Just hearing about it on Facebook from your shady friend doesn't necessarily make it fact. There's low chance of negative effects from eating GMOs. Europe and Asia don't want gmos, but I think further studies will make GMOs common in Europe and Asia, I think.
Herbert Shepard One main reason that GMO's are not wanted is that they can only be grown from seeds bought from the supply company and not grown from seeds obtained as a second generation from a mother plant, the only one that makes any thing on the GMO's is the company that supplies the seed, the farmer has to keep loosing profits from buying the seed over and over.
InvisiMan2006 But is not about cautious skepticism. These people does not even know wtf the letters in GMO stands for. So yeah, better someone who admits its ignorance than people who just think it is bad because others in facebook said so
rodrigopaim82 I think it's completely possible that the Kimmel show picked out the people who didn't know better. If you survey people on why they drink cows milk, you'll hear the same level of ignorance - but not everyone is like that. You don't have to understand the science behind GMO's to be against GMO's.
That's actually a stupid response! There are plenty of things that may hurt you that you may not know about. Ignorance doesn't x out the reality! In today's day and time you can research anything quickly. Knowledge is at your fingertips literally.
@@kikisylvester7195 ya but GMOs aren't one of those things. They simply increase yield, nutritional value and keep food affordable for the world's poor. The problem with access to information is people don't know how to synthesize and come to incorrect conclusions. We would be better off trusting experts... actual experts not facebook moms
Talk about cringeworthy. Not only do most of these people not know what a GMO is, but they can't even say what the acronym stands for. Any wonder our educational system is failing?
I think you mean an initialism. An acronym is a word that can be pronounced like laser. It's truly sad that you don't know this very important bullshit.
Teachers have very limited connections with students as they are allowed only to talk about lessons for students but not to students. Is the system our government created for education. To avoyed law suits, getting fired, students must be invisible in class. This students are very smart but they do need to be educated in different way. Very sad.
I'm a biochemical engineer and have done a lot of genetic engineering. It's not really accurate to say that "GMO's are bad" per se, due to genetic modification being relatively new technology. For those who don't know what genetic modification is, it involves transforming (transferring) genes from a foreign organism (such as bacteria, jellies,) into a new host. There is a common misconception that genetic engineers "inject" pesticides into the crops and that simply is not true. Crops such as GM corn have newly added genes that help the plant to produce some otherwise unnatural pesticides--these pesticides help them to grow more efficiently and produce larger crop yields. However, because this is such new technology, many people are skeptical of the long-term effects that GM crops may have on the population in the years to come--these scientists often argue that GM crops risk the chance of producing malicious proteins that may otherwise be carcinogenic or harmful to the body in other ways. Where do I stand? I'm FOR GM food production, mainly because I feel GM foods will be the answer to current global issues: answer to famines in developing countries; may hopefully help us divert the dependence of foreign fuels to (ethanol maybe?); and mitigate the mass production of animal products (cattle grazing/feed lots) (although I disagree with mega-companies outsourcing soybean production to Brazil, causing millions of acres of deforestation).
***** the minute people start bringing up good points against the anti-gmo crowd, the anti-gmo people quickly say the rational people are the ones being swayed by propaganda. The scientific community is a very clear consensus that there is no significant evidence to believe that GMO crops are hazardous to a persons health. Thats the truth. Now is about the time a hysterical anit-gmo zealot calls me a paid shill for Monsanto or something.
wotshish The Monsanto employees eat organic for meals at their job I read. I don't know if this is true, but they may be rich enough to afford organic and know the truth about it.
Personally I'm for GMOs since there is no evidence of them harming humans. However the lack of understanding on such a basic concept that the people that they questioned showed, absolutely terrifies me.
***** Ah yes - gotta love that logic. Plenty of reliable information on the internet. The UA-cam videos against GMOs are 100% reliable, but not the ones promoting moon landing conspiracies or the ones saying the pyramids were built by aliens are absurd. Reputable scientific and peer reviewed journals? Question all of those. They must be tainted because they disagree with your original viewpoint.
***** The number of peer reviewed studies showing GMOs are safe are orders of magnitude greater than the number of studies showing any kind of a concern. The only way anyone could think that it's a 1:1 ratio is if, like you seem to believe, corporations are tainting all of them. Are companies going to push some studies here and there? Of course. But no industry has the ability completely corrupt one entire side of the argument. Scientists and medical researchers tend to be people who've invested a lot in education to take poorly paying jobs for the purpose of pursuing something they believe in. The idea that more than a fraction of a percent of studies can contain some kind of corporate bias is absurd. This is the same argument every other conspiracy theory uses (anti-vaccine, chemtrails, etc). Peer reviewed science can't be trusted, but there's plenty of great information online.
Selective breeding is not the same as altering genetics in a lab. Combining genes from incompatible species that could not breed together.@@snapperjessen
There is nothing bad about eating GMO's. The real problem is mass farming of only GMO crops. The crops wont have the same genetic diversity as found in nature and one disease could theoretically wipe out the entire population of crops.
1. In order for some organic produce to be made in the first place, you have to plant them around one another, I know that papaya is the most notable example. They will plant GM crops that are immune or repel a certain pest around the perimeter of an "organic" patch of crops shielding them from a common pest. So, they do have at least some cross pollination and as far as your concerns go, if that were to happen they would and could just moddify an additional immunity.
You have a point, that's why we have glyphosate resistant weeds, people got to round-up happy. We just need to be smart about rotating crops and pesticides/herbicides.
Steele Pierson I know buddy, my family farms, I'm very involved in ag, and I hope to inherit the family farm with my sister. That being said, I still admit that farmers are not perfect. We're still people. I know some people who go straight roundup because that's what they can afford and it's easy. That's not representative of every farmer, but when there are weeds like Palmer amaranth when one plant has a million seeds, it's more and more important that every single farmer adapts more varied weed management programs. I think both GMOs and herbicides will be important to these varied programs, but not one single GMO or herbicide is the catch-all answer, but many people treated roudup that way for a while.
Chris Casey The organism you have "farmed for thousands of year" was selective "breeding" done by us. Do you know what this is? Modifying genetics, oh shit. It's not a bunch of nonsense, it's creating optimal foods without the negative effects.
Your problem is that you are looking at one area. Almost everything you eat today is GMO. Most plants before we started playing with them were partly poisonous, this has happened for thousands of years. What you're looking at is one area of modified crops. Genetically modified organisms is not something introduced recently.
Chris Casey That is a multi-variable assessment. My guess is the foods taste better because they are organic. And has nothing to do with if they are GMO or not. You'd have to compare organic and non-organic GMO's to determine if GMO's affect taste. And I don't see that ever happening. Monsanto is pretty evil. They should not be allowed to patent living things. They've been known to sue near by farmers because seeds from their field end up bowing into neighbor's farms.
Chris Casey "It is not natural. I do not need to get into a science debate because it is that simple" WHO SAID THAT!!! What sorcery is this? You're not in the same room as me, how are we communicating? IT'S NOT NATURAL!!!!
Chris Casey Your argument became invalid when you ended with "silly American". I can't take you seriously now that I know you're an elitist piece of shit.
Genetically modified organisms. (aka artificial selection) Organisms also include domesticated animals. If you are against GMOs, get rid of your pets!! They have been artificially selected over thousands of years to look the way they do. Same thing with vegetables. Even the food these people are buying is technically GMO: the farmers know how to alter the way it grows. This whole GMO thing is nonsense.
No breed of dogs have been created in a lab, like GMOs. Plus you know how many anomalies dogs have because of the unnatural breeding we have made? Now imagine same mistakes but in something u put inside your body. All the Anti-GMOs people ask is for proper safety test on this products, because the testing done by Monsanto(aka FDA) doesn't qualify as safe for me.
MrRicky192 Actually the Soviet Union did some extensive cross breeding and genetic modifications on dogs, foxes, ect. in the 1970s. The program resulted in being able to domesticate silver foxes and other canines. (If you know someone who has a silver fox as a pet, that one is a direct descendant of the soviet breeding programme) Domesticated wolves (dogs, canis lupus) are the result of specific breeding patterns anyway. Dogs as we know them have been artificially selected for traits that would benefit humans.
SAFETY TEST? Its called growing more food using artificial selection which they have been doing for centuries! Geezus fuck. acebulf knows exactly what I am talking about. Food and animals are not bred in labs and sent out to humans. The organism in a lab are there to STUDY!
MrRicky192 Actually, the artificial selection will usually be far more damaging to the selected animal (dog breed anomalies, cows that can't give birth without C-section) than to the consumer. You see, when you eat DNA, you break it down and digest it, you don't incorporate it into your own DNA (otherwise we would look a lot more like our livestock by now). Bacteria can do that (including those in your gut), but animals can't, so no worries there. Mostly GMOs are just organisms that have received genes from other species, where those genes have evolved naturally. So if two plants are safe to eat, a GMO of mixed DNA of both plants will not make you grow tentacles.
You guys are right, we should make the GMO label a legal requirement, but if we are to add that label, I’d also like to require an additional label. Every food item that was harvested or slaughtered in February, should have an attached warning. As you all should know, February is an unnatural month, the change in length is not found in any natural or ancient month. A few months ago I began to feel sick, I realized that much of the food I had been eating contained Feburary-contaminated products. The stomach pain only subsided when I switched to a non-Feburary diet. There are those who may claim that “Food picked in February is exactly the same!’” do not listen to these people, they have been paid off by the corrupt calendar industry. The fact is we simply do not know what February does to our food. If we do not ban food harvested in this franken-month we should at least label it.
Isaac Gordon You honestly think this is a fair comparison to putting a label on food that has genetically engineered ingredients? Frankly, that's just bizzare and unintelligent.
it's amusing how scared people are of GMOs when there have been SO MANY STUDIES proving how they're NOT harmful, so people resort to buying over-priced organic food. People need to educate themselves.
Thank you someone read my mind.. I can understand if someone does not like the corporate side of it.. but the scientific data shows that they are not harmful
Ca Andy Please provide valid links proving we are idiots... if the scientific community's data says I am wrong.. I'll look at their results and change my mind. Problem is, I have read the scientific data.. I have a feeling you have not.
danglezbenderz Hey Danglez, do your research. For real this time. The guy at the top is exactly right. We are slowly being depopulated but surely it is happening. The sicker people become, the more money is made. Same with Ebola, do your research, sheep. We are being killed off. Watch the shows too. They are shoving it in our face. The strain, last ship...all of that. A disease exactlyyyy like Ebola. And concentration camps. I ask you, open your eyes & rebel.
[Insert naturalistic fallacy here] [Insert organic doesn't use pesticides here] [Cite obviously biased source here] [Call a shill] [Enjoy your poison] [Insert something about god here] [Misspell glyphosate] [Science has been wrong before] [Cite cherry picked/disproved study here]
That second last guy had the right idea, just admitting ignorance rather than putting on some pretentious health nut show like everyone else pretending they know what they're talking about. So funny
Abraham Diaz Nah - this isn’t a generalization - I know you have Elon Musk and Barak Obama and there was Thomas Edison and Mark Twain and MLK and Rosa Parks and Eleanor Roosevelt ....but then I start to struggle ...look at the choice you have for republican candidates....and there are people who vote for THEM ......I rest my case.
I hate that the anti-gmo movement is associated with liberal politics. Smart liberals want to push for improvements in our food system and agriculture so that we can solve world hunger and improve quality of life. We want to invest in STEM education, explore new frontiers in space, lift up the middle-class, improve healthcare around the world, harness unlimited amounts of free energy from renewable sources, etc. I think it's safe to say that smart liberals and smart conservatives have a lot in common. We both want prosperity, and we know that science and technology can help get us there. Anti-science liberals and anti-science conservatives are the problem here. It's not a party issue or an ideology issue. It's an intelligence issue.
***** While I agree that stem cells are an important item that deserves research, what he was referring to was STEM education, meaning Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics.
As a scientist myself and having had interacted with many other scientist, I'm confident that most scientists are of the left political persuasion (at least in Australia) so it's very counter-intuitive that a lot of the psuedo-science believers are also of the left. I think an additional plane of grouping needs to be recognised as it seems that those of the left that are more passionate about the issue, whether they support or oppose it (idiotically) while those on the right are less passionate about it.
If it is killing the bees it is not going to solve world hunger you moron. that makes thing worse. How do we pollinate the crops? Bees do most of the pollinating for the foods we eat. Beekeepers have said this is true. I am sure Butterflies are being affected too. Without the crops. WE STARVE!! So that debunks your world hunger argument.
The only reason I have found to stay away from certain GMO's is not due to the fact that they are genetically altered, but because of what they alter them to do. A good example of this is the "Round up Ready" corn which allows our food to be drenched in pesticides and herbicides without killing the corn. This chemical cant simply be cleaned off because it is actually absorbed into the food.
Tyler Hurson oh you dont say ? so like my fellow friends up there, saying there was thousands of experiments for decades, i'm sure you'll have no problems showing me at least one - with a valid methodology, and seriousness of course. dont come with those bullshit FDA approved studies. I'll tell you to shove it up your ass, real good. everyone freaking knows FDA is corrupted to its last strain of hair. wanna talk real, let's talk real. No BS or pre-conceived opinions. think you're ready for this. come on. waiting for the "enlightenment" of the "all knowing GMO consumers", pff, what a joke, no offense but, I'll have you for breakfast. you eat GMO. that gives me an advantage. =)
finally someone that actually understands why gmos are dangerous. i don't worry about the modified seed i worry about the glyophosphate srayed on it. also the effects of the glyophosphate that gets into our water supply. for someone to say its less toxic then salt is crazy. lets see you drink a glass of roundup then. i'll drink equal amounts of salt water you drink the roundup!
***** But in order to grow crops, it's either organic or it isn't. There's no middle man with crops. And I never said how they would starve. Could it be that there wouldn't be enough food? Or would it be that the lower classes couldn't afford the food? I mean why should I pay $7 for a bag of potato chips when I can get pretty much the same thing (granted it's probably got a bunch more fat than the $7 bag) for $2.50?
vlasktom because the supply of organic foods at this moment are high from the rarity of them, compared to GMO's. If every/most farmers grew organically, the supply for organic food would sky-rocket, causing more normal pricing for them.
nicholas skoal Even if the supply skyrocketed, the price wouldn't reach the current GMO levels because we still have to pay for the food that never made it to market. The food that the bugs, animals, and diseases got a hold of, and the seeds that didn't grow.
When gluten first became news, I worked at a restaurant and so many people who just blindly jump on bandwagon would ask if the "Grilled chicken with steamed broccoli" had gluten -_- It was obvious these people didn't even know what gluten was or why some people avoid it.
GMO;s arnt harmful. Its the risk that a company could create a modified crop that ends up killing off the original un modified crop. If the company has patented this crop then they will basically end up owning a whole type of crop.
Everything you eat, livestock and vegetation, is the product of many many many thousands of years of selective breeding and line manipulation. So unless you only eat animals and plants that exist in their exact forms from before humans invented agriculture, everything you eat is a GMO.
i1.wp.com/thelibertarianrepublic.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/banana.png?resize=300%2C200 ^^ that my friend, is a picture 100%-Non-GMO-ALL-Natural Banana... just make sure when you go to take deuce, do it outside and on the ground, (preferably in the dirt),.. Don't want to let those seeds go to waste!
***** Yeah, it is shocking how little people understand about one of the first and longest standing human sciences. Seriously though, you're an infowars anti-vaxxer so your room to call anyone stupid is slim to none, especially when they are right.
OMG!!! This is hilariously funny; just had a good laugh. People are scared of eating GMO and yet they don't know the full meaning of GMO or what it is. I am Pro-GMO and am very proud of this technology.
Ladies and gentlemen, perfect example of the result of "blindingly following the media/news/any bs you heard or see people post of fb/social medias without actually fact checking."
Selective breeding can take several generations to perfect and can often result in unpredictable mutations, "artificial" GMOs are quickly modified at the genetic level, then tested and are theoretically safer than selectively bred foods. I say "theoretically" because there's not much evidence to say either method is unsafe.
Drug Addicted Pornstar Are you sure? Because last time I checked we live longer. And doesn't everything cause cancer these days? There have been a lot of changes, and any one of them can be the reason why cancer is on the rise.
Birdie Wolf Google health statistics from before the GM crops emerged in 90s and after. The numbers are crazy. l read that l think autism or some shit like that skyrocketed by l guess 1000%. Bare in mind that 20-30 years isn't that a long time. #RightToKnow
This is an excellent example of WHY they should require labeling so people can ask and educate themselves. People who do know what GMO is want it labeled (+/- 90% according to most polls) but the Monsanto and the rest fight and sue to prevent states from passing laws requiring labeling. If GMO's are so great #JustLabelIt !!!
+Scott Taylor 80 to 90% of the people also want anything that contains DNA to be labeled, too. I don't think consulting the people on scientific matters is the best idea.
Accelerated and enhanced directional evolution and development. That is all it is. Shut the fuck up and eat what you are given. Don't like it? Grow your own food.
AeroAtlas You have the right to voice your opinion, and we have the right to call you an idiot for having worthless opinions. Freedom of speech goes both ways.
***** Well I ate GMO food and now I can fly and pick up buildings. Of course you don't believe that, I have no evidence. Don't be surprised when people don't take your word for it.
This is so perfect. People are such chattel. They have opinions on things and they don't know why. Hint: it's because of the "media". No one wants to believe they can be manipulated.
They are told what to think. What position to have on controversial topics. They are too lazy to look into these topics on their own. The media get paid to put out misinformation to control the narrative and mislead the general public.
***** I'm sorry; this has gone TOTALLY off road. Because i don't think the "vast majority" think that. And other then that maybe the term "friend zone" or "friend zoned" should stop being used. As i don't think that helps anyone really, and me and my friends use that, and it is a horrible term. Like the pinnacle of male-female interaction is sex.
I haven't even watched the video and I've already lost faith in humanity because this question was apparently challenging enough for people to struggle with...
01buttons1 Sorry about your family, you are right about organic, a couple of months after I stopped eating junk food, I have type 2 diabetes and could barely walk...... now I am getting stronger and can walk a quarter of a mile and improving.
01buttons1 While I'm not going to say that eating organic hasn't helped you (it more than likely has), your family definitely has a genetic predisposition to getting cancer, weather or not you ate processed foods all your life you and your family would still have been at higher risk. Cutting out processed and non organic foods definitely helps in cases like yours but it's not the absolute difference between getting cancer and being healthy, and for most people whether food is organic or not isn't even that big of a contributor to general health. I'm terribly sorry for you and your family and wish you the best.
01buttons1 If you have three women in your family that have cancer right now then your family has a clear genetic predisposition to cancer. If no one in you entire family tree has ever had cancer (which is pretty much impossible) then you're lying to push your agenda. GMO's are the only reason that a lot of people in the world can eat. So I'd say that helping fight starvation is a benefit to the world. If you provide me with well documented evidence that directly links colon cancer (which in recent years has been in an overall decline) or any other serious health issue then I'll believe that GMO's are as bad for society as you say. Also GMO's are genetically modified to be resistant to diseases so that they won't be wiped out like the potato famine, that's kinda the point of them.
GMOs aren't bad, it's the blowback that's bad. Like all the GMOs that are genetically modified to protect them from certain pesticides. It just ends up with stupid people dumping tons of pesticides all over their crops which gets into our water and into the crop.
***** What are you talking about? I've been to all the farms that make my food and they don't even own pesticides. The whole point of their practice is to not use pesticides. What "organic" farms are you visiting?
***** Their is nothing wrong with GMOs... They are less "healthy and nutritious" than organic products but they don't cause cancer, diabetes, autism, or whatever else people are claiming. They tend to be less healthy because the goal is to create crops that have higher caloric content, meaning it takes less to feed the same amount of people. I don't think I need to defend GMOs when without genetically modified rice there would be no way China or India could sustain its population.
3DRamen yes but i think he ment the kind that use normal plants that are not naturally resistant to insects and require the farmer to either loss produce or pour pesticides on them
Jimmy Kimmel Live my brother is one of thee best and most educated farmers in this country. Especially when it comes to corn. He was on the leading front of monitoring crops using drones and featured on the cover of Farm Journal magazine. I think he may be a nice guest to have on the show as a follow up about this topic. He is very professional and it would be funny to see you make him laugh. He is very very serious about his job. He is also the hear of the Louisiana rice council.
The same goes for Religion, BLM, Feminism, Global warming. Its about feelings rather than knowing what the problem is. I feel it in my gut that (place ideology here) is going on.
Nikolla Mihallari I do. I think you are confused. I'm saying, a lot of the ideologies I posted are based off a narrative that is spawned from feeling rather than facts. Then when people don't jump on the bandwagon then you are a (insert dirty phrase).
destan5568 Haha that's an informed comment indeed! Do you know for what reason it's modified? It's to make the organism completely resistant to pesticides in order to basically project a torrent of chemicals onto it. Also, people don't have a clue about high fructose corn syrup being a consequence of America's protectionist economy which has been produced for some years now to avoid the importation of refined sugars from other countries. With GM they have an opportunity to create an abundance of untested food (well, they test it on poor Africans -- and let's not get onto the subject of Tuskegee) in order to saturate the market and drive down prices making HF corn syrup more attractive to wholesale buyers who will end up using it as a sugar alternative, thus increasing morbid obesity manifold. And that's what 'Free Trade Agreements' are for: open season for pure, unregulated junk unfit for a dog. Look at how many obese people their are in America; I'm sure they are completely trusting of their benevolent medical establishment and plutocracy. The pro GMOers can extoll the virtues of Frankenfood for forever and a day and yet they'll end up getting mysterious cancers like everyone else and attribute it to one of the many mysteries of life. Bugger that for a joke: Stick 'em in ya own cake hole, but not in mine!!!
I think everybody missed the point??? It should be my CHOICE if I want to eat GMO's So yes it should be labeled GMO in big letters on the front and If I want to buy it I will and If people don't want too well that should be there choice too, I hate how people want to force others to do things they don't want to for what ever reason but we all know why they wont label it GMO it's because most wont touch it and that's there right, simply hiding what something is because people won't buy it is WRONG no matter what the reason
But that causes a big problem for people/corporations who want a complete monopoly over every piece of genetic information in the world. I'm motivated to write a thesis on the topic as you and probably many others are based purely on the documented money ties and lobbying concerning this issue at the moment. It's all or nothing to them, and they know well that if it's labelled GMO (which it should be) sales will go down. Ironic isn't it; so fearful of adverting their 'entirely safe' product which they're at absolute pains to promote in any way apart from putting a GMO label on the product itself!! Pro GMOers suck cancer.
I think it is YOU who missed the point. The "right to know" isn't the right to understand. Look at all those dumbwits who just assume GMO's are bad without doing their own research or thinking; they believe everything they see on TV. Whether GMO's a good or bad for you, that's a moot point. Just assume everything is genetically modified, and eat certified organic if you so desire. Last time I checked, organic food is always labeled.
Ricardo K. Wow so let's assume everyone is too stupid to understand anyway so why bother? You wouldn't know what is in your processed food if it wasn't for allergies or intolerances that either FDA agrees that people should be told about, or food companies are afraid of being sued. Otherwise they would be happy to assume they don't even "need" to tell anyone what's in their food. "Look at all those dumbwits" I bet they don't understand half of what's on a label, anyway.
MsSardonicus Assuming people are too stupid to understand, it is important to bother because these are the same ppl who assume everything is bad without any scientific basis. It's equivalent to a person making decisions based on what they learn on FOX news.
It amazes me how it is somehow acceptable among these people to make decisions and hold strong opinions without being the least bit informed on the subject.
Haha that's funny I learned it in middle school. It's not like GMO is some sacred acronym that you only learn in some class. It literally takes 3 seconds to learn from Google.
I didn't question that you knew what the simple acronym means, genius. I said you don't know what a GMO is because you said (and I quote), "and what it does." So please, tell the class what a GMO does.
Seedless watermelons, grapes, bananas and oranges are not GMOs. But they have been modified through selective breeding/crossbreeding/hybridisation over many/many years. This is completely different from GMO foods (created in a lab).
@@billyfromtheblock8350 That’s not true all. Any organism which has been genetically modified through may means is a GMO. And GMOs aren’t unhealthy or unsafe regardless of their origin.
Exactly. I'm sure Monsanto is in his shares portfolio, as this performance would suggest. Any one can go around with a video camera and cherry pick the most suitable clips to justify their arguments using this format. Choose any hot topic of the day and it would work just the same. One way to prove this theory once and for all is to keep the video running from beginning to end. Also, notice how it was clearly a segment with political and corporate motivations from the very start masquerading as lighthearted affair with the veneer of also being slightly informative by demonstrating the feeble minds of anti-GMO folk? It's clear that making people feel stupid is a convenient tool used to facilitate policy change without any opposition.
TerryMacka McKenzie I agree, there is no doubt they are after seeing this video. Exactly! But of course we only see the ones that make people that are against GMO's look like idiots.. ah I'm positive there would of been people giving good reasons why they don't buy GMO's, obvisouly that wasn't included. Yeah wow once you realise how evil and corrupt this World is you never see it the same. I'm glad you see it the same way as me!!!!!!
Meh, 'Tinfoil Hat' is a cop out used to avoid any real discussion on the issue. It'd be nice if people engaged in that activity which has become lost in the days of yore referred to as 'reading' instead of being a drone operating on the instructions of one miserably boring late night show. References: GMO and Cancer: 'France to probe study linking GM corn to cancer' -- France24. Who owns your disease? Sydney Morning Herald: 'Landmark patent ruling over breast cancer gene BRCA1'
***** you think that the main point of the video was to create some laughs?? i wish i could see the world that innocently. Where there is big money there is big corruption, lies etc. TerryMacka McKenzie is right!! all you need to type into google is gmo risks, cancer, studies and you'll have more than enough evidence. But if you want to allow this "food" into your body, no ones stopping you... not my medical bills
***** Interesting name there, you seem rather homophobic Monsatan, but expect no less from the lord of the underworld and the cultivator of death. Why should we not be interested in gene patents? Don't you think the ethical issues surrounding these are of major concern to everyone on the planet? The reference I posted relates to a woman who had breast cancer yet her doctors couldn't even simply 'test' the genes at all because they were issued with cease and desist notices proventing them from helping the patient with her cancer. It's pure evil and you think it's a grand joke. BRCA1 and BRCA2 are owned by Myriad Technologies. At least 20% of the Human Genome has been patented. Relating this back to GM food, companies like MonSatan endeavour to patent food and profit from intellectual property rights. And as for that study, despite it's criticisms it still hasn't been determined what caused the test subjects to become basically a walking tumors, and the French government is has stated further investigation is required to insure the saftey of the public. Go to Europe and find someone who loves GMOs. They're much more informed over there than the corrupt U$ who rely on latenight comedians whose audience would laugh at a baby being dropped on its head they're that inane. I sincerely hope you don't get cancer and that the amusement of your droll humour isn't interfered with by the reality of death and human suffering. It's all fun and games until it happens to you or someone you care about.
I used to be anti gmo when I first started reading about them but now that I'm better educated on the topic I support genetic modification and think there's no reason to force companies to label gmos.
+Nikolla Mihallari Technically, we're not artificially selected; our breeding is independent of external control, and like wild animals, we select mates on our own; we are technically naturally selected. Also, an artificially selected organism is a GMO. When people think of a GMO, they're immediately brought to think of an organism with foreign DNA introduced to its strand, by artificial means; while that is a GMO, that is a specific type of GMO, known as a transgenic organism. Transgenic GMOs are simply one of multiple types of GMOs.
No way. Noo Waay. People are this misinformed and ignorant? Everyone is entitled to their opinion and I respect that, but the non-truths and poopy logic is quite alarming. If the people who are commenting (like Jeff W) took the time to educate themselves about bacteria, plasmids, restriction enzymes, the cell cycle, DNA, and protein synthesis, they would most likely lose their contempt for genomics. I understand that there will be those who would still be leery, despite being informed, but Kimmel shows that those people are few and far between with most harboring ill-conceived notions and lacking comprehension.
Humans did not evolve from monkeys, we both evolved from a common ancestor, if you accept evolution then stop repeating the idiocy spouted by religious morons.
GMOs aren't inherently bad but they're used to make plants resistant to pesticides and herbicides. In turn GM farmers can use as much chemical on it without effecting the crop. The end result is a crop not only infused with a genetically modified organism, but one also infused with chemical 'cides' which are known as harmful carcinogens. And we all know what carcinogens do...
GMOs aren't inherently bad but they're used to make plants resistant to pesticides and herbicides. In turn GM farmers can use as much chemical on it without effecting the crop. The end result is a crop not only infused with a genetically modified organism, but one also infused with chemical 'cides' which are known as harmful carcinogens. And we all know what carcinogens do...
GMOs aren't inherently bad but they're used to make plants resistant to pesticides and herbicides. In turn GM farmers can use as much chemical on it without effecting the crop. The end result is a crop not only infused with a genetically modified organism, but one also infused with chemical 'cides' which are known as harmful carcinogens. And we all know what carcinogens do...
+Nadira Williams false. a lot of the time they are actually modified to let off secretions that keep pests AWAY from the crops, which means farmers would have to use less pesticides.
Some GMO foods have had antibiotic features built into them to make them immune or resistant to diseases or viruses, according to Iowa State University. When you eat them, these antibiotic markers persist in your body and can make actual antibiotic medications less effective. The university warns that such ingestion of GMO foods and regular exposure to antibiotics may be contributing to the decreased effectiveness of antibiotic drugs that is being noticed in hospitals around the world.
The funny thing is, we as a species have been doing genetic engineering through selective breeding for quite some time now. Dogs, bees (which created Africanized Honey Bees), corn and trees have all had some form of selective breeding done to bring about a certain outcome. Whether that is increased yield, smaller or larger size, or different color, it is on the same level as simple adaptation. GMOs are the products of far more precise practices such as gene splicing which basically shaves years off the process of breeding and growing a target to adulthood before finding out the effects. Take a crop of corn for example. In order to get an accurate crop, the experimental yield and the market yield must be separated lest the experimental crop breeds with the regular yield to accidentally create a new strain of corn which is not good for the environment or the yield. By taking the process to the lab and confining the testing to a small space, you're nearly eliminating the risk of cross pollination which yields undesirable results with more control over what genes are placed into the plant and which are selected out. And on that note, everything you eat has been bred and raised by man. You've been eating genetically engineered crops for the last four thousand years, why does speeding up the process by a factor of hundreds scare you? It shouldn't. That being said, companies who produce and copyright/patent GMOs aren't angels by any means. But that's not because the science is evil. Your blame is misplaced and misguided.
It's amazing how many idiots here never heard of editing. What they didn't tell you is that they probably interviewed 50 people to find the 5 that don't know what GMO stands for. Moreover, just because someone doesn't know what the acronym stands for doesn't mean they don't know what GMO is and have a clear sense of the issues surrounding it.
DeadFishFactory Wrong! You can read a hundred articles that never say Genetically Modified Organisms. They normally just say GMO. Human communication has become obfuscated by acronyms. Half the time people have no idea what other people are saying just because everyone thinks it's cool to throw around acronyms now days.
DeadFishFactory Stop saying "you." If someone doesn't know what an acronym stands for it's not my responsibility. All I'm saying is that it doesn't mean someone can't know anything about a subject just because they don't know what an acronym stands for. It's not even a logical proposition. I have no idea what AARP means, but I know what they do and who they represent. Same thing goes for NAACP and NCAA. I have no idea what the acronyms stand for, but I know enough about what they do to form an opinion about them.
BrainToMush You, as in you people, as in people who claim to know a lot about GMOs because they went to websites like mercola, natural news, or a soccer mom's personal blog to do your research. And even if you didn't know what it stood for, they could have guessed based on what they think it is, and they would have been close. I know the AARP is for old people, so I would assume RP is already retired persons. They're an association so one of the As is already association. But most of those people drew a complete blank, indicating that they had no fucking clue what a GMO is, other than it's ebil.
The study, led by Gilles-Eric Seralini of the University of Caen, was the first ever study to examine the long-term (lifetime) effects of eating GMOs. You may find yourself thinking it is absolutely astonishing that no such studies were ever conducted before GM corn was approved for widespread use by the USDA and FDA, but such is the power of corporate lobbying and corporate greed. The study was published in The Food & Chemical Toxicology Journal and was just presented at a news conference in London. @Eric Pettersen
I love the people that were like "I don't know and I don't care." That attitude it far better than "it's bad!....whatever it is"
Just hearing about it on Facebook from your shady friend doesn't necessarily make it fact. There's low chance of negative effects from eating GMOs. Europe and Asia don't want gmos, but I think further studies will make GMOs common in Europe and Asia, I think.
Herbert Shepard One main reason that GMO's are not wanted is that they can only be grown from seeds bought from the supply company and not grown from seeds obtained as a second generation from a mother plant, the only one that makes any thing on the GMO's is the company that supplies the seed, the farmer has to keep loosing profits from buying the seed over and over.
How is being purposely ignorant better than cautious skepticism?
InvisiMan2006 But is not about cautious skepticism. These people does not even know wtf the letters in GMO stands for.
So yeah, better someone who admits its ignorance than people who just think it is bad because others in facebook said so
rodrigopaim82 I think it's completely possible that the Kimmel show picked out the people who didn't know better.
If you survey people on why they drink cows milk, you'll hear the same level of ignorance - but not everyone is like that. You don't have to understand the science behind GMO's to be against GMO's.
"What's a GMO?"
"I don't know, and I don't care. Doesn't affect me, I'm not sick"
At least one coherent response! :D
قريب
Honestly, that's a better response than everyone avoiding them who doesn't know what GMOs are.
i think he was sick. his nose was stuffed
That's actually a stupid response! There are plenty of things that may hurt you that you may not know about. Ignorance doesn't x out the reality! In today's day and time you can research anything quickly. Knowledge is at your fingertips literally.
@@kikisylvester7195 ya but GMOs aren't one of those things. They simply increase yield, nutritional value and keep food affordable for the world's poor. The problem with access to information is people don't know how to synthesize and come to incorrect conclusions. We would be better off trusting experts... actual experts not facebook moms
Talk about cringeworthy. Not only do most of these people not know what a GMO is, but they can't even say what the acronym stands for. Any wonder our educational system is failing?
Phil Ad damn dude, Imma quote you in my paper.
Agreed!! It's important that teachers have their students disuss current issues.
I think you mean an initialism. An acronym is a word that can be pronounced like laser.
It's truly sad that you don't know this very important bullshit.
It’s failing so badly people have started to think GMOS are bad despite them not knowing that GMOS are literally EVERYTHING we eat.
Teachers have very limited connections with students as they are allowed only to talk about lessons for students but not to students. Is the system our government created for education. To avoyed law suits, getting fired, students must be invisible in class. This students are very smart but they do need to be educated in different way. Very sad.
it seems like a lot of people think GMOs are some kind of inorganic chemical rather than an organism.
GMO is not an organism... It's a modification of an organism...
Which would still make it an organism...
That's exactly what everyone I know who is anti-gmo thinks and refuses to listen to me :(
wich interm is an organisem, its like saying gigners arent realy organisems because they are mutants
Vortox it's a modified organism, sooo
The one black guy in the cool hat, he was the only one that spoke reasonably. He said
make me familiar with it
what is it.
I'm a biochemical engineer and have done a lot of genetic engineering. It's not really accurate to say that "GMO's are bad" per se, due to genetic modification being relatively new technology. For those who don't know what genetic modification is, it involves transforming (transferring) genes from a foreign organism (such as bacteria, jellies,) into a new host. There is a common misconception that genetic engineers "inject" pesticides into the crops and that simply is not true. Crops such as GM corn have newly added genes that help the plant to produce some otherwise unnatural pesticides--these pesticides help them to grow more efficiently and produce larger crop yields. However, because this is such new technology, many people are skeptical of the long-term effects that GM crops may have on the population in the years to come--these scientists often argue that GM crops risk the chance of producing malicious proteins that may otherwise be carcinogenic or harmful to the body in other ways.
Where do I stand? I'm FOR GM food production, mainly because I feel GM foods will be the answer to current global issues: answer to famines in developing countries; may hopefully help us divert the dependence of foreign fuels to (ethanol maybe?); and mitigate the mass production of animal products (cattle grazing/feed lots) (although I disagree with mega-companies outsourcing soybean production to Brazil, causing millions of acres of deforestation).
*****
maybe because I am myself a scientist. so it is not that ironic.
*****
im just a scientist
... it doesn't take much though to have thought
***** the minute people start bringing up good points against the anti-gmo crowd, the anti-gmo people quickly say the rational people are the ones being swayed by propaganda. The scientific community is a very clear consensus that there is no significant evidence to believe that GMO crops are hazardous to a persons health. Thats the truth. Now is about the time a hysterical anit-gmo zealot calls me a paid shill for Monsanto or something.
wotshish The Monsanto employees eat organic for meals at their job I read. I don't know if this is true, but they may be rich enough to afford organic and know the truth about it.
Shasha8674
i hear thru PR statements that they don't go out of their way for organic stuff. Some of what they serve is organic, some isnt.
As a scientist, this is depressing to watch.
No it isn't. Now go drink some glyphosate.
The ignorance of people or the detrimental manipulation of our food supply? Both for me.
@@JohnSmith-ds7oi I will happily
Lol
@@JohnSmith-ds7oi lol
oh hey look, people are afraid of things they don't understand, big surprise
Not really, they just don't know what it stands for.
"I don't know, and I don't care. It hasn't made me sick." Smart man.
we'll see in a few years ;)
Few years have passed and NO ONE is sick.
everyone is sick what do you mean LOL
We all eat GMOs here in our town and we are healthier than obese no-gluten GMO-free activists. Serves them right for eating garbage organic foods.
Its not about being sick its about reducing the gene pool crops which can in the future be dangerous to our food security.
kinda appreciate the guy who just said he doesn't know, don't often c honest ppl in these vids...
Because they usually take them out otherwise it wouldn't be funny, dumbass... -_-
***** didnt take out this one though
Personally I'm for GMOs since there is no evidence of them harming humans. However the lack of understanding on such a basic concept that the people that they questioned showed, absolutely terrifies me.
***** Ah yes - gotta love that logic. Plenty of reliable information on the internet. The UA-cam videos against GMOs are 100% reliable, but not the ones promoting moon landing conspiracies or the ones saying the pyramids were built by aliens are absurd. Reputable scientific and peer reviewed journals? Question all of those. They must be tainted because they disagree with your original viewpoint.
***** The number of peer reviewed studies showing GMOs are safe are orders of magnitude greater than the number of studies showing any kind of a concern. The only way anyone could think that it's a 1:1 ratio is if, like you seem to believe, corporations are tainting all of them. Are companies going to push some studies here and there? Of course. But no industry has the ability completely corrupt one entire side of the argument. Scientists and medical researchers tend to be people who've invested a lot in education to take poorly paying jobs for the purpose of pursuing something they believe in. The idea that more than a fraction of a percent of studies can contain some kind of corporate bias is absurd. This is the same argument every other conspiracy theory uses (anti-vaccine, chemtrails, etc). Peer reviewed science can't be trusted, but there's plenty of great information online.
they have GMO´ed for ages (aka selcetive breeding), doing it in a lab is just recently :)
Selective breeding is not the same as altering genetics in a lab. Combining genes from incompatible species that could not breed together.@@snapperjessen
@@garymanis6305 standing corrected
I was embarrassed for most of them. The guy who said he didn’t know nor care about it is the winner by far.
There is nothing bad about eating GMO's. The real problem is mass farming of only GMO crops. The crops wont have the same genetic diversity as found in nature and one disease could theoretically wipe out the entire population of crops.
1. In order for some organic produce to be made in the first place, you have to plant them around one another, I know that papaya is the most notable example. They will plant GM crops that are immune or repel a certain pest around the perimeter of an "organic" patch of crops shielding them from a common pest. So, they do have at least some cross pollination and as far as your concerns go, if that were to happen they would and could just moddify an additional immunity.
You have a point, that's why we have glyphosate resistant weeds, people got to round-up happy. We just need to be smart about rotating crops and pesticides/herbicides.
Angela Boesche that would imply that farmers don't. When in fact they do.
Steele Pierson I know buddy, my family farms, I'm very involved in ag, and I hope to inherit the family farm with my sister. That being said, I still admit that farmers are not perfect. We're still people. I know some people who go straight roundup because that's what they can afford and it's easy. That's not representative of every farmer, but when there are weeds like Palmer amaranth when one plant has a million seeds, it's more and more important that every single farmer adapts more varied weed management programs. I think both GMOs and herbicides will be important to these varied programs, but not one single GMO or herbicide is the catch-all answer, but many people treated roudup that way for a while.
Angela Boesche Multiple companies male GM crops and they adapt them all the time. I don't think that would be an issue.
A genetically modified organism is nothing to be afraid of. Please state your "proof" that they're bad for you by replying to this comment. Thank you.
Chris Casey The organism you have "farmed for thousands of year" was selective "breeding" done by us. Do you know what this is? Modifying genetics, oh shit.
It's not a bunch of nonsense, it's creating optimal foods without the negative effects.
Your problem is that you are looking at one area. Almost everything you eat today is GMO. Most plants before we started playing with them were partly poisonous, this has happened for thousands of years. What you're looking at is one area of modified crops. Genetically modified organisms is not something introduced recently.
Chris Casey
That is a multi-variable assessment. My guess is the foods taste better because they are organic. And has nothing to do with if they are GMO or not. You'd have to compare organic and non-organic GMO's to determine if GMO's affect taste. And I don't see that ever happening.
Monsanto is pretty evil. They should not be allowed to patent living things. They've been known to sue near by farmers because seeds from their field end up bowing into neighbor's farms.
Chris Casey "It is not natural. I do not need to get into a science debate because it is that simple"
WHO SAID THAT!!!
What sorcery is this? You're not in the same room as me, how are we communicating? IT'S NOT NATURAL!!!!
Chris Casey Your argument became invalid when you ended with "silly American". I can't take you seriously now that I know you're an elitist piece of shit.
Genetically modified organisms. (aka artificial selection)
Organisms also include domesticated animals. If you are against GMOs, get rid of your pets!! They have been artificially selected over thousands of years to look the way they do. Same thing with vegetables. Even the food these people are buying is technically GMO: the farmers know how to alter the way it grows.
This whole GMO thing is nonsense.
No breed of dogs have been created in a lab, like GMOs. Plus you know how many anomalies dogs have because of the unnatural breeding we have made? Now imagine same mistakes but in something u put inside your body.
All the Anti-GMOs people ask is for proper safety test on this products, because the testing done by Monsanto(aka FDA) doesn't qualify as safe for me.
MrRicky192 Actually the Soviet Union did some extensive cross breeding and genetic modifications on dogs, foxes, ect. in the 1970s. The program resulted in being able to domesticate silver foxes and other canines. (If you know someone who has a silver fox as a pet, that one is a direct descendant of the soviet breeding programme)
Domesticated wolves (dogs, canis lupus) are the result of specific breeding patterns anyway. Dogs as we know them have been artificially selected for traits that would benefit humans.
SAFETY TEST? Its called growing more food using artificial selection which they have been doing for centuries! Geezus fuck. acebulf knows exactly what I am talking about. Food and animals are not bred in labs and sent out to humans. The organism in a lab are there to STUDY!
MrRicky192
Actually, the artificial selection will usually be far more damaging to the selected animal (dog breed anomalies, cows that can't give birth without C-section) than to the consumer. You see, when you eat DNA, you break it down and digest it, you don't incorporate it into your own DNA (otherwise we would look a lot more like our livestock by now). Bacteria can do that (including those in your gut), but animals can't, so no worries there. Mostly GMOs are just organisms that have received genes from other species, where those genes have evolved naturally. So if two plants are safe to eat, a GMO of mixed DNA of both plants will not make you grow tentacles.
thats selective breeding not GMOs. You're spreading misunderstandings and getting thumbs up as a result.
You guys are right, we should make the GMO label a legal requirement, but if we are to add that label, I’d also like to require an additional label. Every food item that was harvested or slaughtered in February, should have an attached warning. As you all should know, February is an unnatural month, the change in length is not found in any natural or ancient month. A few months ago I began to feel sick, I realized that much of the food I had been eating contained Feburary-contaminated products. The stomach pain only subsided when I switched to a non-Feburary diet. There are those who may claim that “Food picked in February is exactly the same!’” do not listen to these people, they have been paid off by the corrupt calendar industry. The fact is we simply do not know what February does to our food. If we do not ban food harvested in this franken-month we should at least label it.
Isaac Gordon this is possibly my favorite comment on youtube. i even screencapped it.
ElijahTheCreator spread the movement lol
Isaac Gordon Love your comment!
Isaac Gordon I support a complete ban on all Feburary-contaminated products
Isaac Gordon You honestly think this is a fair comparison to putting a label on food that has genetically engineered ingredients? Frankly, that's just bizzare and unintelligent.
All these people against GMO's are eating foods with GMO and don't even realize it.
The guy holding the kale is a dumbass.
it's amusing how scared people are of GMOs when there have been SO MANY STUDIES proving how they're NOT harmful, so people resort to buying over-priced organic food. People need to educate themselves.
Thank you someone read my mind.. I can understand if someone does not like the corporate side of it.. but the scientific data shows that they are not harmful
You are a MORON hah ah ahah hahahahahhaha hahahahahhaa hahahaha idiot
Ca Andy Please provide valid links proving we are idiots... if the scientific community's data says I am wrong.. I'll look at their results and change my mind. Problem is, I have read the scientific data.. I have a feeling you have not.
danglezbenderz Hey Danglez, do your research. For real this time. The guy at the top is exactly right. We are slowly being depopulated but surely it is happening. The sicker people become, the more money is made. Same with Ebola, do your research, sheep. We are being killed off. Watch the shows too. They are shoving it in our face. The strain, last ship...all of that. A disease exactlyyyy like Ebola. And concentration camps. I ask you, open your eyes & rebel.
Hermetically sealed coffins. I have pictures I took in Kentucky of hundreds on a semi.
[Insert Conspiracy Theory here]
[Insert loose evidence here]
[Insert Religious/Political statement here]
[Insert smart arse reply here]
[Insert unsubstantiated internet link to prove my unsubstantiated position]
[Insert Half Life 3 Confirmed/ Illuminati Confirmed here]
insert fist there
Jonathan Tucker [wallet destroyed due to steam sale]
[Insert naturalistic fallacy here]
[Insert organic doesn't use pesticides here]
[Cite obviously biased source here]
[Call a shill]
[Enjoy your poison]
[Insert something about god here]
[Misspell glyphosate]
[Science has been wrong before]
[Cite cherry picked/disproved study here]
+Kyle Mcmullen nailed it
+Kyle Mcmullen Your science was nothing but lies to begin with. Game, set and match.
RealityHijacked
How so?
lol
Seriously, this "natural" bs that's being pushed in Europe is just cancerous.
That Vibration tho...
3:36 is the total American... and I'm American
+James Potter The typical American would say "I don't know but I just avoid it because of...reasons"
You are an Indian American like me
٢
.٣٥
@@taekwondo1337 Eh not really...
Americans are more like what OP said
That second last guy had the right idea, just admitting ignorance rather than putting on some pretentious health nut show like everyone else pretending they know what they're talking about. So funny
I can’t believe the number of videos where I have to post the phrase “ Americans are so dumb”.
I can't believe the amount of people, like you, that think this isn't scripted.
+Flex it isn't scripted. They just pick the worst answers.
+Abraham Diaz The greatest country in the world....... jeez.....
Abraham Diaz Nah - this isn’t a generalization - I know you have Elon Musk and Barak Obama and there was Thomas Edison and Mark Twain and MLK and Rosa Parks and Eleanor Roosevelt ....but then I start to struggle ...look at the choice you have for republican candidates....and there are people who vote for THEM ......I rest my case.
+John W you might know who we have , but you dont know how to spell the name of the current president
I hate that the anti-gmo movement is associated with liberal politics. Smart liberals want to push for improvements in our food system and agriculture so that we can solve world hunger and improve quality of life. We want to invest in STEM education, explore new frontiers in space, lift up the middle-class, improve healthcare around the world, harness unlimited amounts of free energy from renewable sources, etc.
I think it's safe to say that smart liberals and smart conservatives have a lot in common. We both want prosperity, and we know that science and technology can help get us there.
Anti-science liberals and anti-science conservatives are the problem here. It's not a party issue or an ideology issue. It's an intelligence issue.
***** While I agree that stem cells are an important item that deserves research, what he was referring to was STEM education, meaning Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics.
No harm, no foul... Cameron Smith is right about what I meant, but ***** , stem cell research is also very important.
Don't forget to get a stupid fight in the comment section
As a scientist myself and having had interacted with many other scientist, I'm confident that most scientists are of the left political persuasion (at least in Australia) so it's very counter-intuitive that a lot of the psuedo-science believers are also of the left. I think an additional plane of grouping needs to be recognised as it seems that those of the left that are more passionate about the issue, whether they support or oppose it (idiotically) while those on the right are less passionate about it.
If it is killing the bees it is not going to solve world hunger you moron. that makes thing worse. How do we pollinate the crops? Bees do most of the pollinating for the foods we eat. Beekeepers have said this is true. I am sure Butterflies are being affected too. Without the crops. WE STARVE!! So that debunks your world hunger argument.
if you're wondering how trump became president...
LOL XD
This is California. The odds favor that these are all democrats.
oh snap
Lol all these people voted for Hillary
If you're wondering how hillary won the popular vote rather...
They interview ppl all day and for the sake of entertainment they take out the ppl that actually know what it is.
I hope some of you heard what Jimmy said at the end of the video. "Don't forget to get into a very stupid fight in the comment section, okay?"
Jimmy Kimmel is by far the most intelligent of the talk show comedians.
yeah especially when he made fun of kanye hahahahahahahahahahaah he got him so good roflllllmao kanye is so dumb bro!!!!rapers cant b smart xD
What about Colbert and Stewart?
***** Even those two occasionally go against scientific consensus.
***** And Conan as well...
What about Bill Maher and John Oliver?
The only reason I have found to stay away from certain GMO's is not due to the fact that they are genetically altered, but because of what they alter them to do. A good example of this is the "Round up Ready" corn which allows our food to be drenched in pesticides and herbicides without killing the corn. This chemical cant simply be cleaned off because it is actually absorbed into the food.
Palmerater Glyphosate (Roundup) is less toxic than salt. I wouldn't worry about the .1-100 ppm of glyphosate on your food.
Tyler Hurson oh you dont say ? so like my fellow friends up there, saying there was thousands of experiments for decades, i'm sure you'll have no problems showing me at least one - with a valid methodology, and seriousness of course. dont come with those bullshit FDA approved studies. I'll tell you to shove it up your ass, real good. everyone freaking knows FDA is corrupted to its last strain of hair. wanna talk real, let's talk real. No BS or pre-conceived opinions. think you're ready for this. come on. waiting for the "enlightenment" of the "all knowing GMO consumers", pff, what a joke, no offense but, I'll have you for breakfast. you eat GMO. that gives me an advantage. =)
mostardajp why do you have to be that butthurt. You wanna talk real, and i haven't seen any of your arguments here.
Glyphosate it less toxic than salt. The crops also are not "drenched" in roundup because farmers don't apply excessive amounts due to its cost.
finally someone that actually understands why gmos are dangerous. i don't worry about the modified seed i worry about the glyophosphate srayed on it. also the effects of the glyophosphate that gets into our water supply. for someone to say its less toxic then salt is crazy. lets see you drink a glass of roundup then. i'll drink equal amounts of salt water you drink the roundup!
Fact: If all farmers went to totally organic practices, 2/3 of the WORLD would die from starvation. So thats something to think about
***** But in order to grow crops, it's either organic or it isn't. There's no middle man with crops. And I never said how they would starve. Could it be that there wouldn't be enough food? Or would it be that the lower classes couldn't afford the food? I mean why should I pay $7 for a bag of potato chips when I can get pretty much the same thing (granted it's probably got a bunch more fat than the $7 bag) for $2.50?
vlasktom because the supply of organic foods at this moment are high from the rarity of them, compared to GMO's. If every/most farmers grew organically, the supply for organic food would sky-rocket, causing more normal pricing for them.
nicholas skoal
Even if the supply skyrocketed, the price wouldn't reach the current GMO levels because we still have to pay for the food that never made it to market. The food that the bugs, animals, and diseases got a hold of, and the seeds that didn't grow.
When gluten first became news, I worked at a restaurant and so many people who just blindly jump on bandwagon would ask if the "Grilled chicken with steamed broccoli" had gluten -_- It was obvious these people didn't even know what gluten was or why some people avoid it.
It boggles my mind how people can live their life like this. Just going through without ever question anything
GMO;s arnt harmful. Its the risk that a company could create a modified crop that ends up killing off the original un modified crop. If the company has patented this crop then they will basically end up owning a whole type of crop.
This man has the right idea! +1
3:37 I like this guys attitude.
This shows why taking a high school ag class should be required
True.
I just wanna know if my food is GMO or not Mr.Obama
ALL food that is being grown is GMO.
Everything you eat, livestock and vegetation, is the product of many many many thousands of years of selective breeding and line manipulation. So unless you only eat animals and plants that exist in their exact forms from before humans invented agriculture, everything you eat is a GMO.
i1.wp.com/thelibertarianrepublic.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/banana.png?resize=300%2C200
^^ that my friend, is a picture 100%-Non-GMO-ALL-Natural Banana... just make sure when you go to take deuce, do it outside and on the ground, (preferably in the dirt),.. Don't want to let those seeds go to waste!
***** clearly you understand what GMO is.
***** Yeah, it is shocking how little people understand about one of the first and longest standing human sciences. Seriously though, you're an infowars anti-vaxxer so your room to call anyone stupid is slim to none, especially when they are right.
Stupid fight
hi gamerbroz
I hate you both.
god
fight fight fight
Djuliano Simeonov
lmao .. who won? Oo
As my university lecturer said, "Genetic Modification is achieving what natural selection does, only in a much shorter time frame"
OMG!!! This is hilariously funny; just had a good laugh. People are scared of eating GMO and yet they don't know the full meaning of GMO or what it is. I am Pro-GMO and am very proud of this technology.
Ladies and gentlemen, perfect example of the result of "blindingly following the media/news/any bs you heard or see people post of fb/social medias without actually fact checking."
What's the difference between GMO and selective breeding?
Google it.
Don't start shit in the comments section with your stupidity.
Just the methods in which the resulting plant is produced. And usually the speed.
truckcompany At the genetic level, there is no substantial difference.
Selective breeding can take several generations to perfect and can often result in unpredictable mutations, "artificial" GMOs are quickly modified at the genetic level, then tested and are theoretically safer than selectively bred foods. I say "theoretically" because there's not much evidence to say either method is unsafe.
The timeline is the only difference.
GMOs are safe. We've been eating GMO corn since 1996. Yet somehow, we have not died.
Yet somehow, cancer and all health of USA citizens plumeted since then.
***** True. But for me it's enough to see how mice that ate GMO food turned out.
Drug Addicted Pornstar Are you sure? Because last time I checked we live longer. And doesn't everything cause cancer these days? There have been a lot of changes, and any one of them can be the reason why cancer is on the rise.
Birdie Wolf Google health statistics from before the GM crops emerged in 90s and after. The numbers are crazy. l read that l think autism or some shit like that skyrocketed by l guess 1000%. Bare in mind that 20-30 years isn't that a long time.
#RightToKnow
Drug Addicted Pornstar
Cancer rates: Down
Life expectancy: Up.
Infant mortality: Down
Where's the bad stuff here?
This is an excellent example of WHY they should require labeling so people can ask and educate themselves. People who do know what GMO is want it labeled (+/- 90% according to most polls) but the Monsanto and the rest fight and sue to prevent states from passing laws requiring labeling. If GMO's are so great #JustLabelIt !!!
+Scott Taylor 80 to 90% of the people also want anything that contains DNA to be labeled, too. I don't think consulting the people on scientific matters is the best idea.
Accelerated and enhanced directional evolution and development.
That is all it is.
Shut the fuck up and eat what you are given. Don't like it?
Grow your own food.
Yeah, how dare you voice your opinion in a democracy! Don't like it start your own country.
AeroAtlas You have the right to voice your opinion, and we have the right to call you an idiot for having worthless opinions. Freedom of speech goes both ways.
letsgetsomeshoes1239 I agree, but "shut the fuck up and eat what you are given" is a bit different than that.
***** Anecdotal evidence, doesn't mean anything. Try again.
***** Well I ate GMO food and now I can fly and pick up buildings. Of course you don't believe that, I have no evidence. Don't be surprised when people don't take your word for it.
Everyone is ignoring the fact that (most of) THE AUDIENCE cheered and clapped when Jimmy asked who is against GMOs... Like, seriously?
I hold a degree in Biology from Oxford, and I can confirm that GMOs are good for you.
Well, GMOs are not inherently healthier but yes unless someone specifically engineers them to hurt humans they are perfectly safe.
Your biology degree is worthless and so is your opinion.
@@adamantium2012 How is your opinion any different from his? Giving something value, or the lack thereof is also an opinion.
This is so perfect. People are such chattel. They have opinions on things and they don't know why. Hint: it's because of the "media". No one wants to believe they can be manipulated.
They are told what to think. What position to have on controversial topics. They are too lazy to look into these topics on their own. The media get paid to put out misinformation to control the narrative and mislead the general public.
These people worry me a lot less than the people that still exist that believe Iraq had something to do with 9/11
braindead sheep of america
***** I'm sorry; this has gone TOTALLY off road.
Because i don't think the "vast majority" think that.
And other then that maybe the term "friend zone" or "friend zoned" should stop being used. As i don't think that helps anyone really, and me and my friends use that, and it is a horrible term. Like the pinnacle of male-female interaction is sex.
*STUPID FIGHT*.....someone TAG ME IN! I'm ready!
3:25 "oh hey she's hot" -> *hear's her answer* -> "oh boy..."
I haven't even watched the video and I've already lost faith in humanity because this question was apparently challenging enough for people to struggle with...
Why did they pick the stupidest people on the block
01buttons1 A comedy agenda. I'm thinking you have an agenda as well. So nefarious, I see what you're doing you, you agenda having person you.
01buttons1 Sorry about your family, you are right about organic, a couple of months after I stopped eating junk food, I have type 2 diabetes and could barely walk...... now I am getting stronger and can walk a quarter of a mile and improving.
01buttons1 While I'm not going to say that eating organic hasn't helped you (it more than likely has), your family definitely has a genetic predisposition to getting cancer, weather or not you ate processed foods all your life you and your family would still have been at higher risk. Cutting out processed and non organic foods definitely helps in cases like yours but it's not the absolute difference between getting cancer and being healthy, and for most people whether food is organic or not isn't even that big of a contributor to general health. I'm terribly sorry for you and your family and wish you the best.
01buttons1 If you have three women in your family that have cancer right now then your family has a clear genetic predisposition to cancer. If no one in you entire family tree has ever had cancer (which is pretty much impossible) then you're lying to push your agenda. GMO's are the only reason that a lot of people in the world can eat. So I'd say that helping fight starvation is a benefit to the world. If you provide me with well documented evidence that directly links colon cancer (which in recent years has been in an overall decline) or any other serious health issue then I'll believe that GMO's are as bad for society as you say. Also GMO's are genetically modified to be resistant to diseases so that they won't be wiped out like the potato famine, that's kinda the point of them.
Cleary, because they want the masses to believe that every person who understands GMOS and is against them is a moron.
Everything has a good side and a bad side. Do your research before you state your opinion
GMO theoretically is pretty amazing.
You all do realize they only broadcast the most ridiculous answers. I bet 10 to one, people answered rationally.
GMOs aren't bad, it's the blowback that's bad. Like all the GMOs that are genetically modified to protect them from certain pesticides. It just ends up with stupid people dumping tons of pesticides all over their crops which gets into our water and into the crop.
***** It's cause the pesticide is genetically modified into the food isn't it?
***** What are you talking about? I've been to all the farms that make my food and they don't even own pesticides. The whole point of their practice is to not use pesticides. What "organic" farms are you visiting?
***** Their is nothing wrong with GMOs... They are less "healthy and nutritious" than organic products but they don't cause cancer, diabetes, autism, or whatever else people are claiming. They tend to be less healthy because the goal is to create crops that have higher caloric content, meaning it takes less to feed the same amount of people. I don't think I need to defend GMOs when without genetically modified rice there would be no way China or India could sustain its population.
3DRamen
yes but i think he ment the kind that use normal plants that are not naturally resistant to insects and require the farmer to either loss produce or pour pesticides on them
Db. xto No that's wrong
Lady in pink = Sarah Palin
What
+july7nyc good one hahaha
😝
So funny so true
+lmmatgaming *Hilary Clinton
"I don't know and I really don't care. It doesn't affect me, I'm not sick. I'm fine." lmao that guy's funny 👏
Jimmy Kimmel Live my brother is one of thee best and most educated farmers in this country. Especially when it comes to corn. He was on the leading front of monitoring crops using drones and featured on the cover of Farm Journal magazine. I think he may be a nice guest to have on the show as a follow up about this topic. He is very professional and it would be funny to see you make him laugh. He is very very serious about his job. He is also the hear of the Louisiana rice council.
The same goes for Religion, BLM, Feminism, Global warming. Its about feelings rather than knowing what the problem is. I feel it in my gut that (place ideology here) is going on.
Nikolla Mihallari I do. I think you are confused. I'm saying, a lot of the ideologies I posted are based off a narrative that is spawned from feeling rather than facts. Then when people don't jump on the bandwagon then you are a (insert dirty phrase).
I would rather eat GM corn than corn with pesticides on it!
GM corn gets completely doused with pesticides. If you want to avoid that you need organic corn.
***** Not Bt corn.
the GM corn creates a protein in it that kills insects, not the type of pesticide you would buy at the store.
All corn you eat is a GMO, corn is naturally brown and purple. yellow corn is a mutation, which was produced by inbreeding countless fields of corn.
destan5568 Haha that's an informed comment indeed! Do you know for what reason it's modified? It's to make the organism completely resistant to pesticides in order to basically project a torrent of chemicals onto it. Also, people don't have a clue about high fructose corn syrup being a consequence of America's protectionist economy which has been produced for some years now to avoid the importation of refined sugars from other countries. With GM they have an opportunity to create an abundance of untested food (well, they test it on poor Africans -- and let's not get onto the subject of Tuskegee) in order to saturate the market and drive down prices making HF corn syrup more attractive to wholesale buyers who will end up using it as a sugar alternative, thus increasing morbid obesity manifold.
And that's what 'Free Trade Agreements' are for: open season for pure, unregulated junk unfit for a dog. Look at how many obese people their are in America; I'm sure they are completely trusting of their benevolent medical establishment and plutocracy.
The pro GMOers can extoll the virtues of Frankenfood for forever and a day and yet they'll end up getting mysterious cancers like everyone else and attribute it to one of the many mysteries of life.
Bugger that for a joke: Stick 'em in ya own cake hole, but not in mine!!!
I think everybody missed the point??? It should be my CHOICE if I want to eat GMO's So yes it should be labeled GMO in big letters on the front and If I want to buy it I will and If people don't want too well that should be there choice too, I hate how people want to force others to do things they don't want to for what ever reason but we all know why they wont label it GMO it's because most wont touch it and that's there right, simply hiding what something is because people won't buy it is WRONG no matter what the reason
But that causes a big problem for people/corporations who want a complete monopoly over every piece of genetic information in the world. I'm motivated to write a thesis on the topic as you and probably many others are based purely on the documented money ties and lobbying concerning this issue at the moment. It's all or nothing to them, and they know well that if it's labelled GMO (which it should be) sales will go down. Ironic isn't it; so fearful of adverting their 'entirely safe' product which they're at absolute pains to promote in any way apart from putting a GMO label on the product itself!! Pro GMOers suck cancer.
Exact M GE food is substantially equivalent to non-GE food therefore a GMO label has no scientific justification.
I think it is YOU who missed the point. The "right to know" isn't the right to understand. Look at all those dumbwits who just assume GMO's are bad without doing their own research or thinking; they believe everything they see on TV. Whether GMO's a good or bad for you, that's a moot point. Just assume everything is genetically modified, and eat certified organic if you so desire. Last time I checked, organic food is always labeled.
Ricardo K. Wow so let's assume everyone is too stupid to understand anyway so why bother? You wouldn't know what is in your processed food if it wasn't for allergies or intolerances that either FDA agrees that people should be told about, or food companies are afraid of being sued. Otherwise they would be happy to assume they don't even "need" to tell anyone what's in their food. "Look at all those dumbwits" I bet they don't understand half of what's on a label, anyway.
MsSardonicus Assuming people are too stupid to understand, it is important to bother because these are the same ppl who assume everything is bad without any scientific basis. It's equivalent to a person making decisions based on what they learn on FOX news.
I'm so glad this video exists!!!
It amazes me how it is somehow acceptable among these people to make decisions and hold strong opinions without being the least bit informed on the subject.
there is a TON of evidence stating the safety of gmos. nothing to worry about
Yes!
I am 14 and I know what a GMO stands for and what it does and what it is
Here's a cookie 🍪
No you don't.
Unless you took a biotechnology class in your freshman year of high school you don't...
Haha that's funny I learned it in middle school.
It's not like GMO is some sacred acronym that you only learn in some class. It literally takes 3 seconds to learn from Google.
I didn't question that you knew what the simple acronym means, genius. I said you don't know what a GMO is because you said (and I quote), "and what it does." So please, tell the class what a GMO does.
GMOs are safe, normal, and without them, crop yield would decrease drastically. (This is for a science class)
lol they are surprisingly honest tho and also quite close
Not close at all.
Temperance Raziel well if they know it's about genetically modified "stuff" and food related that's definitely close enough imo
Browneeentertainment If they believe it is harmful in any way, then they are way off.
Temperance Raziel that is your view on that and you know it's controversial .. not gonna discuss this with you either
Browneeentertainment It is only controversial among those who embrace pseudoscience, not within the scientific community
These people are actors, right? That was all staged, RIGHT?!?!?!
***** i hope so
+OwNeD05 No, this is exactly how stupid you look.
Seedless Grapes Baby! My favorite GMO!
Seedless watermelons, grapes, bananas and oranges are not GMOs. But they have been modified through selective breeding/crossbreeding/hybridisation over many/many years. This is completely different from GMO foods (created in a lab).
@@billyfromtheblock8350 That’s not true all. Any organism which has been genetically modified through may means is a GMO.
And GMOs aren’t unhealthy or unsafe regardless of their origin.
2:26 couldn't have said it better myself.
Yup and how much was jimmy paid by Monsanto, to make people that are against GMOs stupid?
Exactly. I'm sure Monsanto is in his shares portfolio, as this performance would suggest. Any one can go around with a video camera and cherry pick the most suitable clips to justify their arguments using this format. Choose any hot topic of the day and it would work just the same. One way to prove this theory once and for all is to keep the video running from beginning to end.
Also, notice how it was clearly a segment with political and corporate motivations from the very start masquerading as lighthearted affair with the veneer of also being slightly informative by demonstrating the feeble minds of anti-GMO folk? It's clear that making people feel stupid is a convenient tool used to facilitate policy change without any opposition.
TerryMacka McKenzie I agree, there is no doubt they are after seeing this video. Exactly! But of course we only see the ones that make people that are against GMO's look like idiots.. ah I'm positive there would of been people giving good reasons why they don't buy GMO's, obvisouly that wasn't included. Yeah wow once you realise how evil and corrupt this World is you never see it the same.
I'm glad you see it the same way as me!!!!!!
Meh, 'Tinfoil Hat' is a cop out used to avoid any real discussion on the issue. It'd be nice if people engaged in that activity which has become lost in the days of yore referred to as 'reading' instead of being a drone operating on the instructions of one miserably boring late night show.
References:
GMO and Cancer: 'France to probe study linking GM corn to cancer' -- France24.
Who owns your disease?
Sydney Morning Herald: 'Landmark patent ruling over breast cancer gene BRCA1'
***** you think that the main point of the video was to create some laughs?? i wish i could see the world that innocently. Where there is big money there is big corruption, lies etc.
TerryMacka McKenzie is right!! all you need to type into google is gmo risks, cancer, studies and you'll have more than enough evidence. But if you want to allow this "food" into your body, no ones stopping you... not my medical bills
***** Interesting name there, you seem rather homophobic Monsatan, but expect no less from the lord of the underworld and the cultivator of death.
Why should we not be interested in gene patents? Don't you think the ethical issues surrounding these are of major concern to everyone on the planet?
The reference I posted relates to a woman who had breast cancer yet her doctors couldn't even simply 'test' the genes at all because they were issued with cease and desist notices proventing them from helping the patient with her cancer.
It's pure evil and you think it's a grand joke. BRCA1 and BRCA2 are owned by Myriad Technologies. At least 20% of the Human Genome has been patented. Relating this back to GM food, companies like MonSatan endeavour to patent food and profit from intellectual property rights.
And as for that study, despite it's criticisms it still hasn't been determined what caused the test subjects to become basically a walking tumors, and the French government is has stated further investigation is required to insure the saftey of the public. Go to Europe and find someone who loves GMOs. They're much more informed over there than the corrupt U$ who rely on latenight comedians whose audience would laugh at a baby being dropped on its head they're that inane.
I sincerely hope you don't get cancer and that the amusement of your droll humour isn't interfered with by the reality of death and human suffering. It's all fun and games until it happens to you or someone you care about.
I used to be anti gmo when I first started reading about them but now that I'm better educated on the topic I support genetic modification and think there's no reason to force companies to label gmos.
Am I too late for the stupid fight in the comment section :'(
Yes..tish tish on your pish pish
You're always late.
I!!! I!!!!... ;_; *cries in a dark corner*
The most obvious follow up question is how can you be against something if you don't know what that something is? Mind boggling.
We humans are GMO as well. Our genome has been modified by nature for a very long time.
Yeah but when it comes to food, we use science to modify it.
I see what you did there, but technically not, considering GM means to have artificially selected traits.
+Nikolla Mihallari
Technically, we're not artificially selected; our breeding is independent of external control, and like wild animals, we select mates on our own; we are technically naturally selected. Also, an artificially selected organism is a GMO. When people think of a GMO, they're immediately brought to think of an organism with foreign DNA introduced to its strand, by artificial means; while that is a GMO, that is a specific type of GMO, known as a transgenic organism. Transgenic GMOs are simply one of multiple types of GMOs.
Technically, no, but your pet dog is.
hey guys. who wants to get in a stupid fight in the comment section like Kimmel said 🙋🙋
+Sarah Sharpe 🙋
+The Dovahkiin [insert anti gmo disproven study here]
+PATRICK STAR 🙋i do plz me fight rawr fight
+The Dovahkiin +Quibbledip 👊👊👊👊
+PATRICK STAR Pleeease!
No way. Noo Waay. People are this misinformed and ignorant? Everyone is entitled to their opinion and I respect that, but the non-truths and poopy logic is quite alarming. If the people who are commenting (like Jeff W) took the time to educate themselves about bacteria, plasmids, restriction enzymes, the cell cycle, DNA, and protein synthesis, they would most likely lose their contempt for genomics. I understand that there will be those who would still be leery, despite being informed, but Kimmel shows that those people are few and far between with most harboring ill-conceived notions and lacking comprehension.
THANK YOU FOR THE 60FPS OMG WHY ISN'T THIS THE STANDARD!!??!??
OMG, good stuff Jimmy! Are you sure we evolved from monkeys and not from sheep?
Humans did not evolve from monkeys, we both evolved from a common ancestor, if you accept evolution then stop repeating the idiocy spouted by religious morons.
Harry Phillips Being religious does not mean you don't accept evolution,
Harry Phillips ... I think you might have missed the punchline on the joke
Louis Loizides Haha can't complain, it's just the way they approach people. Very ignorant and aggressive. But hey he missed the joke, not surprising.
ah
"sheep"
I get it
Lol I'm 11 and I knew the answer!
The Jimmy Kimmel group is good at avoiding interviewing the smarties
Yeh id like to believe ur right. Otherwise id have to admit that there are alot more stupid people than i thought.
No, just edited out to focus on the stupidest ones.
whenever i have homework due, i end up on youtube... stuck in a fucking vortex of never ending videos and tabs.
GMO's aren't bad or bad for you
GMOs aren't inherently bad but they're used to make plants resistant to pesticides and herbicides. In turn GM farmers can use as much chemical on it without effecting the crop. The end result is a crop not only infused with a genetically modified organism, but one also infused with chemical 'cides' which are known as harmful carcinogens. And we all know what carcinogens do...
GMOs aren't inherently bad but they're used to make plants resistant to pesticides and herbicides. In turn GM farmers can use as much chemical on it without effecting the crop. The end result is a crop not only infused with a genetically modified organism, but one also infused with chemical 'cides' which are known as harmful carcinogens. And we all know what carcinogens do...
GMOs aren't inherently bad but they're used to make plants resistant to pesticides and herbicides. In turn GM farmers can use as much chemical on it without effecting the crop. The end result is a crop not only infused with a genetically modified organism, but one also infused with chemical 'cides' which are known as harmful carcinogens. And we all know what carcinogens do...
+Nadira Williams false. a lot of the time they are actually modified to let off secretions that keep pests AWAY from the crops, which means farmers would have to use less pesticides.
+ben murphy that's right, they most likely aren't bad for you. but what about your grandchildren, or even further down the line?
PINK SHIRT had me rollling
Some GMO foods have had antibiotic features built into them to make them immune or resistant to diseases or viruses, according to Iowa State University. When you eat them, these antibiotic markers persist in your body and can make actual antibiotic medications less effective. The university warns that such ingestion of GMO foods and regular exposure to antibiotics may be contributing to the decreased effectiveness of antibiotic drugs that is being noticed in hospitals around the world.
The funny thing is, we as a species have been doing genetic engineering through selective breeding for quite some time now. Dogs, bees (which created Africanized Honey Bees), corn and trees have all had some form of selective breeding done to bring about a certain outcome. Whether that is increased yield, smaller or larger size, or different color, it is on the same level as simple adaptation. GMOs are the products of far more precise practices such as gene splicing which basically shaves years off the process of breeding and growing a target to adulthood before finding out the effects.
Take a crop of corn for example. In order to get an accurate crop, the experimental yield and the market yield must be separated lest the experimental crop breeds with the regular yield to accidentally create a new strain of corn which is not good for the environment or the yield. By taking the process to the lab and confining the testing to a small space, you're nearly eliminating the risk of cross pollination which yields undesirable results with more control over what genes are placed into the plant and which are selected out.
And on that note, everything you eat has been bred and raised by man. You've been eating genetically engineered crops for the last four thousand years, why does speeding up the process by a factor of hundreds scare you? It shouldn't.
That being said, companies who produce and copyright/patent GMOs aren't angels by any means. But that's not because the science is evil. Your blame is misplaced and misguided.
#:50 is your average American. Just going with the flow and a little laughter never hurt anyone.
Great topic Jimmy , way to shed the light! :D
It's amazing how many idiots here never heard of editing. What they didn't tell you is that they probably interviewed 50 people to find the 5 that don't know what GMO stands for. Moreover, just because someone doesn't know what the acronym stands for doesn't mean they don't know what GMO is and have a clear sense of the issues surrounding it.
BrainToMush If you don't know what it stands for, then that shows the level of research you've done into it.
DeadFishFactory Wrong! You can read a hundred articles that never say Genetically Modified Organisms. They normally just say GMO. Human communication has become obfuscated by acronyms. Half the time people have no idea what other people are saying just because everyone thinks it's cool to throw around acronyms now days.
BrainToMush If your basic research doesn't include finding out what the acronym of the thing you hate is, then your level of reseawrch is bad.
DeadFishFactory Stop saying "you." If someone doesn't know what an acronym stands for it's not my responsibility. All I'm saying is that it doesn't mean someone can't know anything about a subject just because they don't know what an acronym stands for. It's not even a logical proposition. I have no idea what AARP means, but I know what they do and who they represent. Same thing goes for NAACP and NCAA. I have no idea what the acronyms stand for, but I know enough about what they do to form an opinion about them.
BrainToMush You, as in you people, as in people who claim to know a lot about GMOs because they went to websites like mercola, natural news, or a soccer mom's personal blog to do your research.
And even if you didn't know what it stood for, they could have guessed based on what they think it is, and they would have been close. I know the AARP is for old people, so I would assume RP is already retired persons. They're an association so one of the As is already association. But most of those people drew a complete blank, indicating that they had no fucking clue what a GMO is, other than it's ebil.
Crazy that people take stances on things they’ve never bothered to look up.
3:36 thats my fav and i agree with him! lol
Nw
At least one person answered correctly
The study, led by Gilles-Eric Seralini of the University of Caen, was the first ever study to examine the long-term (lifetime) effects of eating GMOs. You may find yourself thinking it is absolutely astonishing that no such studies were ever conducted before GM corn was approved for widespread use by the USDA and FDA, but such is the power of corporate lobbying and corporate greed.
The study was published in The Food & Chemical Toxicology Journal and was just presented at a news conference in London.
@Eric Pettersen
That guy in the beginning was completely stoned haha
I didn't knew that whole food consumers did not knew this !!! In shock right now...
i like the guy who just said idk it wasn't awkward and kinda funny
I ran out of air watching this lol agh lol that lady hahaha Please kimmel never retire EVER !
3:36 best answer ever...