Jump to content
  • Sign Up
bartfull

Maybe It Is Gmo's Causing Problem

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

I heard this on the radio this morning. I thought the problem with GMO's was that they could drench the plant with pesticides and herbicides which would undoubtedly get sucked up by the roots and become part of the plants. I still think that could be the problem, but this article states that GMO's have a certain PROTEIN that regular plants don't have, and of course if celiac's react to the proteins in wheat, maybe we corn intolerant folks are reacting to these "new" proteins in corn.

 

Also, I said the other day that I didn't think there WAS such a thing as non-GMO corn (or soy) in this country. Looks like I was right. .09 percent is considered non GMO because that's as low as they can get.

 

 

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2014/02/04/269479079/how-american-food-companies-go-gmo-free-in-a-gmo-world

 

Truckloads of corn arrive here and stop at the "scale house," where they're weighed. A remote-controlled steel probe dives into each load and sucks out some grain for testing.

That's all standard at any corn handling facility. But at this processing plant, operated by Clarkson Grain, there's one more test: a quick, five-minute check to see if this corn contains specific proteins that are the signature of genetic modification.

Farmers have embraced these novel proteins; they protect a growing cornstalk from some insects, or weedkillers. So, at almost any corn processing facility in America, this test would come up positive.

 

 

Also, because corn pollen blows in the wind, he has to make sure his non-GMO fields of corn are a hundred feet from any GMO corn fields.

The separation doesn't always work perfectly. But Lynn Clarkson says the food industry is pragmatic; companies know that they have to tolerate small traces of GMOs. "It always comes down to: How do you define GMO-free?" he says. "What's the tolerance level? If it's zero, we might as well have a drink and part friendly, because we can't do business. We cannot hit a zero standard."

People just need to know, he says, that in the U.S., "GMO-free" means that something contains no more than 0.9 percent GMOs.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as long as Monsanto doesn't find out that the non-GMO field ended up with one of their patented seeds in it... (don't get me started...)

 

Anyway, the jury is still out on the health effects of GMOs, but I only buy non-GMO corn products where I can manage it. I am against the huge agri-business companies (ie: Monsanto) and their practices. If farmers want to use their seeds, fine, but they shouldn't have to pay through the nose to use them, have to re-buy the entire stock next year instead of just reusing seeds, and you know, lawsuits if something grows where it shouldn't...

 

Not sure if you should be trying any corn, but if you do decide to challenge it, I'd get something non-GMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't have GMO Corn in my country and it's still hard to digest.. That's just the nature of corn I'm afraid. I'm quite sure everyone with a leaky gut or hypersensitivity has built up enough problems that they will probably never fully recover to the point of being able to eat everything a more hardy person can. I was getting pretty over eating almost nothing and weighed only 55kg last year. Now I just take my mast cell stabilisers and antihistamines and get on with my life. So long as I take the mast cell stabiliser I can eat anything without any gut issues at all and my digestion is now perfect (and I've gained 11 kg over the last year). I figure at some point my gut will get thick enough that I can cure myself with weight gain :P lol. Life's much easier when you can eat Chocolate without getting sick :rolleyes:  

 

I still don't eat grains other than Rice but I could if I wanted to, well everything other than Gluten containing grains would be OK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea no corn here! Gmo or non! Absolutely! I don't know why the U.S. Still lets GMO in the U.S. I know it's all about the almighty dollar. But We The People don't want it! Ask the presidents wife if she wants to eat GMO.... I bet that would be a big NO ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been doing a lot of research about GMO foods recently and am fascinated by the long term effects of consuming those altered foods over the course of our lives and even generations. I'd love to see a side by side comparison of the plants protein breakdown and how those slight changes might be processed differently in our guts as a whole. Does anyone know of some good non/GMO research and or resources available online? Naturally, given the topic, most of what I read is terribly bias and not quite as scientifically thorough as I'd like.

 

As far as corn goes for me... When at university I lived off of greens, rice, corn tortillas (as my bread), and lucky for me peanut butter mostly because they were cheap, though I did have to splurge on a good peanut butter. My school was in a small town (with no health food store) and the cafeteria food was the kind that listed fish as the vegetarian option... you gotta love them for trying;) As you might imagine I did not have a lot of physical or mental energy during those times, but since then I've really worked hard to master cooking and eating great with my food restrictions!

 

As far as corn goes, I mostly just stay away. 

 

These days when I do eat corn, it's usually in the form of  polenta or cornbread and always organic and Non-GMO (as well as Gluten free, dairy free, and egg free... You all know the drill). I do notice a difference in digestion and over all feeling with the Non-GMO corn vs GMO/or not specified.

Edited by srisrael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a PhD student in molecular bio so if I could just clear the air about GMO's and make sure everyone's on the same page here!  Humans have been breeding together various strains of crops for hundreds of years to obtain more desirable characteristics.  Say you want a shorter wheat stalk with the same taste as the current one, you cross various dwarf wheat with your current wheat until you are at the desired height and taste (this actually happened).  The result is a wheat crop with genes from multiple different sources.  The new wheat crop has the genes to make it shorter than the original as well as a whole bunch of other genes that were unintentionally transferred.  Modern wheat has many extra gluten proteins that didn't exist in either of its parent wheat strains which is one theory as to why so many people are being diagnosed as having celiac or nonceliac gluten intolerance.  This wheat is technically considered non-GMO despite the fact that its DNA is extensively altered.  

 

That brings me around to GMO's themselves.  GMO's allow companies to move JUST the desired genes to make a new version of a crop.  To me, GMO's are safer than conventional hybrids because you're changing only what you want to change instead of unintentionally changing lots of things.  Personally, I don't agree with the tactics used by Monsanto, but GMO's are not the evil that they are made out to be. 

 

For a non-crop example, I'll use dogs.  We've got a large number of dog breeds that are all shapes and sizes but they're all considered dogs.  Say you want a Chihuahua with the floppy ears of a Labrador.  In order to get that, you have to cross a chihuahua with a lab until you get a chihuahua with floppy ears.  Unfortunately, you're going to end up with a puppy that's a mix of both parents, not just a chihuahua puppy with floppy lab ears.  Genetic engineering would allow us to change just the gene that makes the chihuahua's ears stick up to the one that makes it's ears floppy and leave the rest of the puppy alone. 

 

tl;dr (too long, didn't read)- GMO's aren't that much different from other modern crops.  Modern wheat does have more gluten in it but that's NOT a result of it being a GMO, it's the result of conventional crossbreeding techniques that have been used for generations.  Most studies that showed that GMO's are not safe have been retracted because of fatal flaws in the experimental design, whereas studies demonstrating the safety of GMO's while run by or financed by GMO companies, have shown them to be safe and no different from conventional crops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no problem with them inserting genes from one type of potato (a type that is resistant to late blight, for example) into a different type of potato. I know that a lot of gmo's are not only safe, but truly helpful.

 

But with corn (and soy), they modify them so that they can tolerate massive doses of herbicides. These herbicides have to be taken up by the roots and become part of the plant. Not only that, but they have been modified to have built-in insecticide.

 

From Wiki: Corn used for food has been genetically modified to be resistant to various herbicides and to express a protein from Bacillus thuringiensis that kills certain insects.[29] About 90% of the corn grown in the US has been genetically modified.[30]

 

 

 

I just don't think any of that can be good for us to consume, especially when both corn and soy are in so MANY foods. People are getting very large doses of this stuff unless they eat a whole foods diet. A person on the average American diet probably consumes more corn than everything else combined. It is used as a sweetener in soda and ice cream and just about any other sweet thing in the grocery store. It is in bread, it is even in sausage because it adds weight. It is in iodized salt. It is in MILK!

 

I don't have any scientific proof that it is causing problems, but my common sense tells me that food infused with herbicides and pesticides is likely to have adverse effects on my health.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a PhD student in molecular bio so if I could just clear the air about GMO's and make sure everyone's on the same page here!  Humans have been breeding together various strains of crops for hundreds of years to obtain more desirable characteristics.  Say you want a shorter wheat stalk with the same taste as the current one, you cross various dwarf wheat with your current wheat until you are at the desired height and taste (this actually happened).  The result is a wheat crop with genes from multiple different sources.  The new wheat crop has the genes to make it shorter than the original as well as a whole bunch of other genes that were unintentionally transferred.  Modern wheat has many extra gluten proteins that didn't exist in either of its parent wheat strains which is one theory as to why so many people are being diagnosed as having celiac or nonceliac gluten intolerance.  This wheat is technically considered non-GMO despite the fact that its DNA is extensively altered.  

 

That brings me around to GMO's themselves.  GMO's allow companies to move JUST the desired genes to make a new version of a crop.  To me, GMO's are safer than conventional hybrids because you're changing only what you want to change instead of unintentionally changing lots of things.  Personally, I don't agree with the tactics used by Monsanto, but GMO's are not the evil that they are made out to be. 

 

For a non-crop example, I'll use dogs.  We've got a large number of dog breeds that are all shapes and sizes but they're all considered dogs.  Say you want a Chihuahua with the floppy ears of a Labrador.  In order to get that, you have to cross a chihuahua with a lab until you get a chihuahua with floppy ears.  Unfortunately, you're going to end up with a puppy that's a mix of both parents, not just a chihuahua puppy with floppy lab ears.  Genetic engineering would allow us to change just the gene that makes the chihuahua's ears stick up to the one that makes it's ears floppy and leave the rest of the puppy alone. 

 

tl;dr (too long, didn't read)- GMO's aren't that much different from other modern crops.  Modern wheat does have more gluten in it but that's NOT a result of it being a GMO, it's the result of conventional crossbreeding techniques that have been used for generations.  Most studies that showed that GMO's are not safe have been retracted because of fatal flaws in the experimental design, whereas studies demonstrating the safety of GMO's while run by or financed by GMO companies, have shown them to be safe and no different from conventional crops.

No matter how pretty the package you wrap them in GMO's are something I do NOT want in my food supply

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think skelly and bartfull both had great things to add to this.  People see a lot of things and freak out, but it is important to know WHY you don't like something and be informed.  Don't just hear hype and go along with it.  Everyone should educate themselves and make an informed decision.

 

My friend was trying to get me to buy a scottish fold breed cat.  I told her no, it isn't a recognized breed because they have terrible genetic health issues.  Her reply was "That is why I got a pug, they were born that way with a flat face their health problems are natural."  I had to explain to her that the pug was bred that way as well.  Dogs and cruciferous vegetables are great examples of early genetic modification.  Nowadays, Genetic Modification has a narrowed definition, but back in the day, selective breeding and cross breeding were high tech.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think skelly and bartfull both had great things to add to this.  People see a lot of things and freak out, but it is important to know WHY you don't like something and be informed.  Don't just hear hype and go along with it.  Everyone should educate themselves and make an informed decision.

 

My friend was trying to get me to buy a scottish fold breed cat.  I told her no, it isn't a recognized breed because they have terrible genetic health issues.  Her reply was "That is why I got a pug, they were born that way with a flat face their health problems are natural."  I had to explain to her that the pug was bred that way as well.  Dogs and cruciferous vegetables are great examples of early genetic modification.  Nowadays, Genetic Modification has a narrowed definition, but back in the day, selective breeding and cross breeding were high tech.

  

I agree that it's important not to freak out and simply educate yourself (preferably with a wide range of sources). It's ok to be cautious until you've made an informed decision that you are comfortable with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what this suggests, it may not be the GMO per se, but the Roundup:

 

http://www.globalresearch.ca/monsanto-roundup-linked-to-global-boom-in-celiac-disease-and-gluten-intolerance/5370041

 

I thought this was an extremely interesting article I have to say - the link to the main article also discusses in some depth the likely mineral deficiencies found in many celiacs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what this suggests, it may not be the GMO per se, but the Roundup:

 

http://www.globalresearch.ca/monsanto-roundup-linked-to-global-boom-in-celiac-disease-and-gluten-intolerance/5370041

 

I thought this was an extremely interesting article I have to say - the link to the main article also discusses in some depth the likely mineral deficiencies found in many celiacs.

I would believe this in a heart beat! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...