They support it so much so that they starred in a pro-GMO documentary called “food evolution” (produced by Tyson as well). They also have pushed it through countless speeches you can find on YouTube, and have even devoted several full episodes of Neil’s startalk podcast praising GMO’s and essentially calling “GMO truthers” idiots and connecting dots that aren’t there. You know, the usual I’m sure we’ve heard before.
Now, what makes this interesting is the fact that you can find videos of Bill Nye on YouTube from in the 90’s talking about the harmful effects of gmo’s, so why the sudden shift and why did they all just star speaking about it around the same time three years ago?
To wrap this longer then intended post up, I’ll just say that I’m open minded that gmo’s maybe aren’t as bad as we were led to believe seeing as so many people are coming to the defense of it but I don’t know. Something seems off about this situation.
fuster_cluq: That’s funny because when we voted to mandate labels for gmo foods in grocery stores there was huge push back from the food industry. This was in Oregon and unfortunately the bill didn’t pass. You would think if gmos were so wonderful that they wouldn’t mind the label
Reportingthreat: Nye changed his mind 3 years ago following the Intelligence^2 debate “[Genetically modify food?](https://youtu.be/S7iLPJMEkiU)” that he attended.
facelessnature: I think it’s great they’re advocating GMO food. It’s evident that GMO’s are societal game-changers. However, the methods used to preserve or progress these crops are toxic. Nye and Tyson should shift their focus to a healthier alternative to herbicides or insecticides used on the food.
auneakeffect: neither of the two have any nutritional background so them being advocates is no different than someone like Britney spears being an advocate. Just famous people shilling.
DataPhreak: First off, GMO’s are not in food. Food is a GMO. If you knew what GMO stood for, you would know that. Second, GMOs are not inherently bad. Your dog is a GMO. In fact, GMOs can be very good and may even save the planet. Plants can be Genetically Modified to be more nutrient dense, or grow more fruit for less water.
The problem is the companies who manufacture GMOs do so based on bottom line, $$$, and not necessarily the good of the people or the planet. Further, they use archaic laws to push out competitors, like monsanto suing neighboring farmers whose crops get cross pollinated by wind and bees based on copyright infringement.
DefNotJRossiter: I used to love them both years ago till they started getting super shilly. Fuck em both now tbh.
frogfeets: I think the most dangerous aspect of the widespread use of GMO’s is not that there are any harmful health effects of eating them. That has never really been proven. The scary part is the danger of allowing companies like Monsanto to hold a patent on our food, and kill off the competition.
ry8919: The phrase ‘gmo’s in food’, shows how much you know about the subject.
coffeebreak1978: I share your skepticism about their 360 view on GMOs. GMO’s hold so much potential for humanity and people intrinsically always have a distrust for new technology. My grandfather used to talk about how as a child his mother thought automobiles were a tool of the devil.
That said, I think *how* GMO’s have been used is disgusting. We could use GMO for good. We could use them to make plants that don’t require toxic pesticides, or that nitrogen fix so we don’t have to dump toxic, petroleum based fertilizers on our fields. Instead, Monstato has used it to make plants that are resistant to herbicide, so we can turn our fertile farmland into a barren wasteland that can only grow their GMO seeds.
So new we have farmers hooked on Monstato’s drug, and roundup permeating our food-chain. It’s a plan that would make Dr, Evil proud.
mlzr: It’s not GMOs as a whole that are bad, it’s (like many other things in the 21st century) that we’re going too fast and performing live testing on human beings.
Bugs and critters like to eat stuff. Farmers don’t like them to eat stuff. Scientists make it so bugs and critters can’t eat stuff by making it poisonous. The poison gets to the human. Whether it’s spray or dna-splicing-science-projects, making food poisonous so bugs and critters don’t eat it is stupid and lazy.
blackholesmatter: The discussion around GMOs is so toxic at this point. I think GMOs are a good thing but it is also one topic that I believe Actually gets shilled (EDIT: by pro-GMO shills). Monsanto is such an evil corporation that they have soured the entire world on something that is a net good.
sesameseed88: Is he (Bill) even a scientist? The last thing “sciencey” thing he did was with Boeing. Since then he’s just been a complete sell out.
OVERGROUND7: The amount of astroturfing in these GMO threads is fucking insane.
oh_member_I_member: Becuase we should listen to shill-nye and chicken tortures.
Dummy_Detector: King shills.
MasterLocksBagel: Actors tend to believe in whatever earns a paycheck.
florpydorpal: Shills gonna shill
SloppySniper: And for round earth. Tyson is an absolute charlatan.
U.S. media silent as Putin declares Russia GMO-free as they prepare to become top producer of organic food
Dummy_Detector: Wtf America. Kick Monsanto the fuck out already or destroy it through policy change.
HBombthrow: I trust a “GMO free” label from Russia about as much as I trust a “lead free” label from China.
Vaedur: Problem is Russian Corruption is pretty bad, and just because they say it’s GMO free doesn’t mean anything.
brock_lee: We believe Russia now?
Alphaskud: GMO isn’t a bad thing though. It’s what’s sprayed around by unregulated farmers that is the problem.
raymcizo: I love how nothing is ever good enough. Russia makes a giant move in going gmo free. Yes Russia has corruption issues, but really, why give a shit. Are you really afraid of running into falsely labeled Russian organics at your local Wal-Mart? Lmfao. it’s a step in the right direction. How about savor the small wins.
Russia can still be the boogie man and and score a win. Enjoy the infinite gray areas
boatinginboca: This would be the so called “Russia propaganda” that people overlook……
Joy_McClure: It’s a 2 candle night for my Ivan Drago shrine.
Dyeredit: gmo-free =/= organic
-chipped-: GMOs don’t increase crop yield.
PresidentAntifa: This is actually interesting because they have been moving in the white ethnostate fascist direction, and fascists are often interested in food purity and vegetarian stuff.
-QZ-: Does Russia grow hemp?
Sub-Mongoloid: Have they forgotten the lessons from their mass crop failures during the Soviet era?
Chickens never see sunlight or grass, yet eggs may still be labeled ‘Organic’ by USDA
The Trump administration has announced plans to withdraw a regulation that would have required organic egg producers to give their hens room to graze outdoors.
rizing12: Evidence that regulations change with the whim of lobbyists and politicians. If a private reputation system emerges from this situation, organic producers and consumers will benefit.
RedPillFiend: Even “cageless” or “free range” can mean a brick building with no windows with 1,000s of birds shoved in there like sardines.
western_red: Big Ag gets their way again. If these huge factory farms can sell eggs from their cooped up sickly chickens as “organic”, they will be able to out price all the actual organic farmers who are usually pretty small scale.
ABrilliantDisaster: Well yeah, Organic basically means they were not given synthetic drugs and their feed was organic. It has nothing to do with their freedom to move. FYI “free range” also doesn’t mean they lived a truly free range life. It only means they had access to an outdoor area for a few minutes a day. If you want Truly free-range eggs, you need to look for “pastured” chickens, which actually means they were free to roam.
Dippy_Egg: >Those large egg producers have been fighting the new rules. They’ve been joined by some non-organic-farm groups — most prominently, the **National Pork Producers Council** — who see a threat in any federal regulation of animal welfare practices on farms.
I’d like to highlight that the most prominent opposition to providing decent conditions for the birds are lobbyists for CAFOs who want to keep getting away with allowing the deplorable conditions and heartbreaking, inhumane treatment for pigs.
west_coastG: raise your own eggs!
get chickens for your backyard. or muscovy ducks (they don’t quack). or quail. quail would be the easiest option and require the least amount of space.
butteredfingernails: One must be ever vigilant. Any farm worth its salt will let you see with your own eyes what the living conditions are like, regardless of the labels stuck on their products.
TheSalvation: I have some backyard chickens. The quality between their eggs and even supermarket organic is night and day. Their are neon yellow/orange, seriously like glow in the dark vibrant. The whites whip up with little effort and stay fluffed up.
We have lost so much quality in our food as it has become more mass produced by factories.
Lo0seR: The Feds approved version of “Organic” was rewritten some 10 years ago or so, not much of a difference anymore.
SuperCereal87554: What sort of system ends up encouraging systematically lying about the torture of animals? And there’s no other word for it.
They’ll be treating humans like this before you know it. Probably around the time that their unskilled labor is near worthless. It’s a logical consequence of our greed based system and culture. This path leads there one way or the other.
HackQuack: I worked in ag back in the day. Some “organic” pear farmer told me there’s really no difference between organic and non-organic other than the good ol’ gov’s approval. I wasn’t surprised in the least.
Aye_or_Nay: To be fair, What does access to sunlight or grass have to do with the organic composition of feed and livestock?
These people are making up their own truth (I am talking about crappy government regulators – and I am NOT a Trump supporter.)