In response to:

Environmentalism and Human Sacrifice

Just_aJoe Wrote: Feb 26, 2013 7:26 PM
The issue of GM food products is more complicated than Dennis suggests. We know that golden rice has more vitamin A because we're measuring for it. We don't know the long term impact. It's simplistic to say Americans are obese because of a lack of exercise. Maybe it has something to do with corporate farming methods using hormones that get into the food supply. We know this is a contributory factor in antibiotic effectiveness but somehow it's ridiculous to assume the same thing for animal growth hormones.
rmccarthy Wrote: Feb 26, 2013 7:43 PM
Recent reports of artificial sweeteners sabotaging weight loss (esp producing belly fat) doesn't sound good.
nawlins72 Wrote: Feb 26, 2013 10:44 PM
Its not good. Its junk science. The "artificial sweetener = obesity" is correlation not causation.
rmccarthy Wrote: Feb 26, 2013 11:27 PM
Here's the thing, though. My wife heard this stuff about artificial sweeteners and decided to get back on the Celestial seasonings herbal teas with either no sweetener or a touch of honey (which has other good stuff). So, I feel like we can't lose, yeah!
Just_aJoe Wrote: Feb 26, 2013 7:29 PM

We know animal hormones increase animal weight but continue to assume they don't produce a similar effect in people? Are we intentionally being ignorant now about GM food?

The problem is that we just don't know because if we looked, we'd have to admit that maybe what we assumed was safe like we did with smoking in the 50's is really a killer. GM food might be safe but until it's proven, we should be very careful encouraging putting this into the environment.

To a liberal this makes sense but they're also the same people who continue to push material changes to society (read gay marriage) without the same rigor to understand it's long term impact.
ConcealedCarry Wrote: Feb 26, 2013 7:35 PM
Just_aJoe, I think you're being unfair to Prager. His columns are to short to get into the minutia of complex issues like GM foods. He appears to trust people like Lomborg (as do I) to do their due diligence. Now the issue appears to be radical environmentalism vs. the lives and health of people. Prager wants people to win; anything wrong with that?
rmccarthy Wrote: Feb 26, 2013 7:57 PM
Excuse me but, I am led to believe that you get better advise from many wise counselors rather than one or two experts. And opening up something to discussion would be a good thing if people want to consider what is offered.
rmccarthy Wrote: Feb 26, 2013 9:11 PM
I DO NOT think I can get better info from one or two experts.
I look to MANY wise counselors and an open discussion. I always put my trust in God and His wisdom and seriously doubt science and academia. You can nail that to my cross.
bitoubush Wrote: Feb 26, 2013 10:23 PM
Well then, there's the problem............believing in fiction rather than fact.
rmccarthy Wrote: Feb 26, 2013 10:33 PM
A little wisdom beats a whole lotta knowledge any day. Science is wrong half the time...that's definitely worse than fiction.
nawlins72 Wrote: Feb 26, 2013 10:42 PM
Just, hormones used in livestock production are regulated so that the concentrations in final meat are low and are chosen due to their lack of activity by oral route. You could eat significant quantities of it and the liver would metabolize it and excrete it with no effect. Soy has greater concentrations of naturally occurring estrogens than beef.

Last week, Bjorn Lomborg, the widely published Danish professor and director of one of the world's leading environmental think tanks, the Copenhagen Consensus Center, published an article about the Philippines' decision, after 12 years, to allow genetically modified (GM) rice -- "golden rice" -- to be grown and consumed in that country.

The reason for the delay was environmentalist opposition to GM rice; and the reason for the change in Philippine policy was that 4.4 million Filipino children suffer from vitamin A deficiency. That deficiency, Lomborg writes, "according to the World Health Organization, causes 250,000 to 500,000 children to go blind...