Ask a corporate food scientist that works for a major food company anything

If your girlfriend is healthy it's because she's probably eating healthy but has nothing to do with the elimination of GMOs or eating more Organics.

This is Elementary and everyone has been taught this in their youth but they seem to forget.

99% of the shit you read about monsanto's is absolute bullshit. You are reading shell articles. Organics have grown 10% in the last 15 years. Hell it's gotten me 3 promotions! I fucking love Organics for what they've done for my career. But I'm telling you as an Insider it is complete bullshit and not healthier for you in anyway.

There's likely a correlation to people who like to eat organic with generally eating more healthy but it clearly has nothing to do with the products they buy rather their behavior in eating.

If gmo is healthy why is europe banning it? If gmo is healthy why is cancer on the rise since the introduction of it?You can try and justify your shitty job but youre just contributing to cancer to justify your position

We could make up millions of dollars. When people come to us with products we have to sit down and explain to them that when you scale something up it completely changes everything. Meaning the pies you make it home if you made 200000 of them in large debts they will not taste like the originals. Furthermore shelf life is a huge Factor and adding types of packaging and preservatives will affect the taste. However with recent advancements in Packaging and the retort process many foods can be made in small batches and packaged in a certain way not to serve her at their taste. Unfortunately this is not done more often because it is high cost and generally speaking Americans do not want to pay a lot for food. This is why when you go to Europe even in their processed food sections there's much more quality but that directly correlates with the cost.

she's not healthy at all. Fibromyalga (sp) and God knows what else. Some other weird nerve pain shit. I don't even know. So yeah...

Tess, is that you?

How long have you been an uneducated, tryhard cunt?

When you bake a pie in your oven you will eat it within a week. When you bake a pie at an industrial Bakery that I will not be eaten for several weeks. Preservatives will ensure that that pie will stay fresh and most importantly not have you shit yourself to death after consuming it. Preservatives are well-known what needs to be reinstated into the General Public is that they are not bad for you.

PROPAGANDA ALERT! PROPAGANDA ALERT! DISINFORMATION ALERT! DISINFORMATION ALERT!

Whats bullshit about it? They are a monopoly who replaces the seed bank with their gmo bullshit. Mutating cells is the foundation of cancer

Yea all that sodium is great for you and the perseritive infested food of the 90s tasted so great

i've been around the high end, high speed, food processing environments. some large companies/etc. i know about some of the basics of this. i've considered going from offering a pre-made, powered version where a customer adds their own liquid to finalize the product, to going as far as I can with the over the counter preservatives from say bob's red mill to test some basics of flavor/etc change. do you have experience with say, vacuum packaging vs preservatives?

> why did Europe ban GMOs
That's a very good question. First off they have not banned all GMOs and they actually use them just as much. This all started with Germany and without writing a huge paragraph it stems from business practices more so than health. Monsanto started cornering the business with GMOs they were encroaching into Europe. The Europeans did not like this as they wanted their share of the market. Germany very smartly but not empirically inflamed the health scares around GMOs there she brought into it and bend them. Germany further their own GMO research and currently distributes seeds to their Farmers with the same type of Technology but do not call them GMOs.

> GMOs cause cancer.
Sir please cite credible evidence that this is true Beyond a bullshit article you found in mother Vaughn.

There is a reason MMA fighters and other professional athletes stay away from processed foods. There is a reason "processed" has a negative connotation. You should be able to pronounce and recognize what you put in your body. There is a reason americans are so much fatter than the rest of the world and it isn't just because they are lazier. Our food is worse overall.

not op, but cancer has been in humans for hundreds of thousands of years, so you're not helping by being ignorant.

It is true that the current body of academic work on GMOs are mostly positive and there has been little in terms of evidence/proof/etc. that GMOs are bad for you but i dont like GMOs for some of their other characteristics like produce that doesnt create its own seeds so you HAVE to buy new seeds from monsanto. Also, its pretty fucking dangerous to put monsanto incharge of the supply of anything cuz you know, they will price it out of reach for normals or whatever / have control over the supply.

if refugees destroy the identity and function of your nations why is europe letting in millions of them?

EU is not an example to follow

How can I find out if the ground beef or chicken I buy is high quality?

the other dangerous thing about monsanto and their special seeds is how they react with the soils and shit. i dont know much about that but i would imagine its trivial to create some sort of seed DRM to fuck up the soil or whatever.

>Our food is worse overall.

i pity you if you believe this, you have access to higher quality food than anyone else in the country

americans are fat because they drink fucking soda. that's it. same reason mexicans are so fat.

Just FDA doesnt mean shit. In the arms race to feed all of America some short-cuts had to be taken.

I did a paper on this in college. Most, if not, all scientific journals state that GMO's are no better or worse than organic. All GMO really means is that it won't rott by the time it reaches your dinner table. GMO's are actually quite a scientific breakthrough, yet people associate it with bad things. It's very sad.

>i dont know much about that but i would imagine its trivial to create some sort of seed DRM to fuck up the soil or whatever.

>even though I don't understand what I'm talking about I would imagine it's trivial to do something that is actually impossible

what the actual fuck, kids. life lesson: if you don't know about something *don't speak about it*

No sodium is not good for you and no one saying it is. It is a Cheap Trick In preservation there are healthier ways to preserve the question is are you willing to pay for it?

Food is everything, it makes up ever cell in our body. I can't tell you how many times I've bought an organic peice of fruit, taken one bite, and thrown at a tree. Pissed off that I again have been ripped off. I dont want "organic" fruit I want living fruit!!! Fruit grown with love, without the use of too many fertilizers and pesticides. This is the only way to heal man and his sicknesses, to return a hand to land while keeping the other on the steering wheel of our 21st century lives, thank you for some of the inside info, it's funny how dumb people are. Always looking for a way to feel good about themselves instead of going good for themselves and the work

well you are an alleged shill, cough, food scientist. tell us

Can you pronounce cryptoxanthin? Cause thats a naturally occuring pigment in vegetables.
>not an argument

Someone won't be scientists when they grow up.

>cryptoxanthin is hard to pronounce

>somewhere
>an angry hippy is throwing countless fruit at a tree
>he wants organic the fruits of love
>unaware
>that he is the real fruit

Well there's where your advantage is. If you're offering a product in powdered form I'm assuming you're going to spray dry? That's an expensive process but it leaves the preservation part 2 be easier as it has extremely low water activity. At this point all you would need is packaging but again the packaging and the spray drying are going to be a huge cost. The packaging prossess that you'll need won't be as bad but the material will.

OP has taken his cookie clicker addiction to unprecedented levels

again not op, but would you fucking shut your pie hole and do real research before you spew your crappulance again? ffs you fucking moron.

Ask Chad Johnson if he stays away from processed foods. Naming a few athletes who don't eat processed foods doesn't name all of them.

wow literally all the results
lmgtfy.com/?q=monsanto seeds destroying soil

youre a fucking pussy is what you are

Mostly everything that is processed is medium to high glycemic in the index (moreso high glycemic). That overall has a bigger impact than soda, but soda is a huge factor.

>quoting the last sentence of my paragraph and disregarding the rest

You might be the person I should ask this question to.

First off, I'm a fat fuck. 270lbs and climbing. I eat a fuck ton of sweet, sugary shit and just all around "bad for you" foods. I plan on doing an experiment where I go 30 days without eating any sugar. 0 grams, period. Ignoring any other aspect of this experiment, what should I expect to happen to me if I do no exercise but cut out all forms of sugar entirely?

And sodium benzoate, a common preservative, is hard to pronounce?
>not an argument

cancer is on the rise because we eat more meat. See Japan and Chine

GMO is being banned for enviornmental and emotional reasons

actually not considering the spray thing, it's all powdered all the way with dry ingredients, or ingredients that were freeze dried/dehydrated then powdered by grinding. the final water added is the only water in the package. but do you have vacuum packaging experience?

Not op, but if you supplements the sugar with fats and sodiums, you will still stay fat.

>mostly everything that is processed is medium to high glycemic in the index

well no. you're talking about chips and shit. do chips represent "mostly all" foods to you? no, you choose to see it that way.

>That overall has a bigger impact than soda
No, it doesn't. Sugar drinks are, by far, the biggest reason for obesity.

So we gave a name to something that was naturally occuring..

>missing the point

not op; you stupid faggot go do your research

sciencealert.com/cancer-rates-in-kids-and-teens-are-declining

Yes but herein lies the difference in the definition and the misunderstanding. Processed foods correlate with high salt high sugar and high fat all things a pro athlete would want to avoid. However their protein shakes their energy bars their energy gels and probably hundreds of other products that they consume on a daily basis are processed.
Just because they don't eat mac and cheese does not mean there anti processed.

There is a distinction that needs to be made there are healthy foods and unhealthy Foods.
This has nothing to do with processing as there are healthy processed foods.

My point is processing is not the enemy eating like an asshole is. People eat like shit then they get sick they get diabetes they get cancer they get obesity. Then they blame large corporations for their Behaviour.

>not an argument

Are you fucking kidding me? Cancer is on the rise because of all the nuclear testing and pollution in air, water, and land.

I have

Triple double, has to be true

I love Cred Forums makes me feel at home, no sir the angry hippie knows he's a fruit. In fact cause everyone cares I had an apricot this morning in my backyard, it was only about 2 inches all around. But is taste is far greater than anything from fucking natural grocers. And I just moved here. No one gave a fuck bout that tree, but maybe cause it's organic mannnnnn. Enjoy yalls cancer from the round up ready corn meal, but GMO guys keep playing with genes I think alot of good can be accomplished for man

Look at every single country that has adopted a western diet.

I'm talking about mostly everything from the center of a grocery store that isn't produce or meat. "Chips and shit" lol. Everything has sugar in it. Everything has a crazy amount of sodium in it, just like soda.

...

>all the nuclear testing

Here's your (you)

>the government controls everything
>trust me I'm a food scientist contracted by the government

What a shit thread

>soda is making murica fat

Umm, true having a high caloric intake that soda only makes worse while living a sedentary lifestyle as the cause for obesity.

You are correct user. I'm glad you had the foresight to seek the truth. Lord knows there's a lot of bullshit out there sift through.

It literally revolutionized the way we farm. We could feed the world with a land mass the size of Kansas. If it weren't for distribution Logistics we could do that but only because of GMOs

not op, but if you want to cut down on your sugar intake, I'd suggest doing it gradually i.e. if you usually eat 2 tubs of ice cream a week, cut it down to 1, then just a half pint, and eventually get it out of your diet. If you can, stop drinking sodas and juices at once. There is no such thing as a 'cheat day'.Water is still the best way to rehydrate yourself imo. Go for sodas/juices only as an absolute last resort i.e if you're not so sure if the drinking water you have is safe to consume.

>what should I expect to happen

I expect you to give up on your experiment 45 minutes into it. If you had the discipline to abstain from bad food, you wouldn't be 270lbs in the first place. You fat tub of shit.

>earth has never had nuclear testing
>it's a myth
>radia active material doesn't take millennia to reach half life

>over indulgence is bad
>candy is worse than lettuce
>exercise
>sunlight

Source: super doctor

You're searching for a philosophy you are not going to find that in types of food retard.

Do it OP. would be intereesting and dont be a pussy like this guy fukn do it

its an element but the true culprit is the incredible lobbying done by the food fucks FMCG type pricks who have fucked with the labeling laws to the point where you cant rely on any of the 'healthy' indicators that most people rely on.

You can't just say a bunch of untrue stuff as your response

I've seen it done but never actually worked on a product that used it. An alternative to vacuum packing could also be Nitro filling dependent on what your product is.

take this motherfucker
cheesespin.net/

How long has weed been genetically modified and how come those hippies that love their organic food never complain about the cells taken from arctic char and put into some species of weed so they can better battle child climates. I don't get their stupidity. Besides half the "organic" food is grown right beside non organic food.

Kek

non-GMO is anti-scientific nonsense, and as far as I know this certification is only offered by private organizations in the US.

USDA organic certification may or may not mean that food is "better for you", but it absolutely DOES mean that the food was produced using more environmentally friendly methods and, where animals are concerned, more ethical methods.

Sugar is drug that will take you a month to get over craving once you're completely free of it. Take small steps. It might take you a year, but you can be clear of sugar if you try. First step is to cut out soda.

>corporate food scientist
conveyor belt worker

fuck you and spitting on cookies

And it's people like you who use Google for your research purposes that make my company and myself a lot of money.

Don't you understand it's this bullshit scare tactic that has no scientific basis that has driven food Marketing in the past 10 years.

They are selling to your fears moron.

We encourage you to use Google and then go to the store and buy a cart full of organic non gmo overpriced bulshit. You'll get me my fourth promotion.

Cancer is in rise cuz of all the progression we had on medicine in middle ages if you got a cold you were dead so only the ones who where with almost perfect genes made it and got to leave kids. Nowadays you can have AIDS and if you get a cold you still survive, we have let the weak to reproduce that's the reason of all the genetic health problems we are having. I Don't think we should not treat the sick and weak or that they dont have right to reproduce but we should be honest and tell the truth that they are not getting sick cuz the government is testing bombs or that the food is that bad no, they are getting sick because they shouldn't be living in the first place (kind of)

Try a quick experiment, use greens of sorts, harvest and wash one bags worth. Harvest put into bag immediately. See which one lasts longer, your science has blinded you. Not saying that I dislike science, there are other variables that modern man and sciences has yet to acknowledge, this knowledge is within ourselves and in our DNA. Man shall wake from his amnesia

What's your point junk food is processed. But so is the packaged lettuce you get in the store. The point is processing is not your enemy junk food is dummy.

The tinfoil has been deployed! Men, to battle stations!

allrigh then fuck face. post the DOI ids of all the research about Monsanto and soil contamination or any economic essays / opinions promoting the idea of giving Monsanto a monopoly over produce

you are a god for spreading this gospel.

my 12th grade chemistry teacher told me all this shit many years ago, and i carry it with me.

too bad nobody else knows or believes it.

I think you are making it a little easy for your self. I correct you: processing food does not make it unhealthy. But being able to put ingredients in behind closed curtains does. You put in cheapest oils which are also the unhealthiest (omega fats) you put in much salt to generate flavour that your cheap overly industrially grown natural ingredients cant provide.
Processed food is unhealthy, the only one youre fooling here is high school kids.

>Cancer is in rise cuz of all the progression we had on medicine in middle ages if you got a cold >you were dead so only the ones who where
>with almost perfect genes made it
>and got to leave kids.

?! There's at least one inbred royal family proving you wrong.

Doesn't binning break most of the cookies?

Do you do it intentionally to break the weaker cookies, that would otherwise be broken during transit?

What if people grew their own kale?

Organic food is a way to get people who are more prudent and select to spend the same amount of money as your average consumer

True

The chemicals are killing us, big pharma, big gov, big everything.

Also true.

Why can't we have both?

Op here.

You can do it that way and biochemically speaking you will lose weight even if you eat alot of fats. You can expect the first week to be the hardest with cravings if you get past that you will notice how easy it will be to resist sweets. Depending on your age and fat intake I would be a little worried about things like gallstones if you increase your fat intake. My suggestion would be to increase leafy greens and other Savory cook the vegetables to help with cravings. And as another Anton said probably best to do this gradually and not acutely.

Good luck and good for you for trying to get healthy it's going to totally change your life!

OP do you work for haas meincke in denmark?

I like you user. You're a cool dude.

What a fuckwit/10. Where's Eggboy and tales of cooking eggs?

Stoners are stupid. A lot of the weed out there nowadays is shady as fuck and the majority of card holders just want insurance for their street habit. Corners are cut to meet demand

The same way every single person's pet chihuhua nowadays is a "therapy animal". Grow up fuckers.

Who are they? And royal families didn't have to go thru the filth the common people had to go thru. So if you cant find inbred common families than you prove my point.

I believe we're making the same point cir I'm not defending shitty products whether they're made by my company or not. My point is first off by definition processing is not a bad word on the contrary it's a wonderful one that has saved millions of lives.

Secondly companies produce shitty Foods because people buy them. If you've ever work in marketing will know you follow Trends market research literally breaks down to customer behavior and asking them what they want and how much are they willing to pay for it. You cannot blame companies you can only blame the customers we give them what they want.

For example we also sell our product in Europe. It is a completely different product with the same name taste much better and uses better quality ingredients. This is nothing to do with European regulation rather it's what the customer asks for.

If you have the means to eat healthy and you're not then you're an idiot it's not my company's fault it's your own. Just like if you have the means to a good education but still believe every piece of bullshit you read on the internet that's your own fault.

This guy, makes me not feel so alone it's simple

In context to population growth cancer is not on the rise. From 0 to 58 years old cancer rate have actually decreased. The reason more people get it is because life expectancy has gone up significantly. The vast majority of cancer patients are over the age of 60 and have reached the age where the immune system is susceptible to it.

OP pls

This is why America is fucked it's stupidity like this.

You realize you're comparing tree ripened fruit the fruit bought in the store. You fuck wit.

There's a significant higher amount of sugar in tree ripen fruit. All that extra fruit toast is actually not good for you.

Compared to what, twinkies? Suck an egg.

Public Health graduate here. GMO food might not kill you. Real problem is GMO tainting natural genetic plants and crops, and e.g. Monsanto suing the fuck out of farmers and controlling seed. Fuck GMO - it's asshole private companies out to control the world's crops and animals to make profit.

Person here. Things may or may not happen. What is important is what you feel INSIDE

Very true it's actually impossible to find a strain of marijuana that hasn't been genetically modified. You can thank the Narco is for that.

>it's impossible to find a plant that's 15000 years old

No fucking way

I'm a cardholder. I'm a stoner too I'm just not as retarded as your typical one. I agree though, on all your premises.

Not true. I watched a show where this dude went to Columbia to find certain land races that haven't been fucked with yet.

We have a pilot plant attached to our headquarters that's how you do research retard it's called scaling up. A large part of my job is traveling to manufacturing facilities as well. 70% of my job is sitting in a cubicle in the lab I welcome chances to be on the floor.

What show user?

However he was finding them so he could take them back to Europe and genetically modify them.

Not sure exactly, but it was on Vice. Could've been an episode of Vice Essentials.

That seems like a slap in the face

why is hfc in everything, I mean god damn, don't we have better perservatives that isnt straight up corn sugar?

That picture is from the pilot plant those cookies are not for consumption and they will be thrown out. That is why they are being in a bin.

It said we tried to donate them to a shelter but the government won't let us do it.

Mutating cells is the foundation of evolution.

Negative but my company did just purchase an Old Fashioned Denmark Cookie Company.

Dude lost his fucking farm cause of shit-teir neighbour farmer's GMO shit contaminating his organic crop. USA Monsanto lawyers few in to fuck this farmer up. Fucking GMO shill.

mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-12/gm-contamination-farmer-loses-bid-for-high-court-review/7163506

Those dry tin cookies?

Fuck

It's actually adaptation, but you have fun

Yeah. GMO is about companies controlling seed. Will it give you cancer in the long run? Who knows. No risk with organic food but. Fuck Monsanto and Bayer!

Yeah the blue tins

If only people who needed food came to shelters you would be fine, but some dimwit pussy with blue hair will chip his tooth and try to sue you. Government is just trying to help

So if there are healthy and unhealthy foods. What are some of the examples of companies that produce healthy food

Down with things!

Yeah, that ban was a business move, nothing to do with health at all. And we still eat plenty in Europe, even though some of our healthcare is NOT charged at ridiculous rates... It's covered by our taxes - so why would the government allow us to eat any GM crops at all, knowing it was going to cause the cancerz which they'd have to pay to treat?

Very cool. My grandmother loved those.

What are the best brands to buy for processed foods?

Have you tried getting her tested for lyme disease? Fibro is a lie

Why don't you research yourself if you are interested?

Ramen noodles

I bet you're one of those anti-vaccine folks aren't you?

>No organic / non-GMO is not better for you nor is it actually any different from any other products you buy
Shill. In principle it's not worse but in practice the reason they make GMO crops is so they can spray them with poison. Too bad consumers aren't also genetically modified to accept Roundup too eh? But how could anyone possibly blame the industry for the genetic faults of consumers?

>Americans are unhealthy because they eat high sugar and low quality food. This does not correlate in any way with processing.
It most definitely does, and I question either your credentials or your integrity to say something like that. The simple fact is most processed foods are loaded with sugars and low-quality ingredients. That's the definition of correlation. Eating lots of processed foods won't necessarily kill you, but it probably will.

In conclusion, fuck off shill. Go sell this shit to the sheep.

Wrong, it's random mutations in the genetic code that lead to situationally beneficial "adaptions" that encourage procreation in a challenging environment.
You guys are fucking clueless.

I bet you're a jew

>guys
>just me

The ability to adapt isn't always due to mutation. It may be due to behavior, or tradition. As in, the reason humans are alive mega genius.

As a rule of thumb if it's a big Corporation that's not specialized in health food it's probably bad for you. In the food industry you make money with mass distribution and you want to sell to the largest portion of the population. When it comes to food Americans want crap and that's what they get.

Midsize companies usually have great products that aren't too bad for you. The unfortunate thing is a big boy steps in makes them an offer they can't refuse then scales up the process and sells it to everyone turning it into shit.

To be honest with you I'm a pretty boring eater I go out to eat a lot for the majority of my meals I eat a lot of salads. My girlfriend does triathlons and there are some amazing products coming out in that area.

But if I had to pick one process product that I really like it would be the Tetra pack baby food coming out of companies like Gerber and Plum Organics. They're expensive but absolutely delicious

Yeah but so is chronic lyme disease.

In between your visits two informers and other conspiracy sites you should visit some pick up some reading comprehension ones.

Processing is not the enemy shitty food is. The vast majority of non GMO and organic food is processed. The majority of food sold in grocery stores in the middle of the Isles is unhealthy but that is not because of processing.

Roundup chemical half life is less than a week. It breaks down into harmless Celicas. This is literally publicly published knowledge. But I'm sure you're too busy reading about how the new world order is mind controlling. The sad part is you are being controlled.

Anyways like I said keep buying non-GMO and organic you're only helping me and my company.

Or maybe they're both fronted as diagnostic instead of symptomatic so that no one is able to research them. Because doctors don't "practice" anymore. So the AMA can easily obscufate a medical issue by simply not teaching/publishing it.

All I know is it has nothing to do with money.

"Stoners are stupid"
"Most weed is shady as fuck"

Not sure if I'm stupid or the fucker who forgot weed is a plant that you can grow and monitor entirely on your own if you choose.

How bad are diet sodas for you? Does zero calories equal zero weight gain?

"Street habit"
"Out of context quotes"
"How to troll for those new to jewery"

From 0 to 27 they're probably a 14

>20 calories equals zero weight gain

Yes but it also equals Death eventually.

> are diet soda's bad for you.
Once or twice a day no.
7 a day probably.
I wouldn't be worried about the sweeteners I'd be more worried about the phosphoric acid that will eat the lining of your stomach if overused.

But why drink it at all just drink water.

>GMOs cause cancer.
Roundup causes cancer. Crops are genetically modified to survive this herbicide.

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15862083
iarc.fr/en/media-centre/iarcnews/pdf/MonographVolume112.pdf

Fuck off with your shill technicalities. Saying GMO doesn't cause cancer is like saying the Nazis registered all the Jews and put them in ghettos for their own protection, which would probably be technically true since if the Jews didn't go peacefully they'd be shot on the spot.

Corporate food scientist shills for corporate profits because "nothing I do is bad or wrong".

Waste of time as usual. Shut up and go to the corporate trough for your hush money, asshat.

But how many??

>My point is processing is not the enemy eating like an asshole is.
That's like saying guns aren't dangerous because it takes a human to pull the trigger, which I'm sure is exactly what people advocating gun rights would say, but the simple fact is if you put a gun to your head and pull the trigger you'll probably die, and of course, it'll be your fault. But that doesn't mean they're not dangerous. If you eat a lot of processed foods you'll probably get cancer or diabetes or heart disease. Sure, you could eat "healthy" processed foods, and you could use your firearm responsibly too. But let's be real, most people aren't responsible enough to use either of those safely.

I know that study well. And I'm guessing you've never read it and you probably only read the title.

1. it's correlational and inconclusive. In the follow-up studies to this one had contrary results. So no further investigation was done. This literally never even became a hypothesis.

2. The study was done with concentrated samples. Meaning it was done with the chemical in its purest form. What insecticides are sprayed they are deluded many times over. This is because you only need a miniscule amount to kill a bug. When the same studies were done with the diluted amounts that are applied to crops there were no significant findings.

3. The reason this study was done was directed at storage and transportation of the insecticides in their concentrated form. It actually directly says in the study that it is not intended to reflect the insecticide and its applications state.

In the future I urge you to actually read the studies you cite.

What are you talking about I help reduce unhealthy Foods I do a lot wrong. My point is if you want people to eat healthier you have to get them to eat healthier. You can't go after the companies that produce the foods they want.

Corporations want to make money this is not some groundbreaking hippie realization by you retard. If there's money in healthy food trust me companies will start producing.

>they will price it out of reach for normals
What the hell? The whole point of GMO is to increase crop yields to increase profit. Yields go up a lot when you can spray everything with Roundup so nothing else can grow there. They're not going to price this outside of the budget of their customers. The real price is on your health, but what do Amerifats care about that?

So you want to force companies to make healthy foods rather than encouraging people to eat healthy?

If you can't see the flaw in this logic then there is no hope for you.

Essentially, logic. Like anything else in the culinary industry.

You realize that every fruit and vegetable you've ever eaten or will eat is technically a GMO, right? Even if someone hasn't gone in and directly altered the genes, thousands of years of selective breeding to increase yields and sweetness have altered the standard fruits and vegetables to the point where they're hardly comparable to the original base plant.

Just because humans haven't directly inserted things into the DNA doesn't mean we haven't been changing the genes in food to be more beneficial for us since we started farming.

In fact, the same goes for any meat you eat as well. Everything you eat is a fucking GMO in one way or another. Being paranoid about GMOs is just plain ignorance.

I'm not criticizing or debasing. Just helped a lot to see some of these things countered.

Organic fruit cannot be grown with pesticides. If you bought one that was, that means someone lied to you.

Or more likely you're some sort of strawman, because even if hippies and vegans are stupid, I doubt they're this blatantly stupid.

What the hell is this shit? He sued a guy because his seeds blew on to his land. Of course he was going to lose. He'll probably sue the wind next.

And he didn't lose his farm because of Monsanto. It looks like he lost it because the GMO seeds that blew over ruined his organic status. That's like saying Colt or Remington is responsible when someone autist goes on a shooting spree.

youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM

Like how the New England Journal of Medicine published totally credible reaearch from Harvard scientists, that turned out to be bought and paid for by sugar interests?

Or how the FDA says Monsanto's GMOs are fine, despite several of the top FDA staff having business ties or history with Monsanto?

You need to be pretty naive to take US research and regulations at face value with all the corporate interests sticking their fingers in everything.

>No organic / non-GMO is not better for you nor is it actually any different from any other products you buy

They are. Foods that have a lesser environmental impact on top soil benefit everyone. Better methods of farming use a smaller water footprint, which everyone benefits from. Some of these products show VAST differences in quality and improve the land.

For a scientist, you are clearly dumb as shit if you never consider the ecological factors involving our consumption and why "organic / non-GMO" foods can be beneficially different. Its also alarming that you clump these two categories together.

>Processing is not the enemy shitty food is.
It just so happens, shill, that processing correlates with shitty food. Maybe you should look up the definition. I'm not saying it causes food to be shitty. But it definitely correlates with it. You know how you can avoid that shitty processed food entirely? Don't risk eating it.

>The half-life of glyphosate in soil ranges between 2 and 197 days
Do YOU eat things older than 197 days? That's ignoring all the inactive ingredients which are not harmless. But please, by all means, continue to use ad hominem. You're only making yourself look stupid.

look up atkins diet or low carb. That is basically what you are trying to do.

Iam doing one myself since a month

first week you will lose a lot of weight but that is mostly water.

this diets purpose is to let you lose weight without you feeling hungry since protein is filling you up more than carbs

>it's correlational and inconclusive.
So what? Why should I be your experiment? I'm not going on a crusade, I'm deciding what to buy at the grocery store. I don't need it to be conclusive, and I don't care if it's only correlational because if it correlates with my death, it really doesn't matter to me exactly why I died, if I could have avoided it.

Organic farming does not have a less of an impact on the land. You are being shilled to but it's not by me.

That's exactly the opposite of what I'm saying. Processed foods have a reason to exist which I stated. They are fucking tasty. I'm not saying they shouldn't exist, and I'm not saying people shouldn't be allowed to be irresponsible and suffer the consequences. But shills like you obscure or flat out lie about the consequences, so fuck you.

And this is how ignorance propagates.
Keyboard scientists don't understand the basics of scientific method.

Also Read the rest of my post idiot. The damning factor in that study is not that it's correlational or inconclusive it's that it proves nothing about what you're trying to claim.

As someone who has worked in the food industry for nearly two decades, I call absolute bullshit on OPRAH. None of that bullshit is even remotely true.

No one's telling you not to eat healthy dummy. But if you pump out misinformation about the public damning processing you are getting people afraid of the wrong thing. If we want people to change permanently about their diets then they need all of the information. You can eliminate processed foods and still eat very unhealthy. Walk down the non GMO / organic aisle it's full of just as unhealthy processed foods. I'm just glad they're processed so that people don't get sick.

Fuck off shill. You didn't even read what I said. What the fuck does the scientific method have to do with it? Do I have to prove conclusively to you that it's harmful in order for ME to have the right not to eat it? Do I have to prove it in order to have the right to point out some study and say, "these guys think it's risky, buyer beware"?

Anyway, you're probably lying about all of this. Good work troll, you've broken (fairly) new ground.

What misinformation? Correlation is misinformation? I didn't say processed foods cause ___ malady, only that it's correlated. Correlation is not misinformation just because it does not imply causation.

>I'm just glad they're processed so that people don't get sick.
What the fuck does this even mean? Stop parroting this shit like it's a fact, you don't even elaborate on what you mean let alone provide evidence. I've made bread from scratch and I didn't get sick. I've eaten homegrown vegetables and I didn't get sick. It's called COOKING YOUR FUCKING FOOD and I don't need someone else to do it for me.

Do you even understand how the peer-review system and scientific studies work?

Let's pretend for a second that that study was based on non concentrated insecticides. And let's also pretend that it had some interesting evidence concerning the insecticides being a carcinogen. If you look in the citation of any study you will be linked to follow-up studies. These other studies further investigate the findings. This is because for something to become empirically true in science we need irrefutable evidence or at the very least very strong evidence.

If you read the follow-up studies that looked into more subjective aspects about it being a carcinogen in it's diluted form showed no significant findings. Do you understand what that means? There were no significant findings thus no public health risk if insecticide is used as prescribed.

It's very sad to see someone's inability of comprehension.

Thank you.

guys talking shit...
Processed food (excluding OP who seems to think processing can include packaging) means refining....
You cut it all up...which takes all the good shit out...
pure squeezed orange juice....proccesed and has fuck all in it besides sugar...all fiber taken out
corn syrup....
they usually add sugar to everything to make it sweeter...
he claims he created some organic poor quality food?!?! no idea what the fuck he means...if you grow it in the ground, dont use pesticides its not gonna be fucking low quality...these people splice fish genes in tomatoes so they freeze better...sure, no harm...but you refine anything and its worse..
adding presertives to keep somethings "fresh" for a month....fuck me twinkies last 4 years..and they are filled with "cream"...you cant keep fuckin cream fresh 3 years and call it cream...
fucking crop industry has single handedly killed off the bees..."oh this pesticide doesnt kill bees...neither does this one......"5 years later "we didnt know combing them killed all the bees"

what makes food high quality?

Listeria, salmonella, e-coli, giardia, vomitoxin. Those and many more are things that can be consumed with food.

Processing Done Right eliminates that. No one is telling you not to cook your own food everyone does it. I hate to break it to you but the ingredients you purchase to cook your food are processed.

Go look at the fda's publishing of all recalls the issue it everyday. The vast majority of the recalls are dominated by Organics. They're usually small companies that don't know the proper processing precautions for food safety. Most of them are not even HACCP certified.

It's fuckwits like you that try to give processing a bad name when it's literally one of the pillars that has helped civilization to where it is.

>Ingestion of >85 mL of the concentrated formulation is likely to cause significant toxicity in adults.
Inb4 nobody eats that much Roundup unless intentionally. Why should I risk it? Who knows how long it stays in the body, or whether it transforms into something else just as toxic? The burden of proof is not on me, it's on YOU. That is something you don't seem to understand. If I don't eat things grown with Roundup, there is ZERO chance I will be harmed by it (discounting secondhand exposure and increased cost of organic food).

Unless YOU can prove CONCLUSIVELY that it is harmless, why should I risk eating it? Fuck you shill for thinking I'd believe it should be the other way around.

And these studies are commonly funded by companies with a vested financial interest in what is being researched.

Surely getting a paycheck from a company whose product or techniques are being scrutinized by your team will introduce some sort of bias in interpreting your findings.

Can you guys find a way to make niggers palatable, so we can feed them to people who are starving?

That's the point dumbass.

If you create poor quality food it's because of ingredients and practice not because of processing.

The word processing needs to be taken back.

Good ingredients.

How can potato be good senpai?

Hey man if it helps you sleep at night then go with it.

But just so you know there's literally zero chance you would consume 85ml of insecticide. That's the whole point why the study was not given any more attention. But the study actually did what it was supposed to and tighten the regulations on storage and transportation of the insecticide and it's concentrated form. It also Bandits transport in certain container sizes like rail cars.

>I hate to break it to you but the ingredients you purchase to cook your food are processed.
The homegrown vegetables were not. And processing is not really binary, despite the language that implies it is. Obviously the AMOUNT of processing matters as well.

>it's literally one of the pillars that has helped civilization to where it is.
I'm not denying this. Having shitty processed food is preferable to having no food. And having lots of shitty processed food has allowed our population to grow. But that doesn't mean you should eat shitty processed food.

So, you'd probably say, there's a way to not eat shitty processed foods, and that is to eat good, safe processed foods. But I say there's an easier way. And that is to avoid processing as much as possible.

They were fucking done by the same organization you absolute fucking retard.

can you be more precise?
i mean: how can i find out if my broccoli is high or low quality?

Heya that would be the first time a "food scientist"which would be a different title anyhow. Would work in the factory itself, this is never the case.

Anyhow you're a faggot. Organic is indeed meaningless but processed foods are shit, just get fresh ingredients (not packaged shit) and you'll probably live 20 years longer but nobody cares in america since you're all fat and lazy.

10/10 replied and raged a 'lil

>You can have high quality processed food.
2/10 baited.

No annon I think we're saying the exact same thing you're misunderstanding me. I have a garden too.

It is possible to make healthy processed foods the reason companies don't do it is because Americans don't want to pay for it. I don't blame the companies I blame the people. And we're not even talking a significant cost increase.

you took them out of the ground, washed and cooked them.

thats processing.

the only way to eat unprocessed veg is to bury your face in the soil and eat them right then and there.

God dammit OP, is it fucking possible to make niggers palatable to feed starving people. With today's technology and your expertise can this be done?

Roundup is an herbicide, not an insecticide. I hope you're not OP, because a slip like that...

>The word processing needs to be taken back.
That's like saying the word "feminism" needs to be taken back. Just because most feminists are ugly, man-hating lesbians and not "true feminists" does not make feminism any better. Similarly, if what most people consider "processed foods" are terrible, that means processed foods are terrible, because it is defined by usage.

>I hate to break it to you but the ingredients you purchase to cook your food are processed
Do you even know why processed food is?

This information brought to you by Monsanto posters tm

even if you somehow manage to buy ingredients in there exact natural state, without washing or packaging, the moment you wash and cook them, they become processed foods.

Well now we're just talking semantics but I'll bite.

When it comes to produce the Baseline is pretty high overall for quality. Obviously freshly picked is the best unfortunately not everyone has a home Garden or access to a local Farm. But besides that like I said the Baseline for produce is trying to get the freshest.

Where I live there are markets that offer one to rwo day freshness produce. They actually produce from a co-op of greenhouses all year round. It's absolutely outstanding produce but of course you pay for it. We are not too far away from this technology getting good enough we're supermarkets might even produce their own produce with rooftop greenhouses.

For everything else it pretty much depends on mini quality factors. For example with flour it really depends on what you're using it for what the grind size should be and what type of flower it should be ue
Used. So information and knowing what the right information is is a factor. This is why a large part of a chefs training is choosing quality ingredients and knowing how to do it.

Generally speaking quality ingredients will cost you more money.

It's called the pilot plant very crucial for research.

Hey you're a real shining example of intelligence let's make broad unfounded statements and call it fact. Brilliant!

>I don't blame the companies I blame the people.
I'm not blaming anyone. Blame implies morality. They're giving the people what they want. That's just good business. But the people deserve to know that what they think they want is (or might be) bad for their health. If they knew that, some of them might change their minds.

What I do blame is shit like Monsanto doing obviously biased studies saying their product is safe. What, think I was born yesterday, that I'll believe what the salesman tells me? And to hide this behind the veneer of science is insulting. It's not "peer review" when all your "peers" work for your boss too.

The original study were discussing is not dealing with Roundup it's dealing with a pesticide.

What the fuck is this shit? So cooking is processing now? What kind of a shill would it take to define cooking as processing? And even if I did accept that definition, the raw food wasn't cooked when I bought it. I'm fine with "processing" the food myself because I know exactly what that "processing" entailed.

>I have definitely helped create some low quality Organics.

Why don't you get a job where you help create only high quality processed/organic food?

It sounds like you know your shit, and you like what you, but why don't you think quality is better to work with.

Like if it was me, I'd definitely find a place where I worked with some high class premium food, so I knew the shit I helped with was proper shit instead of diarrhea kind of shit

OP is a special kind of retard.

>Americans are unhealthy because they eat high sugar and low quality food. This does not correlate in any way with processing.

>high sugar foods
>This does not correlate in any way with processing
>even though sugar is a highly processed extract

Even if the point might be that healthy foods can be processed without becoming cancer, OP just comes across as retarded.

COMMON MISCONCEPTIONS OF ORGANIC CROPS

>Pesticide Free
>Synthetic Pesticide Free
>More Nutritious
>Greater Harvest
>Green Friendly Supply Chain
>Justifiable Retail Cost

There have been a ton of studies done on GMOs and Roundup specifically by both private and government funded researchers.

I'm not sure what studies you're referring to but the point is moot as there is a significant amount of studies done on GMOs. None of their findings posed any significant threat to health.

At this point people who are anti-gmo are literally trying to validate a belief because they want to hold on to it. If you want to go after Monsanto it's because they have Shady business practices well that's fine. But if you try to attack them based on their GMO is you will lose.

I didn't make the comment you're responding to but he's right by definition and it's what OP is trying to say.

also forgot

>GMO Free

I have actually worked on some really good cereal bars. That was some very good inexpensive ingredients. Unfortunately the project got killed because of cost.

This is usually the case like I said companies are after making money and they spend a ton of it researching what the threshold is on what their customer base will spend. Americans don't care about quality food. Unfortunately.

I make enough money where I go out to really good restaurants and get really good healthy food. It does bother me because I know not everyone can do this and I know it's possible to eat healthy if you're willing to spend just a little bit more.

Uh, no, it was about Roundup, that herbicide they genetically modify crops to be resistant to so they can spray Roundup on them, killing all the competing plants. And if a lot of Roundup is harmful to humans, why should I believe that a lot of Roundup in small doses over an extended period is safe? Do you not see why the burden of proof lies on Monsanto? Obviously they do since they release "studies" saying it's safe.

Nobody was even talking about pesticides, though I wouldn't trust those either. My specific point is that GMO is not safe because it correlates with the danger of being covered in Roundup, something you can't do with non-GMO crops which are naturally not resistant to Roundup. Then some jackass, presumably OP, and possibly you if you're OP, started going on and on about correlation vs. causation, as if I'm going to eat something that correlates with cancer, even if nobody has proved it causes it.

Ascorbic acid is vitamin C and it stops food from going off as quick because ascorbic acid/ vit c is naturally anti bacterial

Conspiracy: b is SUPPOSED to teach us logical fallacy so dumb people can hurry up and die via ignorance.

It works better than removing warning labels.

You're wrong the study were referring to dealt with pesticides.

However the case in point is the same. Roundup and its application form which is diluted many times over does not translate to consumption. It is not a health risk this is been studied many many times over.

We actually use ascorbic acid that's encapsulated so it survives the baking process. It's expensive as hell but we care about our customers

>you will lose.
What the fuck is this shit? This is pathetic. I will lose? Lose what? How do I win? What am I trying to win? This are seriously some 8th grade insults.

If you're saying I will lose because Monsanto will continue making money hand over fist, then obviously I will lose. That's a given and not something I'm trying to change. You can't lose a battle you didn't fight.

You will lose in the sense that there will be someone with empirical fact to tell you why you're wrong.

No, YOU ARE WRONG.
This is the study:
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15862083
This is from the abstract:
Accidental ingestion of glyphosate formulations is generally associated with only mild, transient, gastrointestinal features. Most reported cases have followed the deliberate ingestion of the concentrated formulation of Roundup (The use of trade names is for product identification purposes only and does not imply endorsement.) (41% glyphosate as the IPA salt and 15% POEA). There is a reasonable correlation between the amount ingested and the likelihood of serious systemic sequelae or death. Advancing age is also associated with a less favourable prognosis. Ingestion of >85 mL of the concentrated formulation is likely to cause significant toxicity in adults.

Fuck off with your misinformation, trying to confuse the issue with smoke and mirrors.

Oh yeah I see, come to Europe then, in Scandinavia we care a lot about the quality in our foods, it's becoming trendy to live healthy and organic

>the company exonerated itself
You don't say.

How am I wrong? Crops are genetically modified to survive Roundup so they can kill all the weeds with it, increasing yields and thus profits.
>Ingestion of >85 mL of the concentrated formulation is likely to cause significant toxicity in adults.
How am I wrong? Because nobody eats that much Roundup? What about a little at a time over a lifetime? Fuck you, I'm right, you're wrong. Two can play this elementary school bullshit.

This was the original study cited.

But yours is also dealing with Roundup in its concentrated form.

>Ask a corporate food scientist that works for a major food company anything.

You're a fucking brainwashed dildo corporate shill who can never be trusted.

Mexicans do good food whit the head.

I'm the same person you fucking moron, and it's the same study. Jesus christ.

Goddamn shill moved on from lying to acting like a geezer with Alzheimer's. Good tactic. See that convincing people failed, act like a moron to cover it up and pretend nothing happened.

Keep buying non-GMO and organic you're making me and my company a ton of money. =)

Jesus Christ you clearly did not read the study. Typical conspiracy faggot regurgitating what he's learned on some conspiracy forum.

I'm not sure if you're trying to save face or trolling.

I quoted directly from the abstract. What did you do, accuse me of not reading it? Well, I accuse you of the same thing. Fuck off shill. Nobody trusts you. If you have proof, throw down. Otherwise, gtfo, because the burden of proof is on you. Not only because health is not something you should gamble on, but because I actually provided proof, and you provided nothing.

Sure nobody trusts you and your unfounded evidence. Enjoy your world with the blinders on.

It's actually more like
>keep saying things until hivemind kicks in and your oppressor loses interest, making you "right" by default.

The trouble with shills is they know the information they're trying to confuse. All the have to do is say anything but what they're paid not to. Easiest job ever. Plus it gives such an inflated value of self worth. Never mind that you don't actually know anything, you can win any debate!

To the shill, it's the same thing as being intelligent. When really shillery is just findind a mind stupid enough for spoonfeeding and egotistical enough to not realize its handicap.

I think the modern term is sheep.

Not sure what you guys are arguing about this study is very clear. It does not say what you want it to and I brought that to your attention. Who are you mad at?

Unfounded evidence? It's published by the fucking NIH. What evidence did you provide? Claiming to be a "food scientist" working for a corporation? You haven't provided a goddamn thing. You made a claim which you haven't substantiated, and likely can't because a) you aren't actually a "food scientist" or any kind of scientist, and b) you'd be fired (assuming you were actually a "food scientist") for doing so.

Bravo though. You're a good troll. You got me to respond and pissed me off thoroughly.

You're a fucking retard. Go back to your shitty cubicle at Monsanto you moldy taint. You clearly don't know a God damn thing about the history or science of agriculture, you soulless piece of shit. :D

If you really are what you say you are then just don't bother explaining anything to these retards.

FUCK this OP he doesn't know shit, I'm sure he's a paid advocate for GMOs

Some might have a shit-fit that food isn't processed, but the real issue is someone like Monsanto controlling the food source.

Glad you're at least on board with increasing govt regulation.

You're trying to claim that pesticides / Roundup in its used form is a carcinogen. The study clearly does not say that but yet you use it as evidence to say it does.

That is unfounded.

...

Watching all the aspey conspiratards/alex jones slave boys shit themselves has been fun. Thanks OP.

You don't even know what I want it to say. I want it to say exactly what it does say, because that's the part I quoted. >85 mL of Roundup is toxic. Why should I risk smaller amounts over a lifetime? Prove to me it is safe. The burden is on you, not me. This isn't a scientific journal. This isn't a court of law. This is my life. Prove to me I should feel safe ingesting small amounts of Roundup over a long period of time.

You can't even prove a smaller amount is safe because you're a shill and you know we're already aware all the studies saying it's safe were done by Monsanto.

You are a worthless liar dude. KYS violently.

>Go back to your shitty cubicle at Monsanto you moldy taint.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA WINNING

When you lower yourself to not even clever insults it really exposes the level of intelligence I'm dealing with here.

I definitely don't work for monsanto's and the company that I do work for is heavily into non GMO because dumbfucks like you will pay too much money for that label. But like I said keep believing what you will because you're employing a lot of people.

Here, random shill has taken the reverse bait. If I was upset, I could now spout off an "explanation". The shill would take easy pleasure in only replying to a small part of my post, leaving me too frustrated to continue. In this common example, shill "wins".

In this post we see
>moral high ground
>burden of anecdotal proof
(Anecdotal because there has been no direct sourcing)

And so you're not only wrong for the thing that you didn't actually quote, but the shill is able to be "bored" with your "ignorance"

I'm not saying it's a carcinogen, though I wouldn't be surprised if it is. I'm saying it's toxic in concentrated forms. And frankly, the distinction between carcinogen and toxic doesn't really interest me as a consumer since I don't want either, so fuck off if that's your argument. I'm not going to go to the store and buy poison for dinner and think, "I'm glad this doesn't cause cancer!"

>roundup
>not carcinogenic

I don't know how much more clearly I can explain this to you. Unless you purchase round up from concentrate and drink that much of it there is absolutely no way from store-bought food that you will obtain that amount of Roundup. It couldn't be more clear.

The food you buy in stores is traceless for roundup. Do you know what that means it means the system is working. If you do the math and it's proper dilution is 85 milliliters will actually treat one half an acre just to give you an idea of the dilution rate.

But I understand the facts don't fit well with your grand conspiracy so proceed

Nicely done, OP.

I have a feeling someone posted this on a non GMO forum. The Asperger's level just went up exponentially in here.

>arguing gmos
>on Cred Forums

omg

Are you actually working for monsanto right now to dispell the well founded belief that glyphosphate ready crops (gmo) in our food supply are very bad for our bodies even at the fda approved levels, and including the extreme high levels approved for livestock feed are not ultimately reachimg our plates.
Any "food scientist" without an agenda would vouch for the danger that these roundup ready crops pose for farmland and for the food chain and for our bodies

Exactly many chemicals are carcinogenic and poisonous in their concentrated form but they're used every day around you because you're not consuming them in their concentrated form.

I don't have the gumption to dig it up but the FDA just finished funding a study to try and find traces of insecticides / herbicides in store-bought Foods. The funniest part of all the only finding the head was with an organic product.

Ask a real Monsanto Middle-Management employee anything.

I'm ready to spill the bea---

How does your company do with fat ass burger conspiracy theorists all day?

When you actually just take a step back and look at the issue, does it matter if, perhaps, GMO foods arent 'as bad' as people think? A big thing they do in GMO is to remove genes that produce Omega-3 fatty acids and such things because these contribute to it going bad much faster. That is an essential nutrient. Aside from that, when you look at the economic impact that even just producing some of these fertilizers or pesticides has, let alone their application and consumption... I'm sure /some/ things arent as bad as people make them out to be, but you cant tell me for a second none of it is. When it comes down to it, people were not meant to eat doritos and chef boyardee and god knows what else.. Let me provide an experiment to illustrate my point.. I grow my own tomatoes, and have grown both 'heirloom' and GMO strains. Not sure what is missing from the GMO but they taste like fucking shit, heirloom tomatoes taste crisp and alive and bursting with flavor. Both grown under the same conditions.

There is certainly alot more going on here than the pro-GMO shills are letting on. I don't deny the issue is overblown, but by how much? A little, alot? The fact that they claim its 'perfectly safe' and 'quite the same' shows me they are full of shit.

Picture related: GMO shills at work

You can explain it clearly to me by providing a study NOT FROM MONSANTO saying small amounts are safe. Why is this so fucking hard to understand. I provide evidence. You cast doubt on the integrity of my evidence, while providing absolutely none of your own. Well my possibly doubtful evidence beats your non-existent evidence.

Ikr. He trolled me good, but what can I do besides keep posting. It's like gambling. You hope you weren't trolled but you just keep getting trolled.

This kind of straw-manning is exactly how I've seen Mosanto's shills debate

>I want labeling for GMO's, consumers should have the right to be informed

>You want everyone to starve to death and American business to fail!

youtube.com/watch?v=HIXER_yZUBg

So why should I risk one more chemical if I can avoid it? What kind of fucking stupid shit is this?
>Small amounts of this poison are safe, so you should go ahead and eat it with everything you eat
THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON YOU TO PROVE SMALL AMOUNTS ARE SAFE OVER A LONG PERIOD.
It's not so small when they spray it on everything you eat, and until you show me a study saying otherwise, I'm not believing otherwise.

OP is a faggot corporate shill sent and paid to sway online discourse. They lie about the long term health risks associated w gmos and processed foods because it would slow down their profits. They are trying to make food the fastest and cheapest ways. And these ways have long term health risks that are daily attributed to other things so to keep it on the downlow

Corporations have already infiltrated parts of the govt like the FDA and such meant to regulate this stuff. The "regulation" is a joke and the people in gov'tpostitions help their corporatefriends out and vice versa

Their goal is to suppress the true health risks of eating this shit food they've cut corners while creating because it will save them billions

Not op; Read the fucking article. It clearly says "death rates" are declining, the not the rate of diagnosis. All this means is that our treatments are more effective in preventing death. Seriously learn to fucking read.

Yes it's in the very study that you're claiming proves the opposite.

until all the shit they put in GMOs starts causing health problems, like sterility and higher cancer rates

should take another generation before you faggots find out how horribly wrong you were

diabetes is around the corner for you. expect to lose some toes and/or feet.

I always second-guess it when people said this about chilling. Now I finally know it's not true.

I'm an average asshole that just doesn't buy into conspiracy theories. I actually hate my fucking company and most corporations that I have worked for. But it beats the alternative of a fat asshole sitting by his computer arguing conspiracy theories all day. Instead I'll do it for my comfortable office earning my very nice paycheck.

Too late they've been using GMOs since the forties.

Even the fucking interview hosts are shills.
>Do you consider yourself a lobbyist
As if a 14 year old is supposed to know exactly what that entails. Trying to get her to say she's a shill, fucking media.

>Anyways like I said keep buying non-GMO and organic you're only helping me and my company.

Go play mind games somewhere else faggot

can you give some examples of low vs high quality processed foods OP

I've been to japan and there everything was way underpriced and better quality conpared to America the only things that were more expensive were meats and dairy products for obvious reasons.
Why is this?

Non Monsanto studies and I need to preface that with you idiots have already shown Trace Amounts of any kind do not show up in the food supply across all categories.

Not to mention the fact that insecticides on the other hand do show up in small amounts even in non GMO and organic foods.

SMALL AMOUNTS OVER A LONG PERIOD. QUOTE WHERE THEY SAID THAT.

Will I get cancer if I eat hot pockets? (College student, I got that low quality food budget)

Based on scientific facts and studies, what is your opinion on high fructose corn syrup and artificial sweetners/sugar alcohols (esp. K-ace, aspartame, xytol, and sucralose)? What about stuff like stevia extracts?

faggot
do you know where you are?

You say GMO's aren't inherently bad, and I completely agree. A lot of this stigma is caused by a lot of our most popular GMO's being engineered for cost effectiveness and multi-use properties which ultimately strips them of nutrients and packs them with calories.. corn being a great example.

Are there any examples of GMOs that are designed to make a food healthier/more nutritious? Why hasn't anyone tried a marketing ploy for food engineered to be extremely healthy? I honestly believe this would have more visible benefits.

yes

most processed food is carcinogenic

cancer.org/cancer/news/world-health-organization-says-processed-meat-causes-cancer

Well a lot of it has to do with Logistics.
One they don't have to transport the food as far. That's actually a huge cost for us.

The second and perhaps the most largest cost is regulation both safety and the simple cost of doing business in America. The government has his hand in everything compared to the Japanese and other nations contrary to popular belief in some ways are more capitalistic.

I'm not arguing our government isn't corrupt to the Bone I'm just saying the word process is not a bad word and organic and non GMO foods are not any safer for you.

Well OP is a shill (you probably are too) trying to defeat a straw-man argument.
>Processing is perfectly safe
>You process your food by cooking don't you?
>Nobody else defines cooking as processing but I define it as processing because it suits my argument

The Shill is Strong With This One

I have chronic nerve pain, joint pain, muscle pain and a seizure disorder that induces migraines on a daily basis.
You really can't stand there and tell me that I have a green card because of a "street habbit" hell I don't even smoke I just use tincture.
Also you do know there's only specific doctors that can prescribe green cards and they'll easily lose their job if they give someone one without reason.

>long term health risks associated w gmos
there are none. Look at the relevant peer-reviewed literature before you open your dimwit mouth

> Their goal is to suppress the true health risks of eating this shit food they've cut corners while creating because it will save them billions

So you mean we should see a marked increase in food company stocks and market cap because they're already in the process of saving "billions"? Even though food companies in the US have had the same rate of growth since fucking 1963 (well before organics and the heyday of processed foods). Jesus christ, if half the retards on this site just googled what they were going to say before they opened their mouths to spew this shit..

>the majority

this also likely applies mainly to places like CA where it has become an industry

no u

The steak and cheese flavor is known to cause "cancerous" tumors. Not sure about the other ones

>I have no idea wtf I'm talking about

ftfy

>The steak and cheese flavor
fuck
I've eaten so goddamned many of those

Yeah i live in washington.

>A lot of the weed out there nowadays is shady as fuck

you probably don't even smoke it
shut up

>half the retards on this site
motherfucker more like half the retards in the entire Western World- pseudoscience cancerous bullshit is everywhere

The study nor did I ever say small amounts are safe to consume I'm not sure where you got that from. You're skirting around the point for convenience. You're not going to change the fact that the study dealt with concentrates and when you buy food in the store there is absolutely no way that you will have Roundup in concentrated form in any Trace Amounts on your food.

Again you're using this study to try and prove and non-existing point. What I eat Roundup in any form absolutely not!

Is Roundup a carcinogen in concentrated form: very likely.

Is Roundup or any other pesticide / herbicides found in our food supply in concentrated form: No

Is this clear now?

Insecticide / herbicide are not found the vast majority of store-bought food. With the exception of a recent study that found insecticide in Trace Amounts with some organic. If I remember correctly it was with spinach in ready PAC. And even then it was in negligible amounts. I personally don't think that's acceptable just because it will make people like you claim the sky is falling.

Rip

>The chemicals are killing us, big pharma, big gov, big everything.

come again? We can't have both because the latter is harebrained conspiracy whose only real evidence is retards flinging their own shit at each other online, and the former is actually based in evidence and fact.

>We can't just be evidence-based, we have to be contrarian, ALL THE TIME!!

found the Monsanto shill

>Western World-
casting too small a net. The East has just as many retards, you just can't understand as many of them

>big gov
>killing us

kek

Well your a fucktard if you think this is true. Are food isn't worse we have a larger selection of food some good some bad. Fat fucks just choose wrong. I buy my meat from the butcher and try to not eat cheap section 8 food brands by my veggies at the produce stand and I do t seem to have to eat anything bad all this great healthy food within reach. It's your choice what you eat. I can offer you a bag of cum it's your choice to eat it or not

welcome to the human pyramid- the base is massive and
BASE
get it?

touché

In terms of health they're bad for you in the sense that they cause diabetes. And the artificial sweeteners fuck with the Krebs cycle in a complex way.

From a personal sensory standpoint I think regular good old-fashioned sugar is the best.

I mean it's Elementary sweeteners of all kinds should be used very sparingly.