|
FRINGE posted:The study was not restricted to the "single molecule", which was one of the explicit points. I don't think you really understand what you're arguing here. GMOs are not agricultural chemicals. Testing pesticides is a completely different issue from testing GMOs.
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 04:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 15:02 |
|
|
FRINGE posted:In this regard, it is noteworthy that the far greater toxicity of full agricultural formulations compared to declared supposed active principles alone has recently been demonstrated also for six other major pesticides tested in vitro[22] http://www.euractiv.com/cap/crisis-intervention-needed-pesti-news-533257
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 04:06
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:I don't think you really understand what you're arguing here. GMOs are not agricultural chemicals. Deteriorata posted:Testing pesticides is a completely different issue from testing GMOs. Negative Entropy posted:
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 04:29
|
|
|
Fringe how many of us in this thread who argue with you do you think are paid shills?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 04:31
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:Making up arguments and then asserting that they belong to someone else has a name. Fake 'educating' them afterwards is very you. No, I'm not disagreeing with the passage. I'm disagreeing with you. You cited a passage about testing pesticides as a reason to test GMOs. You seem unaware that those are two unrelated things.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 04:32
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:Fringe how many of us in this thread who argue with you do you think are paid shills? The conspiracy goes all the way up, all the way down, and in circles too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 04:40
|
|
|
Lowtax? Low Tax? Who likes Low Taxes? That's right, BIG FOOD LIKES LOW TAXES! You're busted, SA.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 04:44
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:Thats also exactly what Séralini said. What to do regarding future research is where they disagree. Here's some more analysis of Seralini's pesticide paper: quote:Toxicologists have reservations about the study. "There are issues in terms of its design and execution, as well as its overall tone," writes Michael Coleman, a toxicologist at Aston University in Birmingham, U.K., in an e-mail to ScienceInsider. "Anything is toxic in high concentration, the question is whether the toxicity is relevant to the levels of the agents we are ingesting. This paper does not seem to address this issue at all." Martin van den Berg, a toxicologist at Utrecht University in the Netherlands, says the paper deserved to be reviewed. But he, too, questions the experimental design. "The endpoints observed are so general that we could probably find the same kind of toxicity with lemon juice or grapefruit extract," he says. "It's not new or shocking. It is what I would have expected at the level he is giving this to the cells." Séralini dismisses the criticisms as biased. "I recognize the remarks of industry in that," America Inc. fucked around with this message at 05:35 on Jul 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 04:58
|
|
he tells ScienceInsider.
|
In vitro is a very lousy model for this kind of study. It is not comparable to a whole animal. It's not even particularly accurate on a cellular level, since the conditions are quite different (more oxygen leads to more oxidative stress, the cells may already be stressed to some degree which makes them more vulnerable to chemical stressors, strong selective pressure leads to differences in the cells from how they are in vivo, and other differences).
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 05:44
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:I don't think you really understand what you're arguing here. GMOs are not agricultural chemicals. It's reasonable to connect the issue of toxicity in pesticides with GMOs, since the Roundup Ready trait is popular and naturally encourages the use of the specific pesticide Roundup. Of course it shouldn't be forgotten that glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, does not actually have harmful or carcinogenic effects to people or animals, and the only study to supposedly indicate otherwise was bunk from a now-discredited scientist with an obvious agenda. AuMaestro fucked around with this message at 06:03 on Jul 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 05:57
|
|
|
Speaking of "combating scientific ignorance", FRINGE also isn't a fan of fluoridating water. As you can see, lots of links, lots of misrepresentation and so on. Same poo poo, different topic.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 06:07
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:Speaking of "combating scientific ignorance", FRINGE also isn't a fan of fluoridating water. As you can see, lots of links, lots of misrepresentation and so on. Same poo poo, different topic.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 06:24
|
|
|
How on earth is he not banned? He's been doing dumb poo poo like this for as long as I can remember there being science-related threads in here.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 06:57
|
|
|
Sinestro posted:How on earth is he not banned? He's been doing dumb poo poo like this for as long as I can remember there being science-related threads in here. The liberal bias(one that I agree with) on these forums has a side effect of when crazy left-wing stuff is brought up, people are ignored or probated. Crazy right-wingers are banned. FRINGE is just a stereotypical hippy science-hater, the yin to the yang of the Tea Party.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 07:24
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:Speaking of "combating scientific ignorance", FRINGE also isn't a fan of fluoridating water. As you can see, lots of links, lots of misrepresentation and so on. Same poo poo, different topic. Water flouridation  , God loving damnit. FRINGE, gently caress off before you sap and impurify our precious bodily fluids with your bullshit.Mrit posted:The liberal bias(one that I agree with) on these forums has a side effect of when crazy left-wing stuff is brought up, people are ignored or probated. Crazy right-wingers are banned. Crazy pseudo-lefty science haters aren't better than the Tea Party, wannabe modern day luddites are as much of a burden on society as FYGM republicans who want to eat the poor.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 08:03
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
Poe's law applies a bit, but there is a bit of echo chamber effect in this forum and Poe's corollary , where even if he is fake the fact that he is believable means that that there are millions of people who probably espouse the same views regularly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 08:05
|
|
|
My favorite part of the Seralini study is the (non-significant) correlation between glyphosate intake and lifespan in male rats. Male rats that were fed round-up lived longer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 08:15
|
|
|
NFX posted:My favorite part of the Seralini study is the (non-significant) correlation between glyphosate intake and lifespan in male rats. Male rats that were fed round-up lived longer. I bet you can make that significant if you try enough different statistical tests 
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 08:19
|
|
|
blowfish posted:bullshit. blowfish posted:Stop supporting positions which are harder to argue against than a strawman blowfish posted:Oh god, this thread has become stupid. blowfish posted:Something something evil gubmint goonspiracy Solkanar512 posted:Speaking of "combating scientific ignorance", FRINGE also isn't a fan of fluoridating water. As you can see, lots of links, lots of misrepresentation and so on. Same poo poo, different topic. Have all the flouride you want. Stop being mad at Portland over it. FRINGE posted:This topic is dumb. Mrit posted:FRINGE is just a stereotypical hippy science-hater Thats all you get as long as this is the game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 09:25
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:Every thread, same making GBS threads, no contributions. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 09:44
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:Have all the flouride you want. Stop being mad at Portland over it. That referendum was shameful, a mark against the city that will take us years to overcome (if ever). Since we're on the topic of the Seralini study: if the GM corn in question really was carcinogenic, wouldn't we see a marked increase in the rate of cancer among people in areas where foods made with said corn were sold? Since corn is omnipresent in the American diet, that would be almost the entire population, and it would be immediately obvious if people were being diagnosed that much more, right?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 09:59
|
|
|
Hedera Helix posted:That referendum was shameful, a mark against the city that will take us years to overcome (if ever). But US cancers are still on a downswing, which doesn't support GMOs being horrible, so this observation is irrelevant for ~reasons~.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 10:31
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:Fringe how many of us in this thread who argue with you do you think are paid shills? He's demonstrating all the classic conspiracy theory thinking: "My opponents don't really exist": Accusing various posters of being alt accounts of one poster or possibly a Monsanto computer. By denying that 90 different people actually disagree with him, he can rationalize having a fringe opinion and instead frame it as two people of equal standing having a disagreement. "My opponents don't really believe what they are saying": Everyone who disagrees is an employee of Monsanto being paid to shill, not another person who has formed their own conclusions from the available evidence. "My opponents are sheeple who have swallowed propaganda": Blasting the thread with quantity instead of quality from Seralini, Greenpeace, Euractiv, and other worthless sources in an attempt to counteract solid information from reputable scientists. Scientology Swerve: When shown that something he's saying is bullshit, attack the messenger. Never, ever admit defeat or even acknowledge that contradictory evidence exists. "This study is bad for the following reasons" gets the reply "you are a bad poster" or "you said something about Israel once." Actually acknowledging that there is a difference in kind between the pro-GMO studies by scientists and the anti-GMO tinfoil by Greenpeace is off the table. Gish Gallop: Once thoroughly discredited in one argument, move to another. He's getting beat up on the rat study so in the next few pages he's going to start in on biodiversity or lobbying again. Keep moving from one thing to another so that it seems like there's an array of
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 11:25
|
|
|
meat sweats posted:Accusing various posters of being alt accounts of one poster Hit a nerve? You made an abnormally long post full of fabricated bullshit. Something bothering you?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 12:21
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:Just you. fringe's posting quality has declined below that of a Markov chain bot at this point. Seriously, provide actual arguments instead of being a contrarian dickhead.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 12:25
|
|
|
blowfish posted:fringe's posting quality has declined below that of a Markov chain bot at this point. Seriously, provide actual arguments instead of being a contrarian dickhead. blowfish posted:Speak for yourself
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 12:33
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:blowfish's posting quality has never exceeded the quality of a Markov chain bot. Why don't you go back to checking peoples' post histories (it's not like you haven't already spent the  ) without resorting to selective quoting. Oh wait, that's above the level of discourse you're capable of.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 12:57
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:Something bothering you? Yes, the fact that you jerk off to the idea of third-world children dying of malnutrition bothers me because I'm a moral human being.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 13:08
|
|
|
blowfish posted:Why don't you go back to checking peoples' post histories without resorting to selective quoting. blowfish posted:Speak for yourself
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 13:17
|
|
|
Hedera Helix posted:That referendum was shameful, a mark against the city that will take us years to overcome (if ever). Not to mention we'd see it in our vast grain-fed livestock herds too! Since those have been eating modified corn and other crops for even longer than humans. Anyway remember folks, that FRINGE literally posted this in this very thread just before making GBS threads out a wall of quotes: FRINGE posted:I havent read it except to skim and clip a bit for here. He does this for every topic ever.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 16:57
|
|
|
Kalman posted:
Still waiting for an answer from you, FRINGE. Do you admit you posted irrelevant information or are you full of poo poo?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 17:17
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:Poor you. I summed up your fixation and hurt your feelings. You were told to drop your pet topic by various people in that thread too. Remember, according to FRINGE, good public health policy is just a "fixation".
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 18:55
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:The 90 day study Monsanto released? fringe you do know that this study being a 2 year study is actually to its detriment, right? The rats selected are unsuited to long term studies because they get super cancer on their own
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 19:23
|
|
|
http://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2013/10/massive-review-reveals-consensus-on-gmo-safety.htmlquote:Led by Alessandro Nicolia, an applied biologist at the University of Perugia in Italy, the team collected and evaluated 1,783 research papers, reviews, relevant opinions, and reports published between 2002 and 2012, a comprehensive process that took 12 months to complete. The records covered all aspects of GM crop safety, from how the crops interact with the environment, to how they could potentially affect the humans and animals who consume them. Remember, this is the real science: thousands upon thousands of tests showing GMO is a positive good. And they were not "funded by Monsanto" either. Alessandro Nicolia has worked in public universities his entire life -- his money comes from notoriously GMO-phobic EU governments. He is not part of any corporation or lobbying group. G.E. Seralini's fraud was funded by Greenpeace and he sits on the board of two anti-technology organizations. Do you really want to talk about bias and following the dollars, FRINGE and other death-cultists? You will not like where this path leads. meat sweats fucked around with this message at 20:06 on Jul 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 20:02
|
|
|
Hey FRINGE, I have some questions for ya: how do GMOs cause cancer? What mechanism causes this? I can't seem to find one in Seralini's retracted, refuted and otherwise debunked paper. Bonus points for not using the words "energy," "contamination" or "chemicals" in your explanation 
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 20:27
|
|
|
Taaaaaaarb! posted:Hey FRINGE, I have some questions for ya: how do GMOs cause cancer? What mechanism causes this? I can't seem to find one in Seralini's retracted, refuted and otherwise debunked paper. Bonus points for not using the words "energy," "contamination" or "chemicals" in your explanation Who ever needed a causal link in a study? Bad scientists sure don't!
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 21:18
|
|
|
Taaaaaaarb! posted:Hey FRINGE, I have some questions for ya: how do GMOs cause cancer? What mechanism causes this? I can't seem to find one in Seralini's retracted, refuted and otherwise debunked paper. Bonus points for not using the words "energy," "contamination" or "chemicals" in your explanation A proper study can show benefits or harm from a substance without having to know all the underlying mechanisms. After all, the main thing that you are looking for in side effects is something that you didn't predict or know about in advance. The relevant point here is that no proper study out of the thousands performed has ever shown harm from GMO corn or GMO anything, not that the hypothetical pathway isn't understood.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 21:51
|
|
|
meat sweats posted:A proper study can show benefits or harm from a substance without having to know all the underlying mechanisms. After all, the main thing that you are looking for in side effects is something that you didn't predict or know about in advance. The relevant point here is that no proper study out of the thousands performed has ever shown harm from GMO corn or GMO anything, not that the hypothetical pathway isn't understood. Depends. If there's got lots of correlational studies showing the same result (say, GMOs don't actually kill you), that's ok. If you're
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 22:49
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:fringe you do know that this study being a 2 year study is actually to its detriment, right? The rats selected are unsuited to long term studies because they get super cancer on their own http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/testing/types/cartox/index.html Kalman posted:you're full of poo poo
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 23:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 15:02 |
|
|
Again, the number of rats used make this study meaningless. It is not a compelling but incomplete result, it is simply garbage, and a needless cause of animal suffering (aside from his allowing moribund animals to suffer through to the end). It is unethical to do research that cannot by its design produce meaningful results. Part of the problem with endlessly studying things when the answers are already known is that there are always people who will jump on the flawed or statistical outlier studies that produce the results they want, while ignoring all studies that produce another result. Adenoid Dan fucked around with this message at 23:27 on Jul 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 23:24
|
|