Bloody hell, if you leave anything unattended for 5mins, they blow it up!
(FeralCatManUnusual disease collector.,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:34,
archived)
congratulations
You;ve just spammed a bunch of spam haters.
Your website is going to be:
1) Tested for hotlinks. If any found then the image is going to be changed to a Goatse 2) Added to a large number of blocked site lists 3) Mocked without any remorse
Well done you.
(Crap Little MonkeyDeathstar, so good they built it twice,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:19,
archived)
the reason people protested was because the government tried to sneak it past them, there wasn't a debate and the scientific evidence wasn't made public
(Finite"Aardvark sorted out my shit!" on,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 12:59,
archived)
Yes but the effect of even tested GM produce is not fully know
In the 80's one such supplimet killed over 100 people and caused up to another 10,000 people to fall ill in the US.
(riverghostservicing your mum since,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:02,
archived)
which would support the idea of further testing, resolution and retesting
before release.
Not that we have a choice now.
(Je suis un vagabondis an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:11,
archived)
There is a very good reason
the great unwashed are excluded from debates such as this.
(riverghostservicing your mum since,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:18,
archived)
what 'supplement' was that.
And how is a food supplement a GMO crop. The WHO only shows the passed GMO foods in use as having insect resistance and herbicide tolerance bred into them. Canada and the US bred Virus resistance into Squashes as well.
(Pasanonic's been known to cause insanity in laboratory mice,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:11,
archived)
*digs*
L-tryptophan
(riverghostservicing your mum since,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:19,
archived)
That has absolutely no
relation to genetically modified crops.
(Pasanonic's been known to cause insanity in laboratory mice,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:21,
archived)
Not according to Jeffrey M. Smith so seems to have quite a solid reputation.
(riverghostservicing your mum since,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:29,
archived)
well I'd suggest further reading
but your mind appears made up. I'll just say this. Genetically engineered bacteria and genetically modified crops ( which we were discussing ) are not the same fields and have no relation to each other barring the vast umbrella of 'genetics'
(Pasanonic's been known to cause insanity in laboratory mice,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:31,
archived)
Maybe that was a bad example but you have to admit that there's more than one argument regard GM products.
(riverghostservicing your mum since,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:36,
archived)
All I can do is argue the facts as they are presented.
There may be debate to be had but the fact remains that most of the 'argument' against is based on myth and lies.
(Pasanonic's been known to cause insanity in laboratory mice,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:39,
archived)
minimum of two clearly...
(k3b/-\bPeace man.,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:41,
archived)
Are you seriously anti-GM?
God forbid we actually try and *feed* people, oh dear me, no.
Untested GM I think should be carefully tested before allowed into the cycle.
(Je suis un vagabondis an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 12:54,
archived)
Yeah, I got that,
But why - pretty much all crops have been genetically modified anyhow, and have been for years.
It's the same argument as saying that since male pattern baldness is hereditary, so is a requirement to fight in the First World War, because that's what happened to my grandfather.
I'm sure someone, somewhere said " Yep, that's a huge tomato and it tastes fucking great". If you mean unregulated then that's down to specific governments and where there is regulation ( such as most of the Western world ) there is extreme focus on consumer health and then environmental risks.
Besides, there is less of it 'in the cycle' than you might think with only 6 major GMO crops in worldwide mass use.
(Pasanonic's been known to cause insanity in laboratory mice,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 12:59,
archived)
Tomatos with fish genes.
Etc.
Now they're out there - they've been grown in the open, and have already cross-pollinated with other, non-GM stuff.
Whether the original GM stuff was tested or not.
Wind doesn't really conform to regulations - Western or no.
(Je suis un vagabondis an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:09,
archived)
Right.
Tomatos with fish genes.
Any evidence - at all - that there is anything actually wrong with that? Granted, it's a bit weird, but what the fuck - so is fucking Quorn.
that's not what i'm trying to say. From a scientific point of view
(ignoring the whale huggers views) there must be nothing wrong.
another way to put what I am trying to say is: everything must be right.
(k3b/-\bPeace man.,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:34,
archived)
I'm not saying tomato with fish genes is wrong - I'm citing it as an example of GM, to illustrate the cross-pollination aspect.
(Je suis un vagabondis an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:16,
archived)
You should read less of the
anti GMO propaganda and more of the world health organisation literature before you use urban myth and half truths to prop up your argument. The 'fish-gene' experiment was a bid to turn on cold resistance in tomato genes by copying the markers from Arctic fish. It never worked. These antifreeze proteins are already present in the plants and are not taken from fish, they used the fish research to learn how to turn the genes on.
(Pasanonic's been known to cause insanity in laboratory mice,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:16,
archived)
I'm not saying tomato with fish genes is wrong - I'm citing it as an example of GM, to illustrate the cross-pollination aspect.
(Je suis un vagabondis an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:22,
archived)
I'm saying it is wrong though
because you are using an example of a thing that did not quite happen in the manner that you report it to support an argument that is based solely on your opinion and resistance to progress. "Tomatoes with anti-freeze proteins already present in the food being switched on after studying how the same proteins work in Arctic flounder" Does not really have the same shock effect does it?
(Pasanonic's been known to cause insanity in laboratory mice,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:25,
archived)
OK - I'm sorry.
Here you go then: "Untested GM stuff shouldn't be allowed into the cycle."
Is that better?
(Je suis un vagabondis an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:33,
archived)
It puts us back to the beginning
as I don't know what you mean by untested. As I said, The world health organisation monitors this. The national authorities are required to carry out thorough risk assessments for human and environmental health risks so assuming that's what you mean then I agree with you but considering that's the way it is now I don't see what you are wanting to change.
(Pasanonic's been known to cause insanity in laboratory mice,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:37,
archived)
GM food
is the best thing to happen to the world and it's lily-livered hippies that should hang their head in shame every time some child dies in a famine struck area because their constant, unfounded claims against modified foods are holding back progress.
Also MSG is the tastiest of all the food groups. I love it.
(Pasanonic's been known to cause insanity in laboratory mice,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 12:53,
archived)
msg is lovely, however the thing that concerns me about GM
is that biological experiments/solutions, particularly where large populations, are concerned have gone a bit pear-shaped before.
I think continued development, and funding (which the aforementioned hippies are trying to prevent) is required.
(k3b/-\bPeace man.,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:01,
archived)
But 'this happened in the past'
is no argument for anything. I might argue that Hitler went a bit potty so I call for an open season shooting politicians. I'd probably get elected on that platform actually. Oh wait...
(Pasanonic's been known to cause insanity in laboratory mice,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:04,
archived)
'this happened in the past' isn't a valid argument for stopping GM crops
it's an argument in support for more funding and research for it, that way, hopefully it won't be a disaster with inedible crops developing.
(k3b/-\bPeace man.,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:08,
archived)
But there is already funding and research
and it continues. The EU and WHO have agreed on 18 GMO crops to date with 12 pending. As I said, 6 are in major use worldwide. These modifications are just for herbicide tolerance and insect/virus resistance. What would you have people do? Throw more money at proven technology and talk about it or get on and feed the starving?
(Pasanonic's been known to cause insanity in laboratory mice,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:19,
archived)
there's always going to be new research to be done.
If and when the research problem is solved then the products go into use, ie like the virus resistant crops.
There is no point not developing technology further if there is some advantage.
(k3b/-\bPeace man.,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:25,
archived)
That's just how it works now
so you may sleep safe.
(Pasanonic's been known to cause insanity in laboratory mice,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:33,
archived)
i know...remember my bais, I'll always want more research so people will pay me money.
It's just that the typical gm argument (particularly ones by political people) that i've seen goes down the lines of
"oh it's untestested, therefore bad and we must stop it immediately" vs. "People are starving, it must be accelerated and put in place as soon as possible"
And I don't want politicians cutting corners and research budgets.
(k3b/-\bPeace man.,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:40,
archived)
I just don't understand the 'untested' bit
just because a word is bandied about does not make it fact. There is international law on this. It differs slightly in some areas but EU law states that.
Article 4 Requirements 1. Food referred to in Article 3(1) must not: (a) have adverse effects on human health, animal health or the environment; (b) mislead the consumer; (c) differ from the food which it is intended to replace to such an extent that its normal consumption would be nutritionally disadvantageous for the consumer. 2. No person shall place on the market a GMO for food use or food referred to in Article 3(1) unless it is covered by an authorisation granted in accordance with this Section and the relevant conditions of the authorisation are satisfied. 3. No GMO for food use or food referred to in Article 3(1) shall be authorised unless the applicant for such authorisation has adequately and sufficiently demonstrated that it satisfies the requirements of paragraph 1 of this Article.
so I fail to see what the fuss is all about. People want it 'testing'. The law requires that it is 'tested' and the WHO passes it after the requirements are met ( and it does not pass a lot ) so it appears that people are arguing for a situation that already exists. Granted there will always be a group that oppose change for the sake of needing some cause to justify their petty existence but these can, and should, be mostly ignored.
(Pasanonic's been known to cause insanity in laboratory mice,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:48,
archived)
The problem there is that people DO NOT ignore the (largely) unfounded opposition
and unfortunately the opposition are capable of making persuading arguments to people who cannot understand the facts for themselves, or for some reason, including laziness, refuse to find out the learned opinion on the matter. What's worse is, there is an awful lot of these thick/lazy people.
(k3b/-\bPeace man.,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 14:05,
archived)
This is why I argue.
I have no wish to upset people or fall out with them I just have an innate need to challenge people when they use sweeping generalisation and misinformation to back up their claims. I just want to say "let's look at what you are saying and then let us look at what we actually know on the subject as opposed to what we would like to believe". I think that's fair and I often enjoy the debate. It's a shame some people see it as some kind of attack when it never is.
(Pasanonic's been known to cause insanity in laboratory mice,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 14:09,
archived)
i shall sleep safely now
for what it's worth i tend to agree with you.
my only concern with gm crops is the modified sterility of the seed, but i guess the guys have got to fund their research/holidays somehow
(god save the queenmaking another unremarkable comeback,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:41,
archived)
haha
well cynicked that man ;)
(Pasanonic's been known to cause insanity in laboratory mice,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:43,
archived)
well that's lunch sorted
(prodigy69broke b3ta and made everyone leave,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 12:47,
archived)
(RiffRafflurking like a lurky thing,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:29,
archived)
Oh noes
Protect me from the Genes, Aspartame and MSG...
(Maximinimusyou stick around I'll make it worth your while,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 12:50,
archived)
Shocker
Consuming MSG makes you around 48% more likely to be overweight...
(Maximinimusyou stick around I'll make it worth your while,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 12:53,
archived)
Well
No shit, it makes food more tasty making it far more likely you will eat more.
(Maximinimusyou stick around I'll make it worth your while,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 12:54,
archived)
I've cooked with MSG
for about 20 years. Would not be without it in the kitchen. The fact that I'm a fat cunt would probably be more likely a result of the 8 pints of beer a day I tend to consume ;).
(Pasanonic's been known to cause insanity in laboratory mice,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 12:55,
archived)
Aspartame has been widely used for 35 years
Where is the proof it causes problems
(Maximinimusyou stick around I'll make it worth your while,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 12:56,
archived)
It's lethal you idiot
I saw 20 people drop dead in Tesco yesterday after drinking sugar free cola!
(Maximinimusyou stick around I'll make it worth your while,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 12:56,
archived)
That's nothing
I once ate GM soya and now I have a second arse!
(Maximinimusyou stick around I'll make it worth your while,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:00,
archived)
They should have bought it before drinking it
Or at least know where the Tesco anti-shoplifting sniper nest is located.
I went to burgerking for the first time in 20 years about two weeks back
as I was starving, there was nothing in the house and it was the only place open. I played it safe and went for just a veggie burger and fries. I always eat healthily and I'm always very concious of where my food is sourced from. As a result my body couldn't handle it. I puked the lot up within five minutes.
(riverghostservicing your mum since,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 13:14,
archived)
Well, in that case
avoid the one at Euston Station whatever you do. Salmonella Central, that place.
I went to my local zoo yesterday. They have a section called The Night which they darken during zoo opening hours. You can walk freely between the sloths etc., but you have to be very quiet to see anything. During the night, they light up the place to reverse the animal's daily cycle.
(mediocreha ha ha, you're reading this,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 11:16,
archived)
Oh wow!
That sounds woo! I am still trying to convince Jahled to let me go into the animal enclosures ;) I don't think he will....
Actually, Chag is my own made-up word, meaning pant gravel- a blanket term for all detritus found in a gusset after a long day. including, but not limited to, bumchunks, winnet, poo stripes etc.
(MontyyouterribleCUNTI gave Jeremy Kyle cancer,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 11:07,
archived)
BUMWIPE
That's my word for what you should be using a little more of.
are you honestly telling me that after a long hot day, perhaps walking the length of Oxford Street trying to find some matching bra and panties, your bum is still as pink and kissable as it was when you talced it after your morning bath?
(MontyyouterribleCUNTI gave Jeremy Kyle cancer,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 11:11,
archived)
Yes,
but then it's probably because the torrent of sweat off my back washes everything down through the legs of my boxers and into my socks.
The question is, did the Daily Mail realise it was probably one of their readers, or was the comments on the article just filled up with red faced, vitriolic conservatives shouting "good"?
(HappyToastGroat froth,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 10:46,
archived)
Interesting.
Sickipedia got FP on the Star's site over the weekend.
(riverghostservicing your mum since,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 10:48,
archived)
Hahahaha Ross and Brand should have been fired.
If they'd done that to my grandad I would have messed them up good.
(Je suis un vagabondis an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 10:54,
archived)
You could have just rain on them forever:P
(riverghostservicing your mum since,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 10:58,
archived)
Hahahahahahaha
(Je suis un vagabondis an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 11:00,
archived)
What pissed me off about the whole thing is the way they played the daughter
as poor little innocent victim where in actualy fact she's a burlesque dancer.
(riverghostservicing your mum since,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 11:04,
archived)
All burlesque dancers are GUILTY!
They deserve no privacy because they wear MAKE-UP and CORSETS!
(riverghostservicing your mum since,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 11:31,
archived)
I don't see how that makes any difference.
She could be a hooker - doesn't make it acceptable for them to wind up her granddad about her sex life.
(Je suis un vagabondis an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 11:15,
archived)
I didn't say it was.
I said the media was trying to enrage puritan Britons that this poor delicate blossom had be violated by a nafarious rogue. As if she swooned from her chair whilst doing her tatting when she head the news.
(riverghostservicing your mum since,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 11:34,
archived)
I think it's more the thinking that the making of nuicance 'phonecalls to 70yo grandfathers
By two men in their 30s and 40s - ie - fully grown adults - containing explicit references to said grandfather's granddaughter's sex life - is seen as pretty out of order.
(Je suis un vagabondis an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 11:54,
archived)
also lesbian s&m porn 'actress'
film is crap btw
(god save the queenmaking another unremarkable comeback,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 11:23,
archived)
aaaaaw
*glees*
(riverghostservicing your mum since,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 10:47,
archived)
"Yeah, but ... this one goes up to 11 ..."
(Je suis un vagabondis an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob,
Mon 9 Feb 2009, 9:49,
archived)