Weight Loss Surgery?

scottalanmiller

@scottalanmiller Has that large reflective power generation system that uses steam taken off in Spain?

I haven't seen one, wind and hydro everywhere in the region I am in. It's mountains so those two are in abundance.

Reflective power to steam was in use in the US back when I was very little. I remember seeing it in elementary school. As far as I know, that works really well in desert areas. It's still built regularly.

tonyshowoff

@scottalanmiller said:

None of those eliminated whole crops in a single season. It's completely different.

That goes into what I was saying about clones, especially nothing but clones.

You'll notice what I felt should put people in jail is patenting life.

Sorry, I misread that, but I do agree there that is really bizarre and I've always thought so, especially when it got into the realm of moving beyond plants into animals and the sexist animal of all, human.

Anyway, don't get weight loss surgery. Boom now it's an on topic post

Nic

Just to give you my thoughts on the matter of weight loss, I think it's a hugely complicated situation that isn't completely explained yet.

Modern diet has created a lot of obesity that can't just be explained by saying that everyone has suddenly lost their will to stop eating.

There's a variety of factors that my reading shows play into it:

The rise of processed food
The rise of usage of high fructose corn syrup
The hygiene hypothesis and it's effect on gut bacteria
The influence of certain food chemicals on gut flora and how that impacts obesity
The change in culture to a more sedentary one for most people
The rise in usage of sugars of all kinds to make food more palatable
The rise in usage of industrial seed oils to replace animal fats and healthful vegetable oils
The rise in inflammatory diseases linked to many of the above factors
Metabolic syndrome caused by increase in usage of certain plastics and the associated hormonal imbalances
The rise in use of GMOs - the jury is still out on this one. I know there is a lot of research saying GMOs don't make people less healthy than non-GMOs, but they are only comparing that to a regular unhealthy modern diet, for the most part.
The rise in usage of pesticides
The changes to various staple foods through non-GMO means, such as breeding wheat to have more gluten and other changes
The decrease in consumption of naturally fermented foods, such as sourdough being replaced by fast rising yeast breads
Decrease in consumption of fish oils and other healthy oils leading to an imbalance of Omega 3 and Omega 6 levels
Possible Vitamin D deficiency from less time outside and poor diet
Mineral depletion in food from modern farming practices

The fact that all of these have occurred together makes it incredibly hard to tease out just which of these are important, and how much they each contribute. Or to find out if it is a combination of all of the above and the synergies of them working in concert.

That being said, my personal experience is that a combination of exercise, diet, good probiotic practices, and moving to a more whole foods and lower carb eating style can help almost anyone to drop some weight and improve their long term prospects.

tonyshowoff

@Nic
I'd like some further clarification on some of the things you said, plus also I've mixed in some of my own opinions and I hope you humour me with reading them.

The rise of processed food

How is processed food bad? Most food is processed, except raw fruits and vegetables. Even organic stuff, I mean look at anything based on soy, or things like almond milk, etc. Unless this an Americanism I'm unfamiliar with that refers to some sort of specific process.

The rise of usage of high fructose corn syrup

This breaks down the same way as regular sugar, but if you mean it's bad in the sense that it's much easier to consume way more of it, then I agree with you here.

#3 and #4 about gut flora

I've read a lot that this likely also has a huge influence on why so many people are so damn allergic to everything today, that and not going outside.

The change in culture to a more sedentary one for most people

People bring up this one a lot, but consider that there were lawyers, bank tellers, accountants, etc who were essentially equally as sedentary way back when as now. The primary difference is, from what I've read, is that people consume about 500 more calories per day on average, but also about 150g - 200g more carbohydrates, i.e. sugar.

The rise in usage of sugars of all kinds to make food more palatable

What's funny about this is that this usually happens because they remove the fat, because fat is considered bad, so they just put more sugar in it.

7 and 8

This is definitely one, as I've read some that would suggest hydrogenated oils which are promoted as being more healthy can actually inflame the cardiovascular system in similar manner to smoking

Metabolic syndrome caused by increase in usage of certain plastics and the associated hormonal imbalances

I've not seen much direct hard evidence of this, and usually the hormonal imbalances associated with this and also bovine hormones for milk are more aptly explained by the rise in obesity.

GMOs

The jury really isn't out on GMOs, they can grow more food, in less space, for cheaper, and they're controlling genes that already exist in the plants (for approved foods, not experimental examples often cited which people aren't even eating), they're also tested for sometimes years before approval, when organic cross breeding has no approval process so the suggested dangers of accidental allergens, etc are more realistically risky in organic farming than GMO farming.

There's a lot of fear mongering about this and it seems to be more related to "natural" is good, even though selective breeding over a long period of time can also create similar results, there just isn't enough time, both from a capitalist perspective and also from a 7+ billion people eating perspective. However, I will say the lack of diversity is an issue, as even the cloned banana sits on the edge of being destroyed by a fungus because they're all the same. Getting rid of gene patenting, I think, would encourage diversity since there'd be no benefit to fitting within a patent.

The rise in usage of pesticides

There's no choice here either, before modern pesticides even the Netherlands had famines, thank science those days are gone, now they're some of the fattest people in Europe.

The changes to various staple foods through non-GMO means, such as breeding wheat to have more gluten and other changes

This is another necessary thing, because without it many people would starve, and would have starved if not for these advancements. However, I contend this is more dangerous than GMOs. With GMOs we know what genes we're turning off and on, but with radiation + cross breeding, it's even more shooting in the dark, and could definitely cause allergy problems, especially with how sensative people are now.

The decrease in consumption of naturally fermented foods, such as sourdough being replaced by fast rising yeast breads

OMFG, I love sourdough bread, I hate that I'm off bread mostly, but when I do eat it, and it's not pizza, it's sourdough. Great, now I can't stop thinking about sourdough.

Decrease in consumption of fish oils and other healthy oils leading to an imbalance of Omega 3 and Omega 6 levels

Agreed, supplements help, and also they've found ways to get it into eggs, but the problem is that people often consider eggs to be some sort of heart attack pill, but eating wheat bread is fine. If the modern diet was better, I can't imagine even people who "eat healthy" would be so unhealthy, compared to people who used to "eat unhealthy" being healthier than people today. Seems sorta backwards.

Possible Vitamin D deficiency from less time outside and poor diet

When I was a kid people would come to my school and give us some sort of milk with tons of vitamin D in it. Anyway, I take supplements today, but skin tone has a lot to do with ability to intake Vitamin D.

Mineral depletion in food from modern farming practices

Ironically things like wheat flour have tons of things added now, especially in the US to make up for what's lost/lacking elsewhere.

That being said, my personal experience is that a combination of exercise, diet, good probiotic practices, and moving to a more whole foods and lower carb eating style can help almost anyone to drop some weight and improve their long term prospects.

I agree with you on lower carb for sure (see my story post above), but suggesting exercise and diet is unclear, especially because exercise to most people means things like running and walking which are very crappy ways to burn calories, instead of lifting weights which works a lot better. Second when it comes to diet, a lot of people consider the food pyramid/plate/whatever to be the best, but that's about 300g of carbs per day, when even for a lot of people 100g is probably too much, and also not enough protein.

scottalanmiller

Speaking of not processing things. One of the things that they do in much of the US is put crap in the water. We get to drink right out of the mountain streams here! Best water ever.

MattSpeller

@scottalanmiller Having been back and spoiled with awesome tap water again I can't go back to bottled. Good water is very important.

scottalanmiller

I never did bottled. But this is all natural tap water. It's awesome.

And just one town over, the bottle the stream water. It's the largest water bottling location in the country.

tonyshowoff

@scottalanmiller said:

Speaking of not processing things. One of the things that they do in much of the US is put crap in the water. We get to drink right out of the mountain streams here! Best water ever.

I drink only sea water, it's hell on my kidneys, but I live with my choices

Nic

@tonyshowoff said:

@Nic
I'd like some further clarification on some of the things you said, plus also I've mixed in some of my own opinions and I hope you humour me with reading them.

The rise of processed food

How is processed food bad? Most food is processed, except raw fruits and vegetables. Even organic stuff, I mean look at anything based on soy, or things like almond milk, etc. Unless this an Americanism I'm unfamiliar with that refers to some sort of specific process.

The rise of usage of high fructose corn syrup

This breaks down the same way as regular sugar, but if you mean it's bad in the sense that it's much easier to consume way more of it, then I agree with you here.

#3 and #4 about gut flora

I've read a lot that this likely also has a huge influence on why so many people are so damn allergic to everything today, that and not going outside.

The change in culture to a more sedentary one for most people

People bring up this one a lot, but consider that there were lawyers, bank tellers, accountants, etc who were essentially equally as sedentary way back when as now. The primary difference is, from what I've read, is that people consume about 500 more calories per day on average, but also about 150g - 200g more carbohydrates, i.e. sugar.

The rise in usage of sugars of all kinds to make food more palatable

What's funny about this is that this usually happens because they remove the fat, because fat is considered bad, so they just put more sugar in it.

7 and 8

This is definitely one, as I've read some that would suggest hydrogenated oils which are promoted as being more healthy can actually inflame the cardiovascular system in similar manner to smoking

Metabolic syndrome caused by increase in usage of certain plastics and the associated hormonal imbalances

I've not seen much direct hard evidence of this, and usually the hormonal imbalances associated with this and also bovine hormones for milk are more aptly explained by the rise in obesity.

GMOs

The jury really isn't out on GMOs, they can grow more food, in less space, for cheaper, and they're controlling genes that already exist in the plants (for approved foods, not experimental examples often cited which people aren't even eating), they're also tested for sometimes years before approval, when organic cross breeding has no approval process so the suggested dangers of accidental allergens, etc are more realistically risky in organic farming than GMO farming.

There's a lot of fear mongering about this and it seems to be more related to "natural" is good, even though selective breeding over a long period of time can also create similar results, there just isn't enough time, both from a capitalist perspective and also from a 7+ billion people eating perspective. However, I will say the lack of diversity is an issue, as even the cloned banana sits on the edge of being destroyed by a fungus because they're all the same. Getting rid of gene patenting, I think, would encourage diversity since there'd be no benefit to fitting within a patent.

The rise in usage of pesticides

There's no choice here either, before modern pesticides even the Netherlands had famines, thank science those days are gone, now they're some of the fattest people in Europe.

The changes to various staple foods through non-GMO means, such as breeding wheat to have more gluten and other changes

This is another necessary thing, because without it many people would starve, and would have starved if not for these advancements. However, I contend this is more dangerous than GMOs. With GMOs we know what genes we're turning off and on, but with radiation + cross breeding, it's even more shooting in the dark, and could definitely cause allergy problems, especially with how sensative people are now.

The decrease in consumption of naturally fermented foods, such as sourdough being replaced by fast rising yeast breads

OMFG, I love sourdough bread, I hate that I'm off bread mostly, but when I do eat it, and it's not pizza, it's sourdough. Great, now I can't stop thinking about sourdough.

Decrease in consumption of fish oils and other healthy oils leading to an imbalance of Omega 3 and Omega 6 levels

Agreed, supplements help, and also they've found ways to get it into eggs, but the problem is that people often consider eggs to be some sort of heart attack pill, but eating wheat bread is fine. If the modern diet was better, I can't imagine even people who "eat healthy" would be so unhealthy, compared to people who used to "eat unhealthy" being healthier than people today. Seems sorta backwards.

Possible Vitamin D deficiency from less time outside and poor diet

When I was a kid people would come to my school and give us some sort of milk with tons of vitamin D in it. Anyway, I take supplements today, but skin tone has a lot to do with ability to intake Vitamin D.

Mineral depletion in food from modern farming practices

Ironically things like wheat flour have tons of things added now, especially in the US to make up for what's lost/lacking elsewhere.

That being said, my personal experience is that a combination of exercise, diet, good probiotic practices, and moving to a more whole foods and lower carb eating style can help almost anyone to drop some weight and improve their long term prospects.

I agree with you on lower carb for sure (see my story post above), but suggesting exercise and diet is unclear, especially because exercise to most people means things like running and walking which are very crappy ways to burn calories, instead of lifting weights which works a lot better. Second when it comes to diet, a lot of people consider the food pyramid/plate/whatever to be the best, but that's about 300g of carbs per day, when even for a lot of people 100g is probably too much, and also not enough protein.

I'm talking about heavily processed and the rise of engineered foods that have a lot of chemicals in them
Actually it doesn't break down the same way - there's lots of research showing that it affects the body differently
Again, we have a lot more labor saving devices than people did 20 or 30 years ago. Plus the ratio of people in labor intensive jobs to sedentary ones have changed.
Good point on hormones and antibiotics in food. I forgot about that one. Most people know that animals are fed antibiotics not to keep them healthy, but to make them gain weight faster. Those antibiotics end up in the animal, and guess what, they might have the same effect on humans.
The jury is still out simply because they haven't been around long enough. All we can say right now is that we haven't yet found any adverse effects in animal models. There have not been humans alive who have eaten GMOs for their entire lives, so we can't eliminate the possibility of adverse effects. Also, it's impossible to prove a negative.
Of course there is a choice - there's a choice about population control, and there are ways to feed the entire population without so much pesticide use. We just choose not to because it is cheaper not to.
There was plenty of food before GMOs. It isn't like the world was starving before that was invented.
Fortified flour just has a couple minerals in it - there's plenty of minerals that aren't added in after. Plus you have to have cofactors found in real food to aid in absorption of said minerals and vitamins. It isn't enough just to take a pill.

tonyshowoff

I'm talking about heavily processed and the rise of engineered foods that have a lot of chemicals in them

All foods have chemicals in them, though, but that's nitpicking. What chemicals are you referring to which are engineered into them which cannot exist in them otherwise?

Actually it doesn't break down the same way - there's lots of research showing that it affects the body differently

Even saliva breaks the chain, and I find it hard to believe the stomach couldn't do a much better job. Further there's the issue of: if it is different, how is it different, and in what way does this affect the body? For the most part though all I really see against HFCS from a "it's different" stand point seems to be on par with anti-fluoride "research." That doesn't mean it doesn't exist, what I'm saying is I haven't seen any double blind studies which suggest it's bad beyond sugar. However I will say that in general sugar is bad for you, period, and prior to the pro-vegetarian grain lobby in the Johnson administration, sugar was considered the #1 bad thing, then it became fat. It's ironic though that Type 2 diabetes is caused by too much sugar, and even in the 1920s health pamphlets regarding it said to stay away from bread in addition to many other things, however now the ADA suggests eating a lot of carbs to help with diabetes.

Again, we have a lot more labor saving devices than people did 20 or 30 years ago. Plus the ratio of people in labor intensive jobs to sedentary ones have changed.

Yes, but I'm not talking about society at large (pun intended), I'm talking about people who always worked non-labour jobs and had sedentary lives, the fact that often they were not obese then where as they are now, and not just obese, but massively obese in some cases. Additionally some people who did not change lifestyle (other than food) through the decades also have gained a lot of weight, beyond what's normal for ageing people to gain.

Good point on hormones and antibiotics in food. I forgot about that one. Most people know that animals are fed antibiotics not to keep them healthy, but to make them gain weight faster. Those antibiotics end up in the animal, and guess what, they might have the same effect on humans.

Possibly, but I was mostly referring to hormones, something unlikely to actually have much affect on people, however cow milk is often blamed for young girls starting puberty earlier, even though most of the milk now produced doesn't have these hormones in it, it's still a common belief. Of course, the reality is that puberty for girls involves a body fat ratio, so fatter girls means earlier puberty, and cows have nothing to do with it... unless they're drinking a lot of sugary milkshakes of course.

Genetically engineered cattle would be superior to blasting them with chemicals, and increasing the insulin resistance would make them gain weight much faster too, after all a lot of fat humans blame their genes,

just like me,

brb pizza.

The jury is still out simply because they haven't been around long enough. All we can say right now is that we haven't yet found any adverse effects in animal models. There have not been humans alive who have eaten GMOs for their entire lives, so we can't eliminate the possibility of adverse effects. Also, it's impossible to prove a negative.

How long is long enough? It's been almost 20 years. 50 years? 100 years? The issue here is that if we're turning on and off genes which already exist in the plants why would that automatically potentially make them any more dangerous than ones where natural or artificial selection made them that way? Humans have done damn near magic, just look at wheat, carrots, corn, etc just with cross breeding and selective breeding alone, how do we know the originals weren't safer and we have accidentally introduced more dangerous things even with "organic" farming improvement methods.

I'd say we have since even the most organic coffee today is more carcinogenic than natural, wild coffee plants were/are, and that same goes with black pepper, just to name another example.

Of course there is a choice - there's a choice about population control, and there are ways to feed the entire population without so much pesticide use. We just choose not to because it is cheaper not to.

I agree about population control, and we need to make education and birth control options more widely available, the problem is that so many forces work against it, even in the US. I've never understood the American puritanical view that educating about safe sex means kids will have sex, so instead we tell them not to have sex at all and don't even teach that masturbation even exists, and we end up with 2 million teen pregnancies a year. Yes, I guess that is a success.

Though the USSR for a long time had a similar policy, in fact it was "Soviet citizens don't have sex," in other words we don't even discuss it. Abortion was legal, except briefly it was made illegal, and some birth control options were available, but the whole thing was a mess. Side bar: my father used to talk about how the rubbers were so terrible and chaffing that either people didn't use them or used a more external means of dealing with the problem. Well, it was funnier when he told it.

Anyway, saying and dealing with are two different things. We can talk all day about what people in the world should and shouldn't do, but it doesn't really matter, but I don't have any solution for that which I can implement.

There was plenty of food before GMOs. It isn't like the world was starving before that was invented.

What? Yes it was, and it still is. There was a major food crisis in the latter part of the 20th century, primarily lowered by blasting wheat with radiation to try to get a result to further selectively breed. It did work out well and wheat is much more plentiful than it was then, and it's estimated that at least a billion people have been saved by that. Just because people aren't starving in the west, doesn't mean the rest of the world is eating out at Golden Corral. Over the next 50 years, without GMOs or a miracle, billions more could starve. Organic food really is a western privilege, and the less yield per parcel and ability to plant in less areas, and being less resilient to pests is not a positive.

Further, GMOs help broaden the food supply (so long as we're not talking about clones) which helps with shortages, and there are modern examples of starvation because of shortages, just in places nobody cares about (and apparently don't think exist). Further, I must reiterate my point about ignoring the power of science, because when we were at the will of nature, even the Dutch had famines.

If I can plant more per acre and it yields more, and in more places, then it has obvious benefit over something that takes more land, yields less, is more sensitive to seasonal issues, bugs, weather problems, etc.

Meanwhile it's the same plant, it's the same genes, I've just made sure of which ones I want on and off, and of course go through massive amounts of red tape to get them approved for people to eat. However, if I want to do organic cross breeding and anything else, I don't need approval from anyone to make sure I didn't accidentally create a new gene series which is dangerous.

Fortified flour just has a couple minerals in it - there's plenty of minerals that aren't added in after. Plus you have to have cofactors found in real food to aid in absorption of said minerals and vitamins. It isn't enough just to take a pill.

Of course, it was just an example though based on what you said, I don't consider it a solution or anything. Though it does seem to help, I have noticed in Eastern Europe where wheat is not usually fortified that there are huge deficiency problems compared to the west, but that may be caused by some other factor or food, I haven't attempted any sort of real study or research.

Nic

20 years certainly isn't enough, for the GMOs. I'm not really interested in a long debate about the others stuff, but I'm not really interested in volunteering as a guinea pig for GMOs just so that Monsanto and others can make more money. My dad was a pioneer in the biotech field (if you google my last name Tolstoshev, you'll see his name pop up) so I've got a very good understanding of biotech and genetic therapy. It's not quite as simple as flipping genes on and off - it's very complicated. Epigenetics is just getting started as a field, so we have no idea the long term effects. Anyway, feel free to eat however you like.

Minion Queen

As someone who grew up off grid and we grew everything from heirloom seeds, as in we kept some of our seed back for the next planting, and had for YEARS, once we moved into the modern era (long long story). I We made our own cheese or traded with someone who did, ate meat that we processed our selves, eggs from chickens in our yard, chicken from our yard. Milk was still warm when I got it each morning, butter, buttermilk, ice cream was all made from that milk. Bacon and pork was done in our yard in the fall. I went from no food allergies to I can't eat hardly anything without getting sick.

Fast forward 20 year move to Africa for a year. When I got there I was allergic to tomatoes, wheat and various preservatives. Ate fresh (as in nothing that had been processed except ground down in a hand grinder or on a mortar with a pestle. No food allergies can eat anything I want.

Come home continued to eat what I want for a whole whopping 2 weeks. Then back to getting sick from everything. I can't have corn (or corn syrup or corn anything), tomatoes can't even touch them as I get acid burns, can't eat wheat, can't eat anything that has been bleached, no food coloring. Yeah that doesn't leave me much in today's food chain. I am lucky enough to live in a Mennonite community where they still do things by hand with heirloom seeds from OLD stock. Without that I would starve.

There is something in what we eat here in the states, Period end of story. Do I know for certain what it is, no but I have a pretty good idea.

tonyshowoff

@Nic OK, but I am still curious by what mechanism GMOs are inherently more questionable or dangerous if they've got the same genes just specific ones made sure to be on or off, and how that's inherently more dangerous than blindly breeding without any testing of them at all. I don't inherently trust something because it's natural, even St. Anthony's Fire is natural, and arsenic, etc.

And Monsanto to me isn't a really good talking point, because other places genetically modify foods. They certainly do a lot of really seedy things from a business standpoint, but that doesn't automatically mean the product is equally as untrustworthy or dangerous.

I don't doubt your father is qualified, and no it isn't that simple, but that's a simple way of explaining. It is an early field, and I'm not saying to trust it blindly, but I am saying there is no other option in the long term, and I'm not saying we shouldn't test this stuff.

A lot of lies and bad information get put out there about GMOs by people wanting to sell things, and of course the opposite is true too, and I think the biggest problem is a lot of it gets lumped together to where any discussion always seems to fall into a black in white of super raw veganism-only-eating-what-grows-naturally and Lex Luther gets a bioengineering company.

Having said all that though, on the topic at hand, it seems to be that organic food has become an excuse for not losing weight for some people. I've seen a few people here and there online saying that they can't diet because they can't afford organic food, and obviously they're just making up an excuse, but it's interesting to me that organic is seen as inherently more healthy (in the sense it has things good for you in it), when engineered things often have more-of-whatever-said-food-is-supposed-to have.

I think this gives people also a false sense of what eating better is, because one could eat tons of organic candy, soda, and cake, etc and not really improve at all healthwise. I've seen obese vegetarians and vegans before, most of them eat a lot of stuff packed with carbs of course.

Having said all that (again), coming back to something you said before, the over use of antibiotics and the lack of investment in finding new ones (or real alternatives) is something that really bothers me and concerns me a lot, especially as someone who had a resistant form of TB that took a lot of drugs to get rid of, and I still wonder if all those antibiotics really messed with my long term health, beyond what the TB did obviously.

tonyshowoff

@Minion-Queen said:

As someone who grew up off grid and we grew everything from heirloom seeds, as in we kept some of our seed back for the next planting, and had for YEARS, once we moved into the modern era (long long story).

I hope I'm not the only one who wants to hear this long long story, it sounds interesting as hell, now I can't stop thinking about it to read the rest of your post!

Fast forward 20 year move to Africa for a year.

Another interesting story embedded in here. I lived in South Africa briefly with a girl, until she broke up with me. But she was pretty racist so I went to Russia (lol, whoops, Edit: I didn't go to Russia because she was racist, rather I was trying to say that's what I did afterwards, the two things aren't related).

There is something in what we eat here in the states, Period end of story. Do I know for certain what it is, no but I have a pretty good idea.

I think it's something in wheat to be honest with you, I have no proof but that's an opinion I have.

Nic

I'm not saying they are inherently unsafe. I'm just saying it is a new technology that isn't well understood, so those of us who are more careful are going to wait for better data that can only come from more long term studies.

Doctors used to tell us smoking was good for us. Asbestos was used for a long time before the dangers became apparent. Thalidomide looked like a wonder drug. I'm just willing to bet my health on 20 years of research.

@Minion-Queen said:

As someone who grew up off grid and we grew everything from heirloom seeds, as in we kept some of our seed back for the next planting, and had for YEARS, once we moved into the modern era (long long story). I We made our own cheese or traded with someone who did, ate meat that we processed our selves, eggs from chickens in our yard, chicken from our yard. Milk was still warm when I got it each morning, butter, buttermilk, ice cream was all made from that milk. Bacon and pork was done in our yard in the fall. I went from no food allergies to I can't eat hardly anything without getting sick.

Fast forward 20 year move to Africa for a year. When I got there I was allergic to tomatoes, wheat and various preservatives. Ate fresh (as in nothing that had been processed except ground down in a hand grinder or on a mortar with a pestle. No food allergies can eat anything I want.

Come home continued to eat what I want for a whole whopping 2 weeks. Then back to getting sick from everything. I can't have corn (or corn syrup or corn anything), tomatoes can't even touch them as I get acid burns, can't eat wheat, can't eat anything that has been bleached, no food coloring. Yeah that doesn't leave me much in today's food chain. I am lucky enough to live in a Mennonite community where they still do things by hand with heirloom seeds from OLD stock. Without that I would starve.

There is something in what we eat here in the states, Period end of story. Do I know for certain what it is, no but I have a pretty good idea.

Agreed. They already know a lot of the gluten allergies have come from GMOs. No one used to have it much, now it is very very common.

tonyshowoff

@Nic said:

I'm not saying they are inherently unsafe. I'm just saying it is a new technology that isn't well understood, so those of us who are more careful are going to wait for better data that can only come from more long term studies.

Doctors used to tell us smoking was good for us. Asbestos was used for a long time before the dangers became apparent. Thalidomide looked like a wonder drug. I'm just willing to bet my health on 20 years of research.

Well, I think we can certainly agree there. I see where you're coming from, absolutely, and I hope you see where I'm coming from with feeding 7+ billion people, especially with looming climate change. And while it's not exactly known how many people die each year because of lack of food, it is at least in the tens of millions some place.

tonyshowoff

@thecreativeone91 said:

Agreed. They already know a lot of the gluten allergies have come from GMOs. No one used to have it much, now it is very very common.

People also eat a hell of a lot more wheat and things with wheat flour in them. Plus also wheat isn't a GMO product, but it has changed a lot since the 1970s, due to increased selective breeding and cross breeding in order to increase yield.

Nic

We already have enough food to feed the planet, but humanity doesn't have the will to distribute it evenly:
http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/world hunger facts 2002.htm#Does_the_world_produce_enough_food_to_feed_everyone

tonyshowoff

@Nic said:

We already have enough food to feed the planet, but humanity doesn't have the will to distribute it evenly:
http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/world hunger facts 2002.htm#Does_the_world_produce_enough_food_to_feed_everyone

I agree with you, but it won't always be true, especially over the next century, and also without central planning (which people hate now) and with the rise of "pull yourself up by your bootstraps you starving African child" beliefs, there has to be a means to empower people to plant for their own communities, especially in places where crops cannot easily grow.