The Doom Room: ILF Edition

[amorphous]

I'm just afraid of our gov. fucking the weed up.

we should likely be more afraid of Monsanto fucking up the weed. Oh wait, I forgot, they control our government....

[Ancient Astronaught]

I can't wait till we can talk about weed in this exact same way in this country.

it will happen in our lifetime!

I'm just afraid of our gov. fucking the weed up.

Commercial grade yes, medicinal grade... probably not. They've had control of that for years all ready and have only helped up the quality.

i think the taxation route is a poor choice of arguments. Ask cigarette smokers

I don't mind.

I'm just afraid of our gov. fucking the weed up.

we should likely be more afraid of Monsanto fucking up the weed. Oh wait, I forgot, they control our government....

Yeah...... I'd have to agree. If they start federally requiring roundup for pest control I'm done with life.

[new05002]

GMOs are fine. I would say that 80-90% of regular crops you consume in most food products are GMO.

lol ask New Yorkers about cig tax, that shit sucks for them.

[MeSoFuzzy]

I can't wait till we can talk about weed in this exact same way in this country.

it will happen in our lifetime!

I'm just afraid of our gov. fucking the weed up.

Commercial grade yes, medicinal grade... probably not. They've had control of that for years all ready and have only helped up the quality.

i think the taxation route is a poor choice of arguments. Ask cigarette smokers

I don't mind.

I don't know about the rest of the US, but in MD we have to pay a sales tax and alcohol tax on booze. I'd imagine they would do the same with pot.

You know, when your used to smoking medicinal grade, the commercial grade is pretty much a waste of time and money. There is the exception of using it to make brownies though. Pesticides shouldn't be a problem if you're buying from indoor growers, right?

[amorphous]

GMOs are fine. I would say that 80-90% of regular crops you consume in most food products are GMO

Disagree. Engineered food is not Ok, it's really a lie.
I don't consume GMO's - i'm one of those folks!
I don't like Phish, either.

[new05002]

I believe people say they dont mind ATM because its not legal so anything is better then nothing. But since the tax can be controlled its likely a long term annoyance for a short term win. Plus who will control that tax, state or national? I dont think your going to really convince a GOP member that taxes are win win strategy for legalization.

[new05002]

GMOs are fine. I would say that 80-90% of regular crops you consume in most food products are GMO

Disagree. Engineered food is not Ok, it's really a lie.
I don't consume GMO's - i'm one of those folks!
I don't like Phish, either.

Show me the published, peer reviewed science from a reputable journal that backs that up or I will dismiss that without much consideration.

[Ancient Astronaught]

GMOs are fine. I would say that 80-90% of regular crops you consume in most food products are GMO

Disagree. Engineered food is not Ok, it's really a lie.
I don't consume GMO's - i'm one of those folks!
I don't like Phish, either.

Show me the published, peer reviewed science from a reputable journal that backs that up or I will dismiss that without much consideration.

Their all published over in Europe as the US won't allow it to be published (monsanto owns the FDA, remember the Monsanto protection act? WHY WAS THAT EVEN NECESSARY?!?!?!), and then they write it off saying that the Euro's didn't do a true scientific study. Theyre out there if you look, a simple "European Monsanto GMO corn Ban" search on google should find you what you seek. I mean there's gotta be a legimiate reason that countries are banning their seeds left and right around the world, right?

Sorry... I'm a bit of a "theorist"...

GMOs are fine. I would say that 80-90% of regular crops you consume in most food products are GMO.

lol ask New Yorkers about cig tax, that shit sucks for them.

Unfortunately you are correct on that.

Don't even get me started on New York.... *sips his 32oz 7-11 soda*

[amorphous]

Show me the published, peer reviewed science from a reputable journal that backs that up or I will dismiss that without much consideration.

Show me a politician or science journal not paid off by Monsanto or a pharma company. How do you think this stuff passes?

It's your body man, eat what you want. I just don't believe science is goD or should play goD. (on TV or otherwise!)

[new05002]

I know it won't win me any friends but yea not buying that. I am a scientist, published peer reviewed results are the king and publication is not controlled by the government.

Plus its on you to show me how people are being paid off, not me to show you how they are not. I believe you may not understand exactly how things get published in the scientific world.

You can be anti-Monsanto and be neutral or pro-GMO. Monsanto can do plenty of poor business practices but this does not show how GMOs are bad it just shows that Monsanto is a poorly run business.

When looking at published results you need to look, where is it published (which journal)?, what was the methodology?, what other results does it compare to? Its fairly easy to find a publication mill journal somewhere with little to no reputation. I have reviewed a few negative-GMO studies published in open access journals with little to no peer review and they often get shredded for poor methodology.

[Nostradoomus]

I'm anti-Monsanto but for the further research of GMO food. I hate that such a terrible company owns most of the market and does horrible things as it takes the focus away from feeding the ever expanding population of this planet which biotechnology may very well be able to solve. Don't tell me that organic low yield crops will feed everybody for cheap, that's bullshit Whole Foods inspired propaganda.

Marching against Monsanto is cool with me, but don't restrict research.

[new05002]

I'm anti-Monsanto but for the further research of GMO food. I hate that such a terrible company owns most of the market and does horrible things as it takes the focus away from feeding the ever expanding population of this planet which biotechnology may very well be able to solve. Don't tell me that organic low yield crops will feed everybody for cheap, that's bullshit Whole Foods inspired propaganda.

Marching against Monsanto is cool with me, but don't restrict research.

That sounds a lot like a fellow lab mate who was both anti-GMO and anti-Monsanto. So we discussed this and I told him that to be pro-GMO or atleast in favor of GMO research does not mean you need to like Monsanto. GMOs could be harmful in ways and could be beneficial in others, its all going to boil down to good research. I dig there is a lot of politicizing of the issue but just try to focus on the basic research being done.

For example, check out golden rice. The main idea here is to produce rice which has Vitamin A in it. Vitamin A deficiency is common in other countries which kills over half a million kids each year (under 5 years old). Of course there is still debate going on about the topic but its not a Monsanto derived thing.

I will drop this topic tho as its a bit testy for DR.

[Ancient Astronaught]

If they can remove tens of thousands of anti-Obama posts on Facebook on a daily basis (I've seen it happen live in front of me) they can easily block or remove scientific studies that could harm the reputation of the biggest agriculture business in America ( whose past executives currently make up the entire top officials of the FDA and even include a Supreme Court judge) who happens to be a huge HUGE donator to the Democratic Party.

Also it's not that low yield crops can't feed the world it's that they require larger investments. Companies would rather spends thousands on untested HMO food that can be grown anywhere instead of investing millions into large scale green houses. Also because they would then have to either raise the cost at the consumer levels or decrease their profit, which is the antithesis of business so therefore highly unlikely to happen. I'm all about the research but Monsanto... Ugh

[amorphous]

I know it won't win me any friends but yea not buying that. I am a scientist, published peer reviewed results are the king and publication is not controlled by the government.

Plus its on you to show me how people are being paid off, not me to show you how they are not. I believe you may not understand exactly how things get published in the scientific world.

You can be anti-Monsanto and be neutral or pro-GMO. Monsanto can do plenty of poor business practices but this does not show how GMOs are bad it just shows that Monsanto is a poorly run business.

It's all good, Nick.

You are correct, I do not understand how things get published in scientific journals. I'm positive our politicians are paid off. And i'm sure they cover their asses pretty good, but i also feel the smoke screen is getting thing.

There comes a point where one can continue to put garbage in one's body and wonder why they feel like crap - or make a change. That's what i did. It's really a personal decision, like drinking alcohol or smoking weed.

YYMV, er, something!

[new05002]

GMOs are tested. Studies are done by universities regarding their effects. Pretty easy to find (for example on the golden rice example, wiki has direct links to published results in good journals)

Skip, do you have evidence that the government is able to control how peer reviewed publications or is that merely speculation? I do not want to come off as dismissive as we are friends but I dont find that idea credible.