides? I'll leave that up to you to decide. GMOs are only good for raping the life out of stolen land for four or five years until the practice is no longer profitable, geographers are calling it 'the global land grab' and things far worse than I am able to convey, this shit is DARK.

[@MundaneAxiom]

One aspect of this that I think the video failed to cover is the economic and social ramifications of widespread adoption of GMOs, given that companies like Monsanto own the patents to their strains. Not considering this risks creating a sort of "seed monopoly" where the sucess of small farmers is directly linked to giant multinational corporations. Monsanto has a deserved reputation for agressive legal action against those affected by their products, and the sucessful lawsuit mentioned here is far from the norm. All in all GMOs have huge potential for good, but when all this potential rests in the hands of multinational corporations we're likely to see the same uneven and profit-driven distribution of resources that are the reason we fail to prevent so many famines today.

[@Chuppydu21]

There is already is already a seed monopoly :/

[@Nikwldfr]

I agree with your comment. However, the way plant breeding is performed today requires vast amount of resources that only those companies can afford to input. Thus there is already a seed monopoly. What we need to do in order to ameliorate this problem, is to preserve and continue to grow local plant varieties along with the commercially available ones.

[@Asbjoern]

@@Nikwldfr the problem is that Monsanto files lawsuits against farmers that neighbour Monsanta farmers, claiming that since Monsanta plants will spread to their fields they should pay Monsanta for benefitting off their plant even though the farmers harvest their own seeds for next year's use and don't cultivate the Monsanta seeds, only by accident. There are even stories of mobile seed extractor companies being followed and haressed by Monsanta payed goons to force the few farmers not using Monsanta seeds to convert.

[@Nikwldfr]

@@Asbjoern I agree this is a serious problem, but it is an issue that should be solved by legislation. We must push our governments to implement measures protecting independent farmers. I hope you understand though, that we don't have the luxury of turning down life saving science like GM.

[@suryaiyer13]

Well I disagree. Not all countries give patent for modified biological species or drugs

[@ericschoeman6613]

As a farmer I can feed the people but I can't make them smarter

[@M60A3]

I’m a farmer son in Quebec Canada and peoples are dumbs enough to think that gmo are devils product

[@ericschoeman6613]

@@snatchinitback4635 yes make it yourself then

[@ericschoeman6613]

@@snatchinitback4635 I can feed 153 people per hectare for a year you wouldn't be able to feed one of your kids .that is 100m×100m .see you are one of those dum people I get paid shit but I feed thousands what do you do .definitely not math

[@curiousbystander9193]

@@M60A3 no. no..........they are too ignorant to realize that hard to digest insectidal cry1 proteins in their food is what makes them constipated, especially when they eat these proteins with acidic food, and especially when that food has been harvested using gut biome modifying glyphosate as a harvest desiccant. These things should not be in our food.......but you may too dumb to understand the implications of what I wrote.......let me help you understand....it's call chronic illnesses with drugs that don't cure them so you farmers have it easier and more profitable using your no till and harvest desiccation strategies.

[@globalbridges8570]

@@curiousbystander9193 correct, what is the point in eating poisonous toxic food that kills you slowly. Those fungicides are so toxic they’re banned on tobacco and medical marijuana production, as when burnt they release hydrogen cyanide. Only indoctrinated fools eat that toxic food.

[@moboxgraphics]

Awesome job Steph!

[@Dichtsau]

_CAREFUL._ this video is so heavily biased, it counts as "disinformation". BARELY any1 is scared of "direct damage" (as in "can't be digested, goes other ways"). we are scared of LONG TERM DAMAGES, as in "children born with 5 arms". also, BARELY any1 cares if a potato-gene is put into another potato. what we care about, is when u put tulip-genes into wheat - u also wouldn't wanna eat "pig with dolphin-genes" or "jalapeno with elefant-genes" (or, speaking for farmers, they wouldn't wanna raise "cows with shark-genes").

[@smhs9546]

@@Dichtsau If GMOs produce creatures like you then maybe they are a bad thing

[@Dichtsau]

@@smhs9546 i kinda doubt that you read what i wrote, which in fact puts on yourself what you tried to insult me with.

[@smhs9546]

@@Dichtsau I did read it, but I've heard the same arguments time & time again dripping from the chins of other cunts on the internet that think they know more than they actually do. People are going to consider you a failed GMO until you can form a coherent argument.

[@juandavidcelistorres5748]

@Dichtsau that commentary is high biased

[@raffaelepiccini3405]

"What scares me most about the loud arguments and misinformation about plant genetics is that the poorest people who most need the technology may be denied access because of the vague fears and prejudices of those who have enough to eat" -Pamela Ronald Beautiful quote

[@rodneycox329]

Africa has a good dose of glyphosate in it's food already, I suspect it's playing a roll in the violence taking place there as the lack of tryptophan (from the shikamate pathway) can lead to exactly that.

[@davidadcock3382]

@@rodneycox329 Glyphosate is not in your food but many of the highly toxic pesticides Organic growers are in your food. What an idiot.

[@popeyegordon]

@@rodneycox329 That's a fucking lie. None of the 5 African nations who approved their first GMO crops are using herbicide resistance. They use the Bt trait. The Shikimate cellular path way exists in PLANTS, NOT ANIMALS you moron. Stop repeating unproven unverified conspiracy theories from anti-biotech activists. You will be called on it wherever educated people find your lies. Our farmers deserve more respect than that. That was role, not roll and it does not exist.

[@GenghisDon1970]

for fucks sake, buying that giant corpos do anything for moral or ethical reasons is the most disgusting & dangerous thing that exists today not a one of such cares about any people but themselves, and least of all "poor people"

[@raffaelepiccini3405]

@@GenghisDon1970 it doesnt matter what they care and do not care.. they might care 100% about their own wallet, but GMOs will still be extremely helpful for poor people specifically

[@Klipik12]

Only Real Engineering's second channel would have 100% of its released videos be about how Ireland is disappointing.

[@carso1500]

I mean... Is he wrong

[@mansaruaidhri5602]

@@carso1500 bigoted view?^ my family is pro GMOs, We don’t agree with corrupt politicians forcing these bans along with spreading misinformation to the public. Ireland’s also started building 15 big wind farms.

[@4124V4TA-SNPCA-x]

​@@carso1500he is

[@IamHere2468]

Very nicely done Steph, both sides of the coin. The fears of those with enough to eat really hits. What burns me is the waste. How many tons and tons of food are wasted each year in the name of fall and Halloween decorations.

[@Dare.Bear.X]

Yup. We are already producing enough food to feed 11 billion people - more if we reduce meat consumption. We need equitable distribution, not Engineered crops that are designed primarily to make corporations rich.

[@4124V4TA-SNPCA-x]

WHAAAAT?!? 😮 Americans throw out pumpkins?!? OMG. I've always assumed the pumpkin pulp from the hollowed out fruits for used as pie fillings, pumpkin puree, into cookies, or any other nice food. Color me flabbergasted and deeply disillusioned. 😮‍💨😞

[@stefancrubs]

Great Video! Although as a physician i have one addition: Whilst there are no reported harms by toxic content in GMO, there are plenty of reports regarding allergies against Epitopes on artificial inbreed proteins. That might not sound like a big problem, but if you are allergic against some of these Proteins, its very difficult to find out or to avoid these. Ceep on the great work!

[@popeyegordon]

All GMOs are fully tested for any allergens before they are approved. Systematic debunking of the myth that GMOs have caused an increase in ALLERGIES : "There is no short list of culprits. Microbiome, Western diet, and socioeconomic status to name a few. A number of groups have also blamed genetically modified food. According to the Organic Consumers Association, the main trade group for the organic food industry. However, of the foods that most frequently cause food allergy, GM versions simply don’t exist. There is no GM peanut (although development of a hypoallergenic GM peanut is ongoing). There is no GM milk. Or consumable GM egg (although there is now that makes medicine). However, a few cases of allergenicity cropped up during early experiments involving genetically engineered foods, which piqued concerns. [this mandatory testing prevented them from being approved] European Union health agencies, and member nation health agencies, as well as the US FDA, EPA and USDA, are all involved in necessary rigorous assessments of GM foods (or any other foods) for allergic potential. The EPA, in fact, maintains an extensive list of foods that could trigger allergies. Another resource used to test for allergens is the University of Nebraska’s Allergen Online, which matches amino acid sequences of possible allergens with reference proteins known to cause allergies. And, so far, no single biotechnology-based protein in food has been found to cause an allergic reaction.The causes behind the increase in food allergies are not known. While anti-GMO groups have pointed to biotechnology, there are other proposed causes, each with a varying degree of data to support each. Allergic reactions are complex. Even though eight foods cause most allergies, many more can cause specific reactions, because everybody’s intestinal, nervous and immune systems are different (not to mention their genetics). While certain genetically engineered experimental foods were found to have allergens, these allergens were known and caught by researchers in early stages, just as a test on organic peanuts would also show a potential allergic reaction in sensitive people. And further studies have shown that transgenics technology does not make a food any more allergenic - but neither does it automatically make it less (unless the target trait is allergenicity)." geneticliteracyproject.org/2019/06/07/why-gmos-arent-responsible-for-a-spike-in-food-allergies/

[@stefancrubs]

@@popeyegordon "Systematic debunking of the myth that GMOs have caused an increase in ALLERGIES" I'm not claiming that GMOs are increasing the incidence of Allergies. They are simply adding a few new epitopes into the plant. Since the same molecules are breeded into different plants but can differ from "manufacturer to manufacturer" (sry for bad translation, native german) it's quite hard to diagnose. If you are allergic to the Corn in a specific brand of Chili, doesn't mean that you are allergic to Corn in a different brand using a different Corn. But maybe you are allergic to tomatoes from containig the same inbreed protein. Same is for phytosanitary, inbreed or not (but the not inbreed is often removed in most parts). "All GMOs are fully tested for any allergens before they are approved." That would basically mean that there were no food allergies with GMOs, only with "wildtype" / "organic". Of course GMOs contain epitomes your Antibodys can detect. Im not making an argument against GMOs, just explainig some incoherent symptoms some people suffer from.

[@stefancrubs]

@@popeyegordon Just an addition to my first answer: GMOs will ultimately reduce the prevalence of food allergies, since it's possible to remove a lot of Epitopes without interfering with the function of the wildtype Protein. Of course the Proteins expressed bei GMO are tested for allergic potential, just like any other ingredient that has to be approved. But that does not mean that the incredible diverse human immune system doesn't find anything.

[@popeyegordon]

@@stefancrubs Any allergies people have to conventional foods may still be present on the GM versions. But no additional allergens will be introduced. In fact we will soon have GM allergen free peanuts and gluten free wheat.

[@stefancrubs]

@@popeyegordon Do you realise that every possible combination of amino acids is a possible Epitope for Antibodies?

[@nikkicedrone9311]

I like that y'all posted references. Back when I wrote papers we weren't allowed to use websites because somehow they were more inclined to be wrong than books, even though anyone can write either.

[@masochisticmeese3555]

Just wanted to clarify Irish didn't die from the potatoe famine itself, they died because the English took the rest of the food

[@RealEngineering]

While there is a truth to that. It's a severe over simplification.

[@novivi4390]

@@RealEngineering Not Really

[@mikeoxsmal8022]

@@novivi4390 well no, other foods were still being exported which is a bad idea but not the cause but a cause. The reason it was so bad was ba use of bad governmental policies.

[@annepower7787]

Absolutely - this is a complete misrepresentation of Irish History - The English owned farms and businesses in Ireland and English laws were changed making some foods too expensive whilst others continued to be exported. The potatoes had a blight - but the blight for the Irish was the English for which Tony Blair, British Prime Minister, and others have apologised. www.history.com/topics/immigration/irish-potato-famine

[@that_one_who_is8037]

@@RealEngineeringIrish person here, it’s really not an oversimplification. That is what happened. It was a genocide on my people, and is widely known as such here in Ireland

[@nooranik21]

Tackles GMO doubters in first video: You've earned a sub.

[@halasimov1362]

nooranik21 Without doubt science can't exist

[@nooranik21]

@@halasimov1362 true, very true.

[@Dichtsau]

_CAREFUL._ this video is so heavily biased, it counts as "disinformation". BARELY any1 is scared of "direct damage" (as in "can't be digested, goes other ways"). we are scared of LONG TERM DAMAGES, as in "children born with 5 arms". also, BARELY any1 cares if a potato-gene is put into another potato. what we care about, is when u put tulip-genes into wheat - u also wouldn't wanna eat "pig with dolphin-genes" or "jalapeno with elefant-genes" (or, speaking for farmers, they wouldn't wanna raise "cows with shark-genes").

[@symmetrygames8142]

@@Dichtsau That's not how any of this works.

[@zachpayne3572]

@@Dichtsau you sound like a boy buddy

[@1337sh337]

I’m interest in the effects on the insects and how it further affects the food chain for animals.

[@popeyegordon]

No change in effect for the last 50 years. geneticliteracyproject.org/2020/06/16/are-we-facing-an-insect-armageddon-caused-by-intensive-industrial-farming-and-agricultural-chemicals-the-media-say-yes-science-says-no/ Part two compares organic to GMO farming insect populations. The GLP is a highly reliable non-profit.

[@ntmn8444]

Exactly. It affects them. People are not thinking about how these plants affect the world in the long run. There are many legitimate concerns.

[@lkke]

They die. This gmo-s are dangerous for them as they are dangerous for us

[@nolsen8616]

that's a valid concern that should be studied. it makes me wonder overall what will their ecological effect be in the long run 🤔

[@tibormalinsky8751]

I was thinking about that too, but... change your view a little. Imagine you have wild nature. Then you simply make a fence around a square, you cultivate it and raise GMO crops there. So now, "no wild worms nor caterpillars" will eat your crop. What it will do? It will stay in the wild nature. So what I'm trying to say is that most of the insects that eat the crop are, actually pests/vermin. But in the wild nature they are balanced out with predators. Simply put, they will stay out of our crop and keep living in their natural environment. Our crops will not influence them and they will not influence us.

[@naufalfalfal]

I appreciate the effort that went to making this video and bringing up the nuances surrounding GMO. As a biotechnology student I probably have a bias in supporting GMO but then again not all GMO are created equal. The potential is enormous especially in fulfilling food demands we need in the future. Even malnutrition problems we have currently. I think regulation is highly important. But not GMO blanket bans please. This was a great video

[@drakesmith471]

I totally agree, and it’s nice to know we’ve got someone out there fighting a good fight. Thank you.

[@4nativemedicine60]

Genetic Modification is a LIE. GM is a lie because it is IMPOSSIBLE to open up a seed, go through all the layers and into the nucleus, modify that nucleus, then put all the layers of the seed back in perfect condition. Once that impossible task has been completed, now that seed needs to be planted, germinate, grow and PRODUCE new gm seed. . . Absolutely IMPOSSIBLE, but it's not impossible to LIE and LIE and LIE... The folks who promote GMO's are LIARS, children of the devil. Remember Humpty Dumpty, all the kings horses and all the kings men could NOT put humpty dumpty back together again. But those kings men can LIE about doing so. Them same liars never speak of all the deadly poisons they add to ALL the food, but they sure want you afraid of these lies. . .

[@naufalfalfal]

@@4nativemedicine60 Hi there. Im interested in how you came to that understanding. I can assure you thats not how plant GM works. The resources are out there on plant transformation techniques if youre willing to read up on it (agrobacterium, biolistics, etc). Of course im not an expert in it yet. As for all people promoting gmo are liars, im not so sure about that hahah. I can assure you genetic modification in plants and food have been used for good such as fortifying nutrients in rice (e.g golden rice) as well as eliminating allergens from various plants.

[@4nativemedicine60]

@@naufalfalfal Thanks for responding, few folks do. My understanding it the simple fact that is is impossible to open up a seed all the way down to the nucleus, modify it and then put it all back together perfectly and it both grow and reproduce EXACTLY the same. It's simply impossible. Hybridization is not impossible, nor are hybrids gm'd, yet much talk today uses those terms interchangeably. Also, seldom is much said about all the poisons sprayed on the plants, yet it is the chemical companies claiming gmo's. And it's been proven many times over that the heirloom varieties are usually much more nutritious than the cross breeds, but those folks who speak that Truth loudly, often lose their heads, literally. All the best to you as you prove out the TRUTH for yourself by simple easy to prove and understand logic, as the Truth is always simple and logical. Blessings on your search.

[@naufalfalfal]

@@4nativemedicine60 I see. May I ask what proposed method of genetic modification that is involving seed and opening it etc. ? In my understanding any plant cell/tissue can be taken since they have nuclei. The new genes are introduced via different methods (like i mentioned agrobacterium, particle bombardment, etc). These cells are then regenerated in a culture and plant is eventually selected. I do agree with your statement that certain heirloom varieties of plants being more nutritious or healthier. For example some of the hybridized varieties contain unnecessarily high amounts of sugar etc. However biofortification such as golden rice introduces additional vitamin a precursor to rice grains to support communities that are in need of these micronutrients.

[@BaRKy]

This was an amazing video and as non-biased as I can tell. Thank you for it, and I mean that genuinely.

[@Lyle-xc9pg]

Not with this "russian bot an troll" thing again. As if russia is resposible for everything you dont like. Like every russian and only russians are online trolls.

[@jashak9291]

not really non biased, but a good video anyway

[@teedsthereaper6287]

11:47 Gordon Ramsay would shout that it's an overcooked egg.

[@danabright3241]

non-biased :DDDDDDDD

[@KingsandGenerals]

Best of luck!

[@Masterhitman935]

Kings and Generals any word of the ongoing battle for science! :)

[@chaithuchannakesavula6976]

I'm an msc genetics and plant breeding student, seeing this much of hate on our work, I wonder why I am sacrificing my life and time on something whos beneficiaries are primary opposers and accusing us of conspiracies sometimes I even wonder why I have chosen this career.

[@popeyegordon]

Make sure you know your real enemy, the root cause of anti-biotech activism. "Although GMOs are regarded as safe as their conventional counterparts by every major food safety authority in the world, the organic industry spends nearly $3 billion a year through over 330 different organizations leading with fear and “information spin” as an industry to sell their products. By creating an unfounded fear that requires tighter regulations on GMO crops, they are hoping to force them out of the food supply, thereby creating a bigger market share to sell more products in their more than $65 billion wheelhouse. The unfortunate consequence of these [non-GMO] labels is that the food companies and lobbyists tend to create an unnecessary “us vs. them” divide. When food companies use fear against competitors to sell a product, farmers take it personally." www.agdaily.com/insights/farm-babe-label-trends-end/ Now why do you suppose organic food is so expensive?? Imagine what 3 billion dollars could do for humanitarian goals - end a different disease forever every year.... End all hunger in at least one country...... Funding nasty propaganda? Really??

[@dreama8168]

@@why_sr03 Follow your gut, you know you are not doing a clean business. If you think changing genes of nature and causing pesticide and herbicide resistant creatures are fun, go ahead, but you are polluting our world and causing many unborn illnesses to come. Yes, people hate on GMO work, because it really is something that needs to stop, you could do whatever you want as long as it didnt pollute my air, my soil, and end life of many other creatures. There are studies of changing human fetuses. Why many people were so opposed to that but not to GMOs? Its the same thing.

[@jeffvader811]

@@dreama8168 "changing genes of nature" Wrong, modern day crops do not exist in nature, they have been selectively bred (genetically modified) for thousands of years and no longer resemble their original ancestors. "you are polluting our world" Organic food produces 50% more greenhouse emissions than non-organic food. If you really did care about pollution, as you claim, you would be bashing inefficient organic farming, not non-organic farming and GMOs: www.nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0757-z "causing many unborn illnesses" There is zero evidence that GMOs cause any diseases. Actually, GMOs are significantly more healthy than non-GMOs, containing far fewer toxins, and use up to 25% less land as well: www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-21284-2 "There are studies of changing human fetuses. Why many people were so opposed to that but not to GMOs? Its the same thing." I do hope you're not eating humans, because GMO foods and genetically modified people are very very different things. There has only ever been one documented case of gene editing on human foetuses, which was a study undertaken in China to try and incorporate HIV resistance.

[@adamburling9551]

Because you like playing God and you have a complex that's why

[@4124V4TA-SNPCA-x]

​@@jeffvader811 Really? These tired false claims? Selective breeding and GMOs have nothing in common. If they were the same GMO crops wouldn't even exists because they would be unnecessary, redundant. Please apply some critical thinking someone's before believing bs.

[@vx8952]

As an Engineering student it is great to learn about another area of Stem from this channel. This was a great video and really opened my eyes to the issues faced in global food production. Thank you!

[@4124V4TA-SNPCA-x]

I wish this video was great.

[@kickwriteteach2313]

I love and appreciate this channel's logo! on so many levels

[@majorfallacy5926]

am i stupid or is it just a bogstandard double helix? i cant see any hidden initials or anything?

[@diegosanchez894]

@@majorfallacy5926 it kind of looks like two real engineering logos

[@RyanTaylor2000]

Major Fallacy man it’s 2020, all about simplicity, if you were designing Harley Davidson’s logo no one would say it’s a good design

[@Volksgeist]

Amazing video, so excited for this new channel :)

[@HaasGrotesk]

We live in an era where feelings are more important than facts and the fact that this will destroy this world is somewhat pretty sad and amusing at the same time.

[@rambles2727]

What will?

[@HaasGrotesk]

@@rambles2727 Feelings instead of facts.

[@drgentech4930]

Just a note unrelated to GMOs, Ireland was producing enough food throughout the entire "potato famine" to feed the whole population even with the blight. So why did Ireland starve, if Irish people were hungry and Irish people were producing more than enough food to feed all Irish people? The reason is not potato blight, the reason was colonial British soldiers who enforced forcible exportation of Irish food for profit leading to the starvation of the Irish people. The fundamental cause of a million Irish deaths and 1.5 million refugees was not the potato blight, an interruption to a food security self-defence measure, but British colonisation and theft of Irish wealth for profit which placed Ireland in a food insecure position in the first place, and the fact that the British and their Irish landlord servants continued to export food even as starvation in Ireland magnified thousands of times. British authorities at the time remarked that no "aid" would be sent (aid perhaps meaning some of the food that Ireland produced, given back to Ireland as a "gift"), because there were too many Irish anyway. It was not a famine, the cause was not potato blight, it was a genocide, and the perpetrators were the British colonial authorities who had their footsoldiers shoot starving mothers on the docks as they desperately tried to access the food the British were taking away.

[@that_one_who_is8037]

It’s relieving to me that history teachers are actually beginning to admit and teach it as having been a genocide in class (in Ireland, at least in my school) It makes me feel like I’m not crazy and a conspiracy theorist for realising that it fits the definition and criteria of a genocide. Political relations and pleasantries are the only reason it’s not really called such. Also the whole thing where it’s an egg shell topic to walk around on due the political climate

[@imph1l]

Really cool video! But on "critical" topics like that, I'd really like to know the sources :) I DO NOT mean that the vid was biased, but I stil would like to read all the info on it.

[@jasonbolding3481]

Putting a source on a graph you think would be standard practise

[@woutrobert4402]

They’re in the description (or at least now they are) :)

[@cogspace]

There are 18 sources linked in the description. The bracketed numbers in the video show you which claim is coming from which source.

[@Dichtsau]

_CAREFUL._ this video is so heavily biased, it counts as "disinformation". BARELY any1 is scared of "direct damage" (as in "can't be digested, goes other ways"). we are scared of LONG TERM DAMAGES, as in "children born with 5 arms". also, BARELY any1 cares if a potato-gene is put into another potato. what we care about, is when u put tulip-genes into wheat - u also wouldn't wanna eat "pig with dolphin-genes" or "jalapeno with elefant-genes" (or, speaking for farmers, they wouldn't wanna raise "cows with shark-genes").

[@Runcible2010]

@@Dichtsau Isn't Monsanto modifying crops to withstand agricultural chemicals -- weed killers and pesticides-- that are harmful to humans

[@Pulse_nerd72]

11:47 Gordon Ramsay would shout that it's an overcooked egg.

[@farmerallis]

As someone who's a plant scientist and has worked in agriculture my whole life, this is a phenomenal video. More people need to see this.

[@curiousbystander9193]

problem is .........you are not a biologist, a chemist, a gastroenterologist, a psychologist, or a food scientist.....so your limited point of view and ignorant enthusiasm about this topic may put others at risk of exposure to harmful chemicals and gene alterations in staple crops. FOr example....cry1 glycan binding proteins were approved for consumption based on field application data relate to BT use as competitive organism. Transgene expressed cry1 gmo proteins have not fully studied for their effect on the mammal gi tract biome..... For example.....glyphosate in gmo and non gmo staple crops appears to negatively alter the human gut biome and these changes in food are directly contributing to the rise in autism and chronic disease in western cultures.

[@oliviergrimard3845]

@@curiousbystander9193 and you are any of that?

[@oliviergrimard3845]

@@curiousbystander9193 after reading again what you wrote, there is more chance the person from the first comment actually is a plant scientist than you having finished high school.

[@curiousbystander9193]

@@oliviergrimard3845 After rereading the original posters statement, I have to ask myself, if they are a plant scientist, why would not add to the discussion as opposed to making such a vague statement highlighted with their credentials? You see, because a good plant scientist really should have more to say, especially if they have worked in agriculture their entire life.

[@davidadcock3382]

@@oliviergrimard3845 Curious Bystander are you here telling lies and spreading misinformation again?

[@muskansiddikee2171]

Man I'm in class 12 from India and I studied about all this in an chapter called biotechnology. Wish I found you guys earlier education would have been fun not a burden.

[@eswaribalan164]

But the voice of the reader is real boring and deadening.

[@swilleh_]

@@eswaribalan164 it's their first video. Check the last ones. Also it's not as boring as teacher's way to "teach"

[@luffywest]

And what are you doing now?

[@muskansiddikee2171]

@@luffywest currently a psychology major student.

[@kdonnellyza]

I came here for a video about Complementary Metal Oxide Semiconductors (CMOS)

[@ralanham76]

It's the font I don't recognize it

[@danielhenderson7050]

Me too lol

[@emiledlund9559]

I guess corn is a pretty big component of metaloxide

[@adrianwolmarans]

Cornplementary Metal Oxide ;)

[@MarkPederson]

If you're okay using insulin or getting an antiviral injection and anti-GMO, your views are incongruous. Exogenous DNA is inserted into yeast or eggs respectively which produces the desired protein.

[@curiousbystander9193]

thanks for helping everyone understand what your wife has to put up with daily........... there is quite a difference between insulin made with gmo technologies and stacking staple crops with glyphosate resistance and cry1 protein expression.

[@tmswrs]

@@curiousbystander9193 so the insulin gene is fine but the natural plant genes that provide some species with resistance to the plant hormone mimic glyphosate are bad. Any other bad genes out there?

[@curiousbystander9193]

@@tmswrs excuse me... what are you talking about.....plant genes that produce an analog to gly pho sate? Did I get that right? No such thing.! Expressing cry1 lectins in crops produces ibs through glycan/cry1 binding...yes, there is something wrong with that...especially with acidic diets.

[@solssun]

Just leave the fact that the potato famine was entirely avoidable but the Irish weren't deemed worth saving by the British Empire in the footnotes

[@dottyman7251]

8:42 as an Irish person I have to say "Hwhat" we do not have a sustainable agriculture sector in fact the agriculture in Ireland is one of our main polluters

[@that_one_who_is8037]

I was thinking the exact same thing??? Like, where tf did that idea come from??? I’d love it if it was true, but it’s not???

[@DoReMi123acb]

It never ceases to amaze me how sad and narrowminded the anti-GMO crowd is. Literally all the modern crops we humans have eaten since the beginning of agriculture and farming are a result of genetic modification, cross-breeding, and selective breeding. It really is just mind-baffling. I wouldn' expect this from people in the western world!

[@court2379]

There is a difference between crossing plants and selecting those with desired traits, and splicing a gene into a plant that could never naturally occur there.

[@Leena-zh4lj]

Good luck, I am happy to see western idiots kill themselves.

[@jeffvader811]

@@court2379 The only difference is precision. The end result of the process is nearly identical, except an artificially bred crop will have several changed genes, not all of them known or beneficial, whereas a genetically engineered crop will be almost exactly edited to specification.

[@edvardmunch6344]

They are just like anti-nuke people, actually they usually are the same

[@ntmn8444]

@@court2379 this is correct. There is a difference. Our opinion is unpopular here tho.

[@blooptev]

was looking forward to this for a while, thanks for making this great content!

[@cianmansfield]

STEM, and Irish prominence. My two favorite things.

[@popeyegordon]

My name is Pawan Ramnarain. I want to remind readers of all the huge advantages of GMO crops: 1) The thing about GMOs is that they have been so completely tested clinically and by government safety agencies. 2) All research done is peer reviewed and findings are supported by all legitimate science organizations globally. 3) Companies that produce GMOs are a gift to humanity. NGOs run by the the smartest people on this planet also invest in GMO seed to be given away free to the poorest farmers. Farmers welcome this help graciously. 4) GMOs are the most affordable because they allow us to skip pesticide and herbicide use and avoid personal contamination by pesticides that are not applied thanks to modern crop science. 5) The pros mentioned in this video can not be achieved by conventional breeding so I respect that. We now achieve goals in better seed that was impossible before. 6) People are too poorly educated to understand modern crop science so we rely on our crop scientists to get the seed we desperately need. 7) People have stopped the bogus lawsuits because we learned it was a scam made possible by a huge bribe of organic lobby money delivered to the IARC. I can keep going on with this list to show you why people are embracing GMOs due to all their advantages. But hey, farmers have the right to fail so there is no pressure. I'm glad for the new perfect plant based replacements for meats like beef, this is a sustainable move we have to make.

[@ShadyNasties]

The WHO did NOT rule that glyphosate was carcinogenic. The IARC did and that study is heavily disputed. Check out forbes “IARCs glyphosate gate scandal” by Geoffrey Kabat Hopefully you will correct your mistake. Thank you for a good video.

[@popeyegordon]

Organic farmers sent a $160,000 cash bribe to the IARC through a corrupt USRTK lawyer to get them to make the low cancer risk statement about glyphosate. It was the cornerstone of all these shyster lawyer Roundup lawsuits but now that Congress has cut off its $2mill annual finding to the IARC they are in deep doodoo. Five citations for proof: geneticliteracyproject.org/glp-facts/iarc-international-agency-research-cancer-glyphosate-determination-world-consensus/ geneticliteracyproject.org/2018/08/06/congressional-committee-cuts-funding-to-iarc-over-who-agencys-controversial-glyphosate-cancer-finding/ www.acsh.org/news/2017/10/24/glyphosate-gate-iarcs-scientific-fraud-12014 risk-monger.com/2017/10/13/greed-lies-and-glyphosate-the-portier-papers/ www.cameronjenglish.net/single-post/2017/10/22/Episode-18-Exposing-corruption-secrecy-on-IARC-glyphosate-panel-Jon-Entine

[@ShadyNasties]

@@popeyegordon Thank you :)

[@TheQueenofNeckbeards]

Can't even begin to say how stupidly excited I got when I found out about this new channel! The super-detailed video style of Real Engineering covering more topics in biology is a dream come true.

[@vikingeyes772]

That was the best video on gmos. I really appreciate this as a producer

[@AG-mt3xs]

The potato famine might have been caused by the blight, but the Brits starved the Irish by taking all of their meat and corn crops in exports.

[@hendrixschneider1224]

loved the way this topic was approached, here are subscription and all the best wishes for this channel, keep up the great work!

[@kierancalder8573]

She sounds like a Female version of the guy from Real Engineering

[@YounesLayachi]

Absolutely not

[@augurelite]

Im so glad you talked about both the good and the bad. Im very pro GMO but its good to understand the arguments against it so I can have discussions about it without my bias of thinking the technology is perfect lol

[@popeyegordon]

The technology is virtually perfect. No seed technology is 100% perfect, if it was all crop scientists would be out of a job.

[@conradmbugua9098]

GMO is bad

[@lrn_news9171]

Are you pro GMO corn and soy as they're currently grown? which is in almost everything you buy at the grocery store. If so you're very ignorant.

[@shyamalagowri9992]

@@popeyegordontrue

[@tobyihli9470]

I never understood how so many people would allow themselves to be convinced of something so stupid as believing GMOs are harmful.

[@DukeGMOLOL]

Happens with every new technology. That's ok, I love progress and the screaming of those it leaves behind.

[@popeyegordon]

*People Strongly Against GMOs Had Shakier Understanding Of Food Science, Study Finds* Jan 26, 2019 "People who most intensely oppose genetically modified food think they know a lot about food science, but they actually know the least, according to a peer-reviewed paper published in January in the journal Nature Human Behaviour. GMOs are widely considered safe by scientists, but opponents have said they want more science on the potential harm so that subjective arguments aren't part of the equation. However, previous surveys have shown that providing more scientific facts about GMOs to people doesn't change their minds. The survey, conducted by four universities, asked 2,000 people in Europe and the United States how much they knew about genetically modified food, what their opinion was and how intense it was." Read the full coverage at: www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2019/01/26/687852367/people-strongly-against-gmos-had-shakier-understanding-of-food-science-study-fin The original peer reviewed study is here: www.harvestpublicmedia.org/post/study-people-opposed-gmos-don-t-know-much-about-science-they-think

[@ingridplata2411]

Thank you for this. I could never understand why people would worsen others' lives by destroying Golden Rice fields because they are worried about Monsanto which has nothing to do with it.

[@mac9927]

Depending on how you look at it, humans have been eating GMOs for thousands of years. Selective breeding is a form of genetic modification and we have selectively breed traits into our crops since the rise of agriculture. GMOs are just a modern version of this process. While there are definitely some unknowns and as this video says, it can be abused, but at the end of the day this is just another step in human development. People are just scared of things they don’t understand.

[@boxinghighlight7061]

I actually believe they are trying to kill us off there has been a study on hamsters that were given geneticly modified food and after the 3rd generation they were no longer able to reproduce

[@mac9927]

@@boxinghighlight7061 show me the study Lmaooo, and are hamsters humans? There are hundreds of studies with real science that show the gmos are beneficial.

[@boxinghighlight7061]

@@mac9927 it was a Russian experiment but there was another study in Hawaii on rats and it said it gave the rats diseases like cancer and other illnesses that was actually reported in the n.y times I’ll link it too you when I find it

[@mac9927]

@@boxinghighlight7061 have you ever heard of confirmation bias? When looking to prove yourself right one tends to research specific information that can help their argument regardless of where that info comes from. Once that info is found one will use it to dismiss the data that they don’t agree with and use their unsubstantiated “studies” as irrefutable proof. However, with real science and research, Studies need to be substantiated, pier reviewed, and go through a lot more scrutiny. I HIGHLY recommend that you learn how to conduct your own proper research so you don’t continue to spread pseudoscience and incorrect information. If you would like I can recommend a few reliable scientific journals.

[@boxinghighlight7061]

@@mac9927 ny times are a reputable source I don’t believe in everything they say but food that doesn’t brown or bruise could Lead me to believe they might contain some plastic

[@icedcoffee8561]

they spraying huge amounts of fungicide, or pesticide on potatoes? At first you say the potatoes were sprayed with fungicide, but then say the gmo ones don't need pesticide? I was under the impression most gmo food used pesticide like glyphosate

[@popeyegordon]

There are many different crop pests. GMOs can increase resistance to insects, fungus, drought, floods and more. Many GMO crops do not need glyphosate, it depends on the weeds in each area. GMOs can be resistant to borer worm pests and that has reduced the total annual use of pesticides in the US by 37%. That resistance is accomplished with the genes from the bacteria called BT. Organic farmers used BT spray for over 70 years, it is not a chemical, it is from a protein molecule in a commonly found bacteria in soils. BT is harmless to humans. BT GMO stops borer worms without chemical sprays.

[@harleytutor]

On the topic of GMOs, the benefits far outweigh the drawbacks. just about everything you eat has been genetically modified throughout the millennia. Hell, aren't "natural" tomatoes poisonous? Non GMO bananas are seeded, natural corn is bitter, the animals we harvest have been genetically modified to produce more of some something. we have been living with GMOs for centuries. why all the hub bub now? also, on the topic of herbicides, I thought glyphosate worked by destroying a specific part of the plant that humans and animals don't have. On the Bayer website it states, "According to a US News article the Environmental Protection Agency has again reached conclusions that support the long-standing record of safe use for glyphosate, the main active ingredient in many Roundup brand weed killers. The article notes that glyphosate does not (DOES NOT) cause cancer or pose a public health risk when proper application procedures (PROPER APPLICATION PROCEDURES) are followed". In other words, if you don't follow the instructions when you apply the chemical, it can harm you. Bleach is used to purify your water. that doesn't mean go drink bleach. hundreds of millions of people use round up or eat plants that have been sprayed with roundup. if roundup is such a dangerous carcinogen, why are they having such a hard time proving it's harmfulness. especially when hundreds of millions use it.

[@AnonMedic]

You're completely wrong on so many levels. No we have not been eating genetically modified foods for centuries.

[@dariusattebrant7354]

/^\inutemen/^\edia I believe his point was to draw a parallel between selective breeding and gmo:s, in the sense that genetical engineering is just a sped up version of selective breeding, which has been going on at least since the agricultural revolution.

[@harleytutor]

Darius Attebrant you are correct sir. Selective breeding, genetic modification. Same thing with a few differences.

[@harleytutor]

By selectively breeding plants and animals. You are taking the genes from those organisms and produce more ideal offspring. A primitive way of genetically modifying. Granted doing it this way you have to take the bad with the good as well and hope you can breed the negative genes out later on. You dog has been genetically modified by selective breeding over thousands of years.

[@AnonMedic]

@@harleytutor huge difference. Selective breeding uses natural codes already existing in that organisms gene pool. genetic engineering takes code from another organism and mixes it with code from a different organism. That is playing God with the building blocks of life. We are what we eat, and you'd have to be naive to argue genetic technology is 100% safe. What if I bred a plant with an enzyme that attacks the reproductive organ of whoever eats that plant? Then i sent that plant to counties that opposed my companies will to reduce their population. The technology is real. But just like a gun it's only technology. I can be used for good or bad. Sometimes the good intentions have unintended consequences. This Gene editing technology affects everyone on earth, and cannot be undone once the gene edits are circulating on the planet. So we need to think and discuss the good and bad uses. And be proactive in regulation, because being reactivate with Pandora's box is a bad idea. There is a guy in Oakland California trying to sell homemade human gene editing kits. After some conversation on Instagram, is only concern seems to be capitalizing on his gene editing skills and knowledge. He seems completely unconcerned with potential consequences. Now I don't care if he alters his muscular DNA. That edit dies with him. I'm more concerned about embryo editing, or editing your reproductive DNA, and back to food..as i said the concern should be weaponization of gene edits, and maybe more than that, the unintended consequences.

[@Chuppydu21]

No mention to the potential harm for biodiversity regarding to the use of GMO's. When you create a plant that can create it's own pesticide, the question is not only how the human will interact with the pesticide in question but also how the ecosystem will interact with it. You don't talk about the potential harm that plant produced pesticide can have on insect like worms or polinator wich are essential to a healthy culture. No mention also to the potential selection pressure that GMO's crops can represent on a population of insect wich can lead to the creation of a toxin-resistant specie, a bit like what's happening with antibiotics. And no mention of the interaction GMO's crops can have with crops outside the fiels and the potential crossings wich can result in the apparition of new traits on species present in nature. I'm not for or against GMO's but if you do a video titled "The Truth About GMOs" you better be factul when showing both side off the debate rather thant just saying "peaple are scared for no reason" and "not doing this would be killing malnourished children" because if the debate is so still, it's because the effects of GMO's in long terms are still unsure and need to be tackeled with more engeneering to avoid the problems mentionned below(cf:2016 report of academy of science of Americam). So again good video on the form but not fair enouth for me I' m open for debate ps: IEnglish is my 2nd language so typo's are certainly present

[@jojoAW101]

thanks man

[@Pyromanemouse]

The point you miss is that not using gmo in most cases translate to the use of roundup or other chem, which could also lead to adaptation. Also using a few types of gmo could easily counter the issue as long as you don’t use one locally too long. They are plenty of possibilities with this tech and we can just stop using it at any point which would reverse any adaptation/ mutation of parasites, as this mutation would now be useless. (English 3rd language)

[@Chuppydu21]

@@Pyromanemouse Yeah as I said I was not trying support or incriminate the GMOs just to point the lack of fair representation in the video.

[@seanhubbard6033]

Why would pesticide effects of the GMOs be any more concerning that the effects of all the pesticides used on conventional produce?

[@popeyegordon]

Watch our for that natural pesticide that is also used to make tear gas - 3 billion people savor hot peppers. PERSPECTIVE, DUDE! The 'negative side' is a bunch of made up propaganda from organic farming lobbyists. The NAS study does not find any concerns with GMO foods. In fact it ended the GMO safety debate forever: allianceforscience.cornell.edu/blog/2016/05/gmo-safety-debate-is-over/

[@adamhannath1417]

Thanks for the open, balanced analysis. I hope it reaches beyond the choir.

[@kennethjose7159]

This is balanced for you? Huh

[@trevorcrowe7571]

Increased glysophate yes, but what did it replace over time? I recall much worse chemicals.

[@popeyegordon]

Thank goodness FDA and EPA testing of foods no longer finds dangerous levels of Atrazine, paraquat, DDT, fludioxonil, metolaclor, acephate and diazinon. Now they find minute traces of the least toxic herbicide ever formulated, glyphosate, which is 43% less toxic than table salt, and Bt, so non-toxic that organic farmers rely on it heavily. WHAT A DRAMATIC IMPROVEMENT!!!! Anti-GMO idiots claim they want to go back to that nightmare list of much more toxic pesticides. Why???? I can't imagine. geneticliteracyproject.org/2019/05/01/viewpoint-why-grow-gmo-crops-because-they-cut-pesticide-use-37/

[@moayadbassam]

Great video! Looking forward to more videos on the new channel.

[@Russell12345789]

This was fantastic! Excellently written and narrated!

[@abval001]

Great video! Though I would have loved to see a discussion on GMO's effect on biodiversity

[@popeyegordon]

All human activity affects biodiversity. All farming is invasive to nature. ---------------------------- *AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH* -------------------------------- Don’t buy organic food if you want to increase farm yields or seriously address climate change "As we approach the 2020s, many consumers have accepted the marketing/activist narrative that organic farming would be the best option for food safety and to mitigate the most damaging effects of climate change. The inconvenient truth is that organic farming is a terrible option from a climate change perspective. Its dependence on manures and compost involves huge, but rarely recognized, greenhouse gas emissions in the form of very potent methane and nitrous oxide. But perhaps its biggest climate change issue is that organic farms are mostly less productive per unit area than “conventionally” farmed land. With rising food demand driven mostly by rising standards of living in the developing world, there is a need to boost farm production, and that means the very undesirable conversion of forests or grasslands to agriculture in places like Brazil. That leads to major carbon dioxide release from what had been sequestered carbon in the soils, and also the loss of biodiversity and other environmental services provided by those natural lands. In 1990, the USDA (US Department of Agriculture) was charged by Congress with establishing a national organic standard to supersede the fragmented certification systems that had evolved to that time. It was a major struggle because the very science-oriented USDA was at odds with the early organic marketers who had focused entirely on the narrative that what is “natural” is always best. The marketers finally prevailed. When the national organic standards were issued in 2002, they were not based on science but rather on the naturalistic fallacy. So here is the big picture. The only crop category for which organic yields were higher than the 2016 US average was for forage crops for feeding animals. To have produced all of the US agricultural output from 2016 as organic would have required more than 100 million more acres to have been farmed-an area greater than that of the entire state of California, the third largest US state. That amount of new land suitable for farming clearly does not exist in the US, and so that shortfall would induce more conversion of forest and grassland into farming in places like Brazil, leading to major releases of previously sequestered carbon in those soils" This informative article goes on to use eleven charts and graphs from government data to prove in great detail just how inferior organic farming is. geneticliteracyproject.org/2019/10/07/viewpoint-dont-buy-organic-food-if-you-want-to-seriously-address-climate-change/

[@Illumas]

This is literally the only balanced video/information I've ever seen on GMOs. Good job.

[@popeyegordon]

Then you have not done a search. 3 educational factual YT videos on GMOs have 1 to 3 million views.

[@tpfrk8977]

It’s shocking how ignorant people are when it comes to the believing that gmo’s are harmful

[@RyanTaylor2000]

Todd P people that are anti-GMO essentially same as the anti-vacs, but more people oppose GMO because it’s easier to lose crops than their loved ones because simply not everyone is farmer. Sadly

[@tpfrk8977]

Ryan Taylor Yes.. and how they are willing to dislike it despite having such little understanding of what it is or how it works... Someone said it’s bad, therefore it is. They don’t understand that their own dog is far more genetically engineered than most of the plants that they are consuming.

[@jayyyzeee6409]

Mistakes were made in the past and corporations aren't getting any less greedy and immoral. Calling people ignorant for being skeptical when trust in governments and corporations is at an all-time low for good reason is just lazy.

[@tpfrk8977]

Jayyy Zeee Mistakes with GMO’s?? Which mistake are you referring to?They are generally just swapping out one gene most of the time for a very specific trait. The use of pesticides and herbicides is a far larger concern to me.

[@currentriver4951]

@@tpfrk8977 you do understand some GMOs make their own pesticides , which you would be eating.

[@ewerybody]

Super nice video! 👍 I really like the science behind some of this GMO stuff! But the corporate business crap that's been done with it drag it in the dirt. Thats an utter shame for the scientists behind it all. Truly this is one of the stepstones for providing everyone with food. ... but ... Well, if they summon an army of lawyers to sue farmers that have their fields next to GMO ones where plants started to spread by wind or if they fight a huge group of people that try to get compensation for their cancer problems or lobby their way up the behinds of our politicians to suppress studies and labeling: I'm with the ones with the forks and torches! This science should be used to free the poor and hungry and not to make them dependent on the richest that just get richer.

[@popeyegordon]

Stop repeating nasty conspiracy theories fed to you by the organic foods cartel activists. There is no corporate bogeyman. More than half of all GMO seeds being used today (by variety, not tonnage) are not for or from US agribusiness. They are for specific applications in many different parts of the world where climate change is causing additional challenges. Most of them are not patented. Most of them are given away free to struggling farmers by NGOs and govt seed programs: kzbin.info/www/bejne/pHardqdra9xjhrc

[@popeyegordon]

The science IS primarily being used to help the poorest farmers. You can't prove otherwise. Lawsuits about drifting or stray seeds are a myth, only 11 lawsuits have been prosecuted in the North American continent in the last 30 years with proven criminal intent by farmers: geneticliteracyproject.org/2018/06/01/dissecting-claims-about-monsanto-suing-farmers-for-accidentally-planting-patented-seeds/

[@ntmn8444]

That’s why a lot of people have issues with eating GMO. I’m one of them. I’m concerned with the ethics around it. Call me crazy, but ever since I came back to the Catholic Church 2 years ago, I just find myself questioning things that are billed as good for humanity. Is it? Because we have a way of effing things up. I’m not entirely convinced GMOs are humanity’s gift to the world. What about the ecosystem and its impact to it? What about the business around it? I think the EU did well in banning them.

[@cabo1656]

@@ntmn8444 There are some environmental concerns to GMOs, like the the gene mixing with non-GMO crops(but current papers and studies show not real impact on the real world). The real problem is the Monsanto pestecide-resistance GMO, which how the video states, the overuse of pesticide is the dangerous carcigenous element there(also, reminder that Monsanto is responsible for similar practices like that, many years before GMOs were involved). So yeah, as always, we should heavily regulate sckethy and all companies that use GMOs, or on anyone that produce food, because there containment and poisons(like pesticides) that we actually know and have evidence that kills people. It's true that the narrative that GMOs are the saviors of the planet is kinda over dramatic and understand if it turn you off from that. But it does have more than some true, it's not only in theory that we can modified plants to survive on extreme conditions, some already have been already be done, of course they require of years of research and testing to reach markets to assure safety and that they work properly. It's undeniable the inmense potential of bioengineering, having already clear and successful cases, on times that will get harder with climate change, not using GMOs would be on my opinion foolish. It will not be the final solution on malnutrition, growing crops on climate change, overuse pesticides, etc. Because are big and complex problems, but it should be clear that GMOs can be a big part on the solutions. There is not other technology where is that obvious how much it can help on its own and in conjunction with others(the vertical crops idea becomes much more viable with GMOs). I guess I should state my possible bias saying I did studied Bioengineering for a few years at university, and thou I'm not in that area anymore, I do try to keep up reading some papers once in a while.

[@hahna77]

@@ntmn8444 you need to be questioning the Catholic Church since their lies the true deception. If you pray in sincerity for Jesus to show you truth in His Word, He will I promise you.

[@thewindowsexperience489]

More people need to watch not just this video, but this channel.

[@pretzel2722]

This technology can revolutionize agriculture, have the potential to become one of the most powerful tool to fight climate change, world hunger and dieseases and yet people rejected it just because they think that "genetic modification" is always bad

[@popeyegordon]

That era is almost over. There are now more GM crops overseas than there are in the US. Cultivation bans have been dropping fast. Most are created by experts in their own countries and many of those seeds are given away free. They are more interested in the Bt trait and drought resistance than herbicide resistance. The 30 year long Golden Rice project is also maturing despite the best efforts of anti-biotech activists.

[@charlessarver1637]

I'm all for gmo's. Let's save lives and eliminate superstition

[@adamburling9551]

Uh. Superstition has nothing to do with it.

[@charlessarver1637]

@@adamburling9551 uh superstition does have everything to do with it

[@selman7753]

I love her voice it's so natural yet still easy to understand even for people whose first language isn't English

[@JW-hh4qg]

Just a comment for the KZbin algorithm. Here are some extra words in case that makes a difference.

[@MrDerpdog]

Jeremy Walker agreed. KZbin is a trash pile nowadays but channels like these are why i keep using the website.

[@markhasenour12]

I'm a farmer and we also use glyphosate to grow non GMO...

[@_DarkKnight2301_]

That's a sub for me. High quality and well researched videos are a beautiful sight to see. Glad this channel is doing great like Mr. Engineering guy

[@gorge.1155]

Great first video, informational and laid back

[@chikinnunget5231]

Huh very laid back HUUUUHHH Lol nice comment tho

[@inpursuitofgoodness4205]

What a balanced view!

[@MrPinguinzz]

how many new technologies need to be created to people understand that no new technology is neither good or bad by itself? the way it is used matters so much more

[@alrightydave]

Interesting. Even as a fan of educational stuff on KZbin, when I saw this channel I thought it was gonna be a bit too nerdy for me but guess I was wrong but this stuff is just as good as Real Engineering!

[@day2148]

I feel like the next time someone tells me "GMOs are bad". I should ask them "Is fire evil?" And if they replies: "it depends"... well, why not use the same logic on GMOs?

[@mommytime454]

You need to stop believing the lies monsanto tells you, first and foremost they are A company that produces Poisons, secondly, they have now merged with Bayer pharmaceuticals. Thirdly there are people that have worked for monsanto that now are now working for the FDA (positions to change regulations) And fourthly these genetically modified plants are dowsed with glyphosates, which have, in a court of law been attributed to The cause of non-hodgekins Lymphoma, for starters. If you really do some research there have been some independent studies which leads to the same conclusions. Studies where 3 groups of rats were fed genetically modified corn..(BT-CORN) that had been sprayed with Round-up Glyphosate. There were 3 different groups , One Group consumed organic corn, NONGMO, No pestisdes or herbicides used in the growth. The 2nd group Consumed also non GMO corn but had herbicides and pesticides sprayed on it, Not glyphosate. The 3rd group of rats consumed the genetically modified BT corn that was sprayed with glyphosates. The Rats who consumed The organic corn had no symptoms whatsoever, The 2nd group of rats who consumed the Corn sprayed with herbicides and pesticides had some symptoms but the 3rd Group of the Genetically modified BT corn sprayed with glyphosate Became extremely Sick With cancerous tumors, digestive track shut down, and the female rats became infertile. These independent study groups were attacked by monsanto and discredited. There is tons of information out there from people trying to expose the evil of these companies if you're too lazy to look and research that's your problem don't believe everything you see from the main stream media and these big Tech corporations, they only want to make money and they don't care at what cost. We are being used as Guinea pigs and I don't know how old you are but if you're 40,50,or 60 you will have noticed the decline in the health of people worldwide, since they we're Introduced into the agricultural system, From when you were a child. Open your eyes and have an open mind to receive new informarion from independent studies who are researching for health safety rather than listening to the companies that are killing us for a prophet who also are Eugenisists, who believe that the population needs to go into a decline. I don't need a study to follow because I am living proof of what this food does to your body I was sick for 4 1/2 years going to a Gastro entomologist with every symptom that you can think of from top to bottom I was put out all kinds of pills sent for many different tests, Multiple times. With no conclusive diagnosis . the pills I was taking for 4 and a 1/2 years to combat the acid reflux had a warning on it that said do not take from more than 6 months when I questioned the doctor I was told that the benefits outweigh the risk one of the warnings on that pamphlet for those proton pump inhibitor was a warning to possible cancer of kidney and liver diseases. I now have issues with my liver thanks to taking those pills when I ask the doctor about Leaky gut syndrome, He looked at me like I was speaking another language and told me to just do as he said After researching for a long time I found my own answers and that's that glyphosate is known to cause Microscopic holes in the membrane of the digestive track leaking stomach acids and undigested foods into the gut cavity and killing key gut flora that is the building blocks and warrior fighing bacteria in our immune system.

[@taktsing4969]

The best way to stop something from happening is to spread fear and rumor among ignorant persons. Ingorance speaks louder than scientific evidence.

[@josephhargrove4319]

Like the old adage (said in so many words in various cultures - I know it from Yiddish culture): "A lie will run around the world before the truth gets its boots on." richard -- MAGPIE, n. A bird whose thievish disposition suggested to someone that it might be taught to talk. -Ambrose Bierce, writer (1842-1914)

[@analogdistortion]

Another problem with GM is that Monsanto sells all the seeds which are all clones of the same crop leading to no natural resistance to an insect infestation from genetic diversity.

[@davidadcock3382]

Your post is false. Monsanto was bought out three years ago and does not exist. The seeds are not clones of the same crop. You are clueless about this subject analogdistortion.

[@popeyegordon]

There can't be 'another' problem because there is not even one to begin with you idiot. Monsanto is gone, shut down 3 years ago. GMO seed is not 'cloned'. It is tested for years before approval and resistance is one of the things improved with superior GMO seeds. Farmers don't want a perfect seed to mutate - it already has all the traits they want. Bt crops are so totally insect resistant that no insecticides are needed at all, a huge advantage for everyone but the organic farmer cult.

[@teedsthereaper6287]

It’s so sad to see how many people don’t understand how these types of technology work and because of that they believe that they are inherently evil

[@davidtuchscherer6276]

overheard an acquaintance saying she wants gmos forbidden (already are in France anyway) because she doesn't want to eat genes.... Mass media disinformation went through there and left a devastated public opinion

[@Arukkao]

Fastest sub of my life. Phenomenal job.

[@noticemejisoo446]

I’m learning gmos in class and this can really help me on my test! Thanks Real Science

[@joanbaczek2575]

iiRoseCrystalii learn the difference between hybrid and gmo cuz she has grouped them all as gmo and it’s misleading

[@carso1500]

@@joanbaczek2575 both are the same, since both are genetically modified organisms that are diferent from the base product

[@JohnSmith-ds7oi]

@@carso1500 Which genes are "modified" in a hybrid?

[@EvlEgle]

Heres the thing, if you are opposed to gmos, you need to stop eating anything that came from a farm. All of our crops are genetically modified from wild plant species.

[@sebastianmuller4649]

Great video! I would love to see a video about Nuclear Power from you; the same irrational fearmongering is going on there as with GMOs, and it too is an important tool against climate change (as well as other forms of pollution).

[@quekumber]

agreed

[@theholypeanut8193]

WHY DOES EVERYONE FEAR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS??? Only Chernobyl and Fukoshima was where accidents happened. Chernobyl because... well, USSR. And Fukoshima because a tsunami. Now nuclear power plants are ABSOLUTELY safe.

[@michaeldepaul7676]

Question: How did they get the genes from blight resistant wild potatoes into the common potatoes? Don't they have to use a recombinant like HEK293?

[@secullenable]

HEK293 is just a cell line dude

[@Edwinthebreadwin]

Oh my god this is well made. Unlike most gmo stuff, well balanced too.

[@Adarsh_Shrivastava24]

I'm a biotechnologist too and i don't think GMOs are bad the are very necessary, as Due to green revolution in India it saved millions of lives in India Thanks to our great scientist HARGOVIND KHURANA.

[@nimbusws5946]

37 dislikes. Must be the irish politicians

[@that_one_who_is8037]

Ireland didn’t have a government at the time of the famine, we weren’t allowed to have one. We hadn’t gained independence yet. We were entirely subjected to the whims of the English government and politicians. It has been recognised that what was committed for those years of famine, was genocide. It’s not a famine if other food still grows, it’s a genocide when food is taken away from you (to be exported) as you starve

[@CoolBreezeAnthony]

This is a great educational video. KUDOS to Real Science. I like.

[@dariodalcin5177]

Please youtube algorithm do one thing wright...

[@BillyBoland]

This is the third video I've watched on this topic. I am thrilled to see the two-sided approach and explanation on GMO foods. Well done on knowledge and presentation.

[@zaneaqo6084]

To put it simply GMO's are modernized products which are safe to consume. 🤝👏👏👏💯✔️💙

[@galadrael]

Come on people, what do you expect from very low prices? People are pushing for cheaper prices all the time, so they are in large part responsible for the insanity of the production system. They closed their eyes for decades perfectly knowing the whole food production apparatus was built lies. And now they wake up and cry wolf because they're gluten intolerant or blessed with Alzheimer? Nonsense! You want good food, you have to recognize that the value of it has to be paid fairly. And it's not cheap! ISBN 978-92-5-105914-2 Read, learn, loose your YT ignorance Pg 3, “19. Risk management measures may include, as appropriate, food labelling8 conditions for marketing approvals and post-market monitoring.” Pg 18, “56: Gene transfer from plants and their food products to gut micro-organisms or human cells is considered a rare possibility because of the many complex and unlikely events that would need to occur consecutively. Nevertheless, the possibility of such events cannot be completely discounted.6” Pg 10, “ 15: Unintended effects can result from the random insertion of DNA sequences into the plant genome, which may cause disruption or silencing of existing genes, activation of silent genes, or modifications in the expression of existing genes. Unintended effects may also result in the formation of new or changed patterns of metabolites. For example, the expression of enzymes at high levels may give rise to secondary biochemical effects or changes in the regulation of metabolic pathways and/or altered levels of metabolites” Pg 16. "46: ….. consideration should be given to the potential impacts on human health using conventional procedures for establishing the safety of such metabolites (e.g. procedures for assessing the human safety of chemicals in foods) .” i.e. Human Safety Studies, YET: None ever.

[@MrSheaonemillion]

'Moral posturing drowning out sensible discussion', sounds exactly like the USA! Isn't it fun?

[@criticaltransmission6643]

Generally Liberals, SJWs and Antifa. People standing on self built moral pulpit, forcing people what not and what should be.

[@markoklincharov3468]

I would recommend checking out Myles Power's channel for more information about RoundUp since he has reviewed studies done on it. One of said studies showed data according to which if you are male and drink RoundUp - you'll live longer...

[@sambishara9300]

How do you drink it though?

[@popeyegordon]

@@sambishara9300 'On the rocks with a twist of weeds'. No, there is no reason to drink weed killer intentionally. Ever. Myles was demonstrating the perversion of facts by cherry picking science studies. We can also say glyphosate cures cancer if we cherry pick the way ignorant hateful activists do: geneticliteracyproject.org/2019/05/21/glyphosate-can-cure-cancer-yes-some-research-shows-that-but-what-does-it-mean-and-what-does-it-say-about-roundup-doomsday-claims/

[@bronzedivision]

To be clear he does not recommend drinking it. He was just pointing out an example of how badly organized the data was in one of the anti-round up studies.

[@markoklincharov3468]

Yes, I do know you shouldn't drink herbicide. I said that to point out that at least that study on glyphosphate was faulty at best.

[@jamestor6700]

I remember a guy who said gmo corn caused cancer and once I looked up the studies I found many flaws, they used roundup weed killer(the study was a few years old so its possible that was what caused the "cancer" I say "cancer" because they never actually confirmed if any of the rats in the study had cancer either. They used rats which were well known for naturally developing growths as they age, the study concluded the GMO corn caused the growths not the types of rats used or the roundup. They also only used about 50 rats or so they also had a very small sample size

[@kleidenwaht]

People who know a lot about GMO's know they're okay while those who are totally ignorant on the subject vehemently oppose them. It's a sad comment on the supposed rationality of humans.

[@DukeGMOLOL]

Right!!

[@RoenbergMusic]

Great video. Gotta say, that calling the topic nuanced is a bit misleading in my opinion. Sure, it's a problem how Roundup might be used so extensively around resistant crops, but it is hardly a problem caused by GMOs. But in any case, using your example from the video, you would never argue whether to have internet or not even though there might exist downsides. The benefits are simply so much greater, that the downsides look ridiculous in comparison. The general consensus should be that it shouldn't even be argued whether to use GMOs or not. It's incredibly sad how ignorance and misinformation causes so much opportunity to go to waste, especially for those in need. Anyways, thanks for making a great and very necessary video. Should have had millions of views really.

[@terrymcmiller3513]

Love this channel here and on nebula. I subscribed yesterday and am loving it! Thanks for your hard and dedicated work, you all! 😊👍 The only thing which needs some more work is the app for android. It is broken 💔

[@realscience]

Thank you! And we are working on it and trying to make things better all the time

[@popeyegordon]

@@realscience Please block the asshole troll 'Jacinta' who posted a very dangerous lie 14 hours previous to your reply here. I am pretty sure you do not want to tolerate this offense on your thread. Thank you.

[@schrodingersdino]

Ireland 👏🏻 One of few countries that maintain it's food healthy at least.

[@italovidigal1990]

The problem is that academia people, myself included, don't reach the people that matters most. Leaving to the journalists to explain the process of delivering the technology such as delivery via agrobacterium. I think every ordinary people would be scared if someone tells them that we edit the genome of plants using plasmids (bacteria DNA) even though they will most likely segregate in subsequent generations. Thank you for the excellent video, i can only hope that it changed someone's mind. Respectfully, Italo.

[@popeyegordon]

This video for kids teaches the basics of GMOs, it has 12 million views. kzbin.info/www/bejne/bYXQlIuPpZ2rq5Y "Though much of the controversy around genetically modified crops is driven by the belief that the process of moving genes from one species to another is “unnatural,” new research shows some 1 in 20 flowering plants are naturally transgenic. Dozens of plants, including bananas, peanuts, Surinam cherries, hops, cranberries and tea, contain the Agrobacterium microbe - the very same bacterium that scientists typically use to create GM crops. The research follows on the heels of the 2015 discovery that sweet potatoes are naturally transgenic. Agrobacterium DNA also has been found in tobacco plants.The findings were reported in a paper published Sept. 21 in the journal Plant Molecular Biology. Researchers studied the genomes of some 356 dicot species and found 15 naturally occurring transgenic species. “Thus, HGT [horizontal gene transfer] from Agrobacterium to dicots is remarkably widespread,” the abstract stated. It has also been discovered that the horticultural process of grafting different plants together can lead to the exchange of genes, meaning humans have inadvertently been creating transgenic plants for millennia. From genome studies, we can see that gene swapping has been going on since the dawn of life. allianceforscience.cornell.edu/blog/2019/10/many-plants-naturally-gmo-research-finds/

[@TimEasterling]

Thank you for providing a look at the argument from both sides. I personally don't oppose GMOs, but I appreciate the information on why others may.

[@joanbaczek2575]

Tim Easterling look into difference between hybrid and gmo cus she thinks they are the same but they are not!!!

[@troyclayton]

Thanks for the video. GMOs have incredible potential, but they can pose problems in implementation. When I was in graduate school working on making GM plants I learned a few things. The people making them, for the most part, have no care about the flow of transgenes from their 'product' to native populations or other grower's fields. This is genetic pollution. It seems that every time humans find some new 'tool' we rush headlong into it without worry for the future ramifications of our actions. I always wanted to talk about ways to control the flow of transgenes and no one understood why. Everyone had some great thing that was too important to take a little time and be careful to not make mistakes that are hard or impossible to undo. 20 years later and still no one cares. Just like how none of them cared 20 years ago when the first samples from heirloom strains of corn in "GMO free" Oxacao, Mexico showed they'd already been 'infected' with transgenes. These plants use WIND POLLINATION. How long until we decide to learn to walk before we run? Seriously.

[@popeyegordon]

You prove there are colleges where they still preach propaganda about GMO which is proven all good by peer reviewed science. There ARE no native populations of corn, soy or alfalfa. There is no actually significant 'genetic pollution' in the real world. The USDA organic standard only requires a 25 foot buffer zone from GMO crops. Mexicans are extremely obsessed with corn, in fact any mixed genes can only enhance their corn positively. If they get some glyphosate resistance in their crop but never actually use glyphosate, nothing changes. If the get some Bt traits in their corn, the worst that can happen is they need LESS OR NO PESTICIDES!! OH THE HORROR!!! GMO corn also prevents deadly aflatoxin infections in corn crops, a life saving trait. Wind pollination for corn has a short travel range measured in feet and inches, not yards. You also talk as though natural selection could be halted by farmers, that is false. 'Genetic pollution' is the organic activist's name for evolution. Nature will always protect itself from inferior mutations and if GMO traits are superior they will enhance our biome. GMO farmers are a tolerant bunch - they don't whine when that inferior organic pollen blows over their fields. If only organic farmers were so friendly and tolerant....

[@troyclayton]

@@popeyegordon Thank you for demonstrating my point. You don't care. Just like people didn't care every other time new technologies were discovered and left following generations to clean up the mess because they were myopic and too obsessed with "more now!" Sad. edit: I learned what I learned by watching the people in my lab and those around me. My research is owned by a biotech corporation. I'm not against GM crops, I'm for being responsible as we enter a new age.

[@popeyegordon]

@@troyclayton I care at an educated level your tiny mind can not comprehend. THERE IS NO FUCKING MESS YOU ASSHOLE!!!! The mess would be a billion corpses from starvation we would have to bury without GMO crop science. You are a filthy liar, no way you got college education in this topic. If you had you'd know this as the first truth: *GMO 20-year safety endorsement: 280 science institutions, more than 3,000 studies* "Currently, there is a social and political controversy about the safety of foods produced from genetically modified (GM) crops. However, in the scientific community, there is no dispute or controversy regarding the safety of these crops. To date, more than 3,000 scientific studies [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8] have assessed the safety of these crops in terms of human health and environmental impact. These studies together with several reviews performed on a case-by-case from regulatory agencies around the world have enabled a solid and clear scientific consensus: GM crops have no more risk than those that have been developed by conventional breeding techniques. In addition, there is also extensive literature that compiles the socioeconomic and environmental benefits that transgenic crops have reported in two decades of commercialization [9,10]. This document brings together the public statements of technical and scientific institutions that adhere to this consensus. I made an update based on this document from ChileBio that initially included 40 official documents representing about 190 institutions - the document from ChileBio was subsequently updated in 2017 with the institutions and statements attached here. The update shows that 284 technical and scientific institutions recognize the safety of GM crops and their potential benefits. Interestingly a large part of these institutions are located in Europe, the continent that has put more obstacles to the commercialization of these crops. On the other hand, the countries with most organizations in favor of GM crops are United Kingdom (33), United States (25), Italy (23), Spain (16) and Germany (11). In conclusion, 284 technical and scientific institutions recognize that GM crops are not riskier than those produced by conventional breeding, and/or the potential benefits of these crops." geneticliteracyproject.org/2017/06/19/gmo-20-year-safety-endorsement-280-science-institutions-more-3000-studies/

[@popeyegordon]

@@troyclayton You are an ignorant hateful liar. If you knew the first thing about crop science you'd know about this stunning list of 9,335 peer reviewed verified published GMO safety studies from hundreds of different sources globally - they all agree and find zero negative issues despite being from a full spectrum of various science sources: www.sciencedirect.com/search?qs=gmo&show=25&sortBy=relevance

[@MeAMoose]

@@popeyegordon Their concerns are valid, and should be addressed as such without the need for hostilities. Anyways back on topic. It's always good to go into something cautiously, it's just good practice. Asking "what ifs" and "how comes" are a good way to get an understanding of the full picture. Troy raises a valid concern, "what if a faulty GMO seed with undesirable traits begins to spread". The simple answer to this would be alot of testing prior to release of a product... so as long as we test each of our GMO crops before release (which is what we currently do anyways), we should be fine.

[@augustcouperthwaite3814]

I really love how this took a science topic and then looked at the social issues around it. It takes something that very science based and gave it a social perspective really just allowing you to see how this issue applies to your own life

[@agaluch]

While correct on GMOs this piece is wrong about glyphosate. Roundup is safe and reduces herbicide use overall. The real problem with all of these technologies is managing resistance so that they remain useful. While the perspective on GMOs presented here is refreshing it needs to be better.

[@popeyegordon]

Pesticide resistance has been a challenge for as long as we have used chemicals. Farmers learned long ago that resistance is controlled by crop and field rotation. It also improves soil quality. Unfortunately the performance of GMO seed is so high that farmers avoid rotating out to lower performance seed.

[@Teaganbear]

The main difference between organic and non-organic food products is that non-organic foods are usually grown with synthetic pesticides & fertilizers. Organic products are not allowed to be grown with synthetic pesticides & fertilizers. I think that's the main difference that I've noticed when comparing how I feel after eating 100% organic meals and non-organic meals. I'm not sure how much it has to do with GMO / genetic modification. It's really trippy stuff though, every time I eat non-organic food I feel shittier mentally and physically. I have no idea why but I imagine it's the synthetic pesticides / fertilizers that my body is having issues with.

[@popeyegordon]

It is not possible to 'Feel' any difference on an organic vs. a GMO diet. That is nonsense and imagined pseudoscience. You suffer from the clean eating mental disorder, a diagnosed illness. geneticliteracyproject.org/2017/09/22/orthorexia-nervosa-anti-gmo-activists-eating-disorder/ geneticliteracyproject.org/2019/07/24/digesting-gmo-and-non-gmo-foods-why-your-body-cant-tell-the-difference/ psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2017/02/18/how-a-healthy-food-obsession-became-an-eating-disorder/

[@popeyegordon]

Organic foods have sickened and killed many people because they contaminate the crops with animal waste. Organic is a scam - *The HUGE list of pesticides and chemicals permitted for organic farming under the USDA Organic Standard is so long it can't be pasted here intact.* Note inclusion of highly toxic copper sulfate, 600+ times more toxic than glyphosate: www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?c=ecfr&SID=9874504b6f1025eb0e6b67cadf9d3b40&rgn=div6&view=text&node=7:3.1.1.9.32.7&idno=7 THE FULL LIST FILLS YOUR SCREEN SIX TIMES AS YOU SCROLL DOWN THROUGH IT!! I condensed the first section of the list by removing spaces between line items but there is another huge list for substances used on farm animals and lists for other uses as well. §205.601 Synthetic substances allowed for use in organic crop production. (a) As algicide, disinfectants, and sanitizer, including irrigation system cleaning systems. (1) Alcohols. (i) Ethanol. (ii) Isopropanol. (2) Chlorine materials-For pre-harvest use, residual chlorine levels in the water in direct crop contact or as water from cleaning irrigation systems applied to soil must not exceed the maximum residual disinfectant limit under the Safe Drinking Water Act, except that chlorine products may be used in edible sprout production according to EPA label directions. (i) Calcium hypochlorite. (ii) Chlorine dioxide. (iii) Sodium hypochlorite. (3) Copper sulfate-for use as an algicide in aquatic rice systems, is limited to one application per field during any 24-month period. Application rates are limited to those which do not increase baseline soil test values for copper over a timeframe agreed upon by the producer and accredited certifying agent. (4) Hydrogen peroxide. (5) Ozone gas-for use as an irrigation system cleaner only. (6) Peracetic acid-for use in disinfecting equipment, seed, and asexually propagated planting material. Also permitted in hydrogen peroxide formulations as allowed in §205.601(a) at concentration of no more than 6% as indicated on the pesticide product label. (7) Soap-based algicide/demossers. (8) Sodium carbonate peroxyhydrate (CAS #-15630-89-4)-Federal law restricts the use of this substance in food crop production to approved food uses identified on the product label. (b) As herbicides, weed barriers, as applicable. (1) Herbicides, soap-based-for use in farmstead maintenance (roadways, ditches, right of ways, building perimeters) and ornamental crops. (2) Mulches. (i) Newspaper or other recycled paper, without glossy or colored inks. (ii) Plastic mulch and covers (petroleum-based other than polyvinyl chloride (PVC)). (iii) Biodegradable biobased mulch film as defined in §205.2. Must be produced without organisms or feedstock derived from excluded methods. (c) As compost feedstocks-Newspapers or other recycled paper, without glossy or colored inks. (d) As animal repellents-Soaps, ammonium-for use as a large animal repellant only, no contact with soil or edible portion of crop. (e) As insecticides (including acaricides or mite control). (1) Ammonium carbonate-for use as bait in insect traps only, no direct contact with crop or soil. (2) Aqueous potassium silicate (CAS #-1312-76-1)-the silica, used in the manufacture of potassium silicate, must be sourced from naturally occurring sand. (3) Boric acid-structural pest control, no direct contact with organic food or crops. (4) Copper sulfate-for use as tadpole shrimp control in aquatic rice production, is limited to one application per field during any 24-month period. Application rates are limited to levels which do not increase baseline soil test values for copper over a timeframe agreed upon by the producer and accredited certifying agent. (5) Elemental sulfur. (6) Lime sulfur-including calcium polysulfide. (7) Oils, horticultural-narrow range oils as dormant, suffocating, and summer oils. (8) Soaps, insecticidal. (9) Sticky traps/barriers. (10) Sucrose octanoate esters (CAS #s-42922-74-7; 58064-47-4)-in accordance with approved labeling. (f) As insect management. Pheromones. (g) As rodenticides. Vitamin D3. (h) As slug or snail bait. Ferric phosphate (CAS # 10045-86-0). (i) As plant disease control. (1) Aqueous potassium silicate (CAS #-1312-76-1)-the silica, used in the manufacture of potassium silicate, must be sourced from naturally occurring sand. (2) Coppers, fixed-copper hydroxide, copper oxide, copper oxychloride, includes products exempted from EPA tolerance, Provided, That, copper-based materials must be used in a manner that minimizes accumulation in the soil and shall not be used as herbicides. (3) Copper sulfate-Substance must be used in a manner that minimizes accumulation of copper in the soil. (4) Hydrated lime. (5) Hydrogen peroxide. (6) Lime sulfur. (7) Oils, horticultural, narrow range oils as dormant, suffocating, and summer oils. (8) Peracetic acid-for use to control fire blight bacteria. Also permitted in hydrogen peroxide formulations as allowed in §205.601(i) at concentration of no more than 6% as indicated on the pesticide product label. (9) Potassium bicarbonate. (10) Elemental sulfur. (j) As plant or soil amendments. (1) Aquatic plant extracts (other than hydrolyzed)-Extraction process is limited to the use of potassium hydroxide or sodium hydroxide; solvent amount used is limited to that amount necessary for extraction. (2) Elemental sulfur. (3) Humic acids-naturally occurring deposits, water and alkali extracts only. (4) Lignin sulfonate-chelating agent, dust suppressant. (5) Magnesium sulfate-allowed with a documented soil deficiency. (6) Micronutrients-not to be used as a defoliant, herbicide, or desiccant. Those made from nitrates or chlorides are not allowed. Soil deficiency must be documented by testing. (i) Soluble boron products. (ii) Sulfates, carbonates, oxides, or silicates of zinc, copper, iron, manganese, molybdenum, selenium, and cobalt. (7) Liquid fish products-can be pH adjusted with sulfuric, citric or phosphoric acid. The amount of acid used shall not exceed the minimum needed to lower the pH to 3.5. (8) Vitamins, B1, C, and E. (9) Sulfurous acid (CAS # 7782-99-2) for on-farm generation of substance utilizing 99% purity elemental sulfur per paragraph (j)(2) of this section. (k) As plant growth regulators. Ethylene gas-for regulation of pineapple flowering. (l) As floating agents in postharvest handling. Sodium silicate-for tree fruit and fiber processing. (m) As synthetic inert ingredients as classified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), for use with nonsynthetic substances or synthetic substances listed in this section and used as an active pesticide ingredient in accordance with any limitations on the use of such substances. (1) EPA List 4-Inerts of Minimal Concern. (2) EPA List 3-Inerts of unknown toxicity-for use only in passive pheromone dispensers. (n) Seed preparations. Hydrogen chloride (CAS # 7647-01-0)-for delinting cotton seed for planting. (o) As production aids. Microcrystalline cheesewax (CAS #'s 64742-42-3, 8009-03-08, and 8002-74-2)-for use in log grown mushroom production. Must be made without either ethylene-propylene co-polymer or synthetic colors.

[@popeyegordon]

Organic farming uses proven carcinogenic pesticides: ascienceenthusiast.com/organic-crops-use-carcinogenic-pesticides/

[@Teaganbear]

@@popeyegordon www.nongmoproject.org/high-risk/synthetic-biology/ Synthetic biology, often called synbio, is an emerging application of genetic modification that involves the practice of changing an organism such as yeast or algae so that it makes a substance it is not able to make naturally. The process requires artificially created DNA that mimics naturally occurring DNA in other organisms. A number of substances produced by synthetic biology are currently being used in consumer products, including food, cosmetics, fragrances, pharmaceutical products, detergents and soaps. Because synthetic biology is so new, no legal framework exists to regulate it. Advocates for synthetic biology claim that its products are “just like” the naturally occurring products. This is scientifically questionable because the synbio product is NOT exactly the same as the product derived from natural sources. The products of synthetic biology are produced with genetic engineering that creates DNA not found in nature. The Non-GMO Project has no evidence based on testing that synbio products are safe. Until these products have been demonstrated to be safe, the Non-GMO Project has applied the precautionary principle and has zero tolerance for synbio ingredients in its standard.

[@Teaganbear]

@@popeyegordon Gordon I'm not trying to spread misinformation or disagree with modern science but I legitimately am having problems every time I eat food that isn't organic / non-GMO and I'm trying to share that with others so that I can figure out why. I get that you don't believe me, but it's what's happening and there's really no point in telling me it's all in my head, because I'd be totally down to eat normal food if it didn't make me feel weird and shitty. I don't expect me explaining this to make any sense to you though, I get you're on a warpath mission to attack and insult anyone who disagrees with you and has questions / concerns relating to this topic.

[@richardstevens3478]

GMOs are safe

[@sylviabriggs4087]

Lol

[@dustmight2546]

Eat what makes you feel best

[@popeyegordon]

That is a foolish admission that you believe in pseudoscience. You have no factual refutations to my truths so you desperately resort to personal attacks. Whether I am the most healthy person on Earth, or dying from cancer, my verifiable citations and peer reviewed studies are the same. There are extremely few GMO foods you can buy in markets but they are fully tested and required by federal law to be identical in nutrition. Our bodies can not tell the difference: geneticliteracyproject.org/2019/07/24/digesting-gmo-and-non-gmo-foods-why-your-body-cant-tell-the-difference/

[@dustmight2546]

@@popeyegordon This isn't about you. This is about people listening to their bodies. It's sad that you don't understand that.

[@popeyegordon]

@@dustmight2546 All readers can clearly see I have never posted a single word "about me". I have been selfless in defending truth and science. The human body can not know if or when it has eaten foods raised by any specific breeding method. And make no mistake, GMO is strictly a breeding method and never an actual ingredient any more than seed selection, hybridization or grafting is an ingredient. You are a science illiterate fool who mistakes woo, pseudoscience and organic farming industry propaganda for reality.

[@dustmight2546]

@@popeyegordon tell that to my body then because i feel like garbage after eating non-organic foods. my body can tell the difference. i've tested this over and over.

[@popeyegordon]

@@dustmight2546 No. Tell your own mind that you suffer from psychosomatic delusions. You can continue to live in willful ignorance but all readers who see my devastating citations about your clean eating disorder are laughing their asses off at your ignorance.

[@earthman4222]

I have some GMO salt that I use all the time. I had to write it on my salt shaker because there are so many salt shakers with "non-GMO" on the label. I am still waiting for someone to sequence the DNA of salt.