Forum Statistics

Threads
27,576
Posts
541,632
Members
28,554
Latest Member
pbtom
What's New?

Are Plant Foods truly “Healthy”?

69nites

69nites

VIP Member
Aug 17, 2011
2,130
721
Feedlot / factory finished, to some extent I wouldn’t deny. Yet nevertheless, detoxed a good bit by the time we consume them….. unlike plants.
This isn’t a thread claiming perfection of cattle — it’s about; first and foremost, plant toxicity….. a distant underlying inference is their lack of being nature-made.
By comparison — there’s little comparison.
By comparison we've been genetically modifying cattle for at least 8000 years while what you're scared about modifying in plants has been around for 3000 years assuming you're scared of grafting to give plants favorable genetic traits of other species.

They are the exact level of modification with thousands of years difference in the time we've been modifying them.

If you want to consume non genetically modified food, you're either going to need to discover an island that has never been touched by humans and has no bird migratory patterns or build a time machine.

All the toxicity in plants is present in animals.

Also, as a rule, if you see someone talking about nutrition and they're using the words toxic, toxins, toxicity, or cleanse they have nothing of value to add to the conversation.
 
testboner

testboner

VIP Member
Oct 10, 2010
1,479
1,799
By comparison we've been genetically modifying cattle for at least 8000 years while what you're scared about modifying in plants has been around for 3000 years assuming you're scared of grafting to give plants favorable genetic traits of other species.

They are the exact level of modification with thousands of years difference in the time we've been modifying them.

If you want to consume non genetically modified food, you're either going to need to discover an island that has never been touched by humans and has no bird migratory patterns or build a time machine.

All the toxicity in plants is present in animals.

Also, as a rule, if you see someone talking about nutrition and they're using the words toxic, toxins, toxicity, or cleanse they have nothing of value to add to the conversation.

You’ve got a lot confused.
 
testboner

testboner

VIP Member
Oct 10, 2010
1,479
1,799
For the readers not quite familiar with GMO’s, a broad (albeit highly incomplete) overview can be gleaned from the Wiki info about the science.
Ultimately, GMO’s are the result of modifying / tampering with what’s natural.
It’s another one of those hotly debated, emotion filled realms of dispute, but the end result of technocracy at large = an end to all that’s natural. This is a realm affecting every aspect of all life and the earth itself. AI hybrid humans is the current direction of modifications — quite literally moving at a shocking pace toward eliminating natural born Humankind. The goal and tech “advancement’ is to do away with all of nature / natural order.
 
DungeonDweller

DungeonDweller

VIP Member
Mar 21, 2017
1,534
1,334
I do think the genetically modified argument against eating plants is hilarious. Do you think livestock isn't? Do you think what the livestock is eating isn't genetically modified?
Everything has been bred to promote certain traits over others since man first domesticated the first animals and planted the first crops. No dog, cow, grain, etc exists in a pre-modified untouched form. Yeah, its not gene splicing, but if you truly understand what's going on then you know its essentially the same thing. The hippie cry for "outlaw Monsanto!" is just so clueless.
 
BackAtIt

BackAtIt

MuscleHead
Oct 3, 2016
2,185
668
By comparison we've been genetically modifying cattle for at least 8000 years while what you're scared about modifying in plants has been around for 3000 years assuming you're scared of grafting to give plants favorable genetic traits of other species.

They are the exact level of modification with thousands of years difference in the time we've been modifying them.


Isn't this a little inaccurate?...Aren't u referring to genetic recombination, which is different from genetic modification?...I don't know yet if what I'm asking is right, however, I find it hard to believe genetic modification was being utilized that far back....I'm not disputing what u are saying, just trying to understand...As I stated earlier in this thread, I haven't studied this subject in-depth, yet....:)


.
 
69nites

69nites

VIP Member
Aug 17, 2011
2,130
721
Soooooooo, don’t eat?

Damn. This fast is gonna suck, to death.
Or just eat whatever you think fits your diet best from a macro and micronutrient perspective and disregard what human beings that lived to the age of 30 ate.
 
Bigtex

Bigtex

VIP Member
Aug 14, 2012
1,107
1,636
What to really get scared.......... "Micropep scans the “DNA blueprints” of plants to identify naturally occurring peptide sequences produced by microRNAs which control plant physiology, he adds. These peptides can then be used to influence all plant phenotypes regulated by microRNAs – including those relating to germination, flowering, and disease resistance, among others. " DAMN, if I wouldn't get so hungry, I would stop eating.;)

 
69nites

69nites

VIP Member
Aug 17, 2011
2,130
721
Isn't this a little inaccurate?...Aren't u referring to genetic recombination, which is different from genetic modification?...I don't know yet if what I'm asking is right, however, I find it hard to believe genetic modification was being utilized that far back....I'm not disputing what u are saying, just trying to understand...As I stated earlier in this thread, I haven't studied this subject in-depth, yet....:)


.
That's a semantic argument ignoring that the methodology leads to the same result.

Whether we extract enzymes and expose them to a plant in a lab or graft onto the root of the plant we're trying to force evolution in, the result is the same. The difference is the efficiency.

It's building a better mousetrap, but it's still a mousetrap.

If
 
testboner

testboner

VIP Member
Oct 10, 2010
1,479
1,799
An indication of where such food manipulation is headed:


Bill Gates is America’s biggest farmer...
Owning about a quarter-million acres across America.
And while it’s still only a fraction of the total farmland…
I think it’s concerning.
Because Farmer Bill has said very clearly he wants us to stop eating meat…
And eat fake meat and plants instead.
He’s even gone so far as to say people need to learn to like fake meat…
And that if that doesn’t work, regulations could do the trick…
I will repeat myself.
THE BIGGEST OWNER OF FARMLAND IN THE UNITED STATES, BILL GATES, WANTS TO REGULATE YOUR CONSUMPTION OF MEAT.
Can you now see why I’m concerned?
And Farmer Bill is only getting richer...
His wealth went from $98B in 2020 to $124B in 2021…
Meaning he can easily snap up more farmland at prices small family-run farms can't compete against…
And you can bet he won’t be raising cattle regeneratively on that land anytime soon.
This speaks to a wider issue…
Farmers are getting older on average…
And in the next five years it’s estimated that 92 MILLION acres will change hands…
Will this land be purchased by investment entities who control what’s grown on it and how?
What happens when a small few control the vast majority of farmland?
Don’t ever take your meat for granted folks. — Paul Saladino MD
DC6D32C9-364C-4A32-8B08-3B8323E04589.jpeg
 
BackAtIt

BackAtIt

MuscleHead
Oct 3, 2016
2,185
668
That's a semantic argument ignoring that the methodology leads to the same result.

Whether we extract enzymes and expose them to a plant in a lab or graft onto the root of the plant we're trying to force evolution in, the result is the same. The difference is the efficiency.

It's building a better mousetrap, but it's still a mousetrap.

If


@69nites , first allow me to clear my motive in commenting in this thread....I'm not trying to out piss anyone for the record, merely engaging in an concern in regards to the "safety" of gene modification....I just want the facts/truth on it....I'm not concerned with who is 'right/wrong' on this subject...As I stated earlier in this thread, I haven't studied this topic in-depth....

The main reason that drew me to engage in the discussion was that I had watched a movie ( can't remember the name, but it starred Morgan Freeman as the organic farmer) around a year ago on GMO's...Supposedly it is/was based on a "true story"....To cut it short, the movie indicated that GMO companies try to eradicate organic farming....The main story was based on a woman's child who had become sick and the doctors couldn't figure out what was causing it....She ended up discovering that GMOs were responsible....Also, the movie indicated other children and I believe adults had contracted an illness from GMO's...Again, the was suppose to be a "true" story?....

So then, back to our discussion on gene modification...I realize the overall outcome is indeed altering the course of adaption....However, I have a concern when we literally go in and alter the gene physically within the organism ...I'm not seeing that as the "exact" same as "mixing and matching" organisms via cross-pollination, breeding, etc....However, with me not knowing the in's and out's of this subject matter I'm on the fence at the moment in regards to gene modification....:)


.
 
Last edited:
Who is viewing this thread?

There are currently 0 members watching this topic

Top