I'm curious about your experience with people who say that. Its it anything other than the fact that the statement is fundamentally classist because buying GMO-free or non-processed foods is materially impossible for most working-class people?
I have pretty big criticisms to GMOs because I think their use has and will lead to the further precarization of food systems, the erasure of indigenous foodways and untold amounts of stress on soils and ecosystems. People who oppose GMOs on a "health" basis are a bit silly, in my opinion.
If you're interested, I'd like to talk more some other time (I'm ungodly busy and tired all the time right now) on the "being anti-GMOs is anti-intellectualism/science" bit, because as I've said before, food scholarship, and food activism are my chosen field of struggle, and I think there are good conversations to be had there.
I think many parts of movements for/about food have had the misfortune of getting started by privileged white people, and putting their concerns over basic humanity. But there are plenty of food-related movements like La Via Campesina who oppose GMOs on a political and ideological level, so we shouldn't be throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
Couldn't have said it better, so . I understand that GMOs aren't likely to be directly harmful to eat, but the longer-term effects on the wider ecosystem is the real (and thoroughly not studied nor understood) concern.
Oof, that was the stuff they hilariously claimed you could safely drink by the gallon, then refused to drink. Very good point that I've not considered before!
I didn't want to go into "one health" or "ecosystemic health is human health" concepts because I felt it would derail the conversation, but I think they're important to take into account.
I think it is fundamentally eurocentric to consider that the agricultural and food systems in which one lives aren't deeply linked to one's wellbeing, and that the indiscriminate use of GMOs couldn't have an effect on that.
There's alot of specific ways specific GMOs suck and of course Monsanto gets the wall for shit like round up and the abuse of termination genes (great for research, terrible for farmers)
But so often the protesters are out against something like a scientific research project on soil redmediation, or of course the Golden Rice debacle.
I'm curious about your experience with people who say that. Its it anything other than the fact that the statement is fundamentally classist because buying GMO-free or non-processed foods is materially impossible for most working-class people?
I have pretty big criticisms to GMOs because I think their use has and will lead to the further precarization of food systems, the erasure of indigenous foodways and untold amounts of stress on soils and ecosystems. People who oppose GMOs on a "health" basis are a bit silly, in my opinion.
deleted by creator
I see, thanks for explaining!
If you're interested, I'd like to talk more some other time (I'm ungodly busy and tired all the time right now) on the "being anti-GMOs is anti-intellectualism/science" bit, because as I've said before, food scholarship, and food activism are my chosen field of struggle, and I think there are good conversations to be had there.
I think many parts of movements for/about food have had the misfortune of getting started by privileged white people, and putting their concerns over basic humanity. But there are plenty of food-related movements like La Via Campesina who oppose GMOs on a political and ideological level, so we shouldn't be throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
deleted by creator
it'd be cool if your future conversation was public because i'm interested too
Couldn't have said it better, so
. I understand that GMOs aren't likely to be directly harmful to eat, but the longer-term effects on the wider ecosystem is the real (and thoroughly not studied nor understood) concern.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Oof, that was the stuff they hilariously claimed you could safely drink by the gallon, then refused to drink. Very good point that I've not considered before!
this is all pretty new to me tbh, are we getting harmful levels of exposure just from eating produce or is this more about acute exposure?
deleted by creator
I didn't want to go into "one health" or "ecosystemic health is human health" concepts because I felt it would derail the conversation, but I think they're important to take into account.
I think it is fundamentally eurocentric to consider that the agricultural and food systems in which one lives aren't deeply linked to one's wellbeing, and that the indiscriminate use of GMOs couldn't have an effect on that.
There's alot of specific ways specific GMOs suck and of course Monsanto gets the wall for shit like round up and the abuse of termination genes (great for research, terrible for farmers)
But so often the protesters are out against something like a scientific research project on soil redmediation, or of course the Golden Rice debacle.