Slashdot Mirror
Americans Support Mandatory Labeling of Food That Contains DNA
HughPickens.com writes Jennifer Abel writes at the LA Times that according to a recent survey (PDF), over 80% of Americans says they support "mandatory labels on foods containing DNA," roughly the same number that support the mandatory labeling of GMO foods "produced with genetic engineering." Ilya Somin, writing about the survey at the Washington Post, suggested that a mandatory label for foods containing DNA might sound like this: "WARNING: This product contains deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA). The Surgeon General has determined that DNA is linked to a variety of diseases in both animals and humans. In some configurations, it is a risk factor for cancer and heart disease. Pregnant women are at very high risk of passing on DNA to their children."
The report echoes a well-known joke/prank wherein people discuss the dangers of the chemical "dihydrogen monoxide" also known as hydrogen oxide and hydrogen hydroxide. Search online for information about dihydrogen monoxide, and you'll find a long list of scary-sounding and absolutely true warnings about it: the nuclear power industry uses enormous quantities of it every year. Dihydrogen monoxide is used in the production of many highly toxic pesticides, and chemical weapons banned by the Geneva Conventions. Dihydrogen monoxide is found in all tumors removed from cancer patients, and is guaranteed fatal to humans in large quantities and even small quantities can kill you, if it enters your respiratory system. In 2006, in Louisville, Kentucky, David Karem, executive director of the Waterfront Development Corporation, a public body that operates Waterfront Park, wished to deter bathers from using a large public fountain. "Counting on a lack of understanding about water's chemical makeup," he arranged for signs reading: "DANGER! – WATER CONTAINS HIGH LEVELS OF HYDROGEN – KEEP OUT" to be posted on the fountain at public expense.
The report echoes a well-known joke/prank wherein people discuss the dangers of the chemical "dihydrogen monoxide" also known as hydrogen oxide and hydrogen hydroxide. Search online for information about dihydrogen monoxide, and you'll find a long list of scary-sounding and absolutely true warnings about it: the nuclear power industry uses enormous quantities of it every year. Dihydrogen monoxide is used in the production of many highly toxic pesticides, and chemical weapons banned by the Geneva Conventions. Dihydrogen monoxide is found in all tumors removed from cancer patients, and is guaranteed fatal to humans in large quantities and even small quantities can kill you, if it enters your respiratory system. In 2006, in Louisville, Kentucky, David Karem, executive director of the Waterfront Development Corporation, a public body that operates Waterfront Park, wished to deter bathers from using a large public fountain. "Counting on a lack of understanding about water's chemical makeup," he arranged for signs reading: "DANGER! – WATER CONTAINS HIGH LEVELS OF HYDROGEN – KEEP OUT" to be posted on the fountain at public expense.
Another fun excerpt: "Secondly, participants were asked “Did you read any books about food and agriculture in the past year?” Participants were asked to select “Yes”, “No”, or “I don’t know”. Just over 16% of participants stated that they had read a book related to food and agriculture in the past year. About 81% answered “No”, and 3% answered “I don’t know”. Those who answered “Yes” were asked: “What is the title of the most recent book you read about food and agriculture?” The vast majority of responses were of the form “I don’t remember” or “cannot recall”. Fast Food Nation, Food Inc., and Omnivore’s Dilemma were each mentioned about three times. The Farmer’s Almanac and Skinny Bitch were mentioned twice. One respondent mentioned the bible."
This appears to follow the general pattern that people will lie to interviewers to seem more smart, educated, or intellectual than they are. They don't mention in the study a correlation between those who said yes to reading a book and then couldn't "remember" it when pressed and those who wanted to ban food containing DNA, but I'd be willing put money on their being a correlation.
what a great way to wake up!hahahaha!!!
For April fools jokes, isn't it?
I used to have a sig, but I set it free and it never came back.
Remember when news organizations didn't so blatantly try to push agendas? Well, I'm not sure if there ever was such a time but it certainly isn't today.
Ask if they would consider eating radioactive food!
Well, I for one support labelling of food. Period!
Whether it contains DNA or not.
A clever article that says that since
people can be fooled by clever lies,
that's proof that the law passed to state
that GRAS foods are to be treated "as if tested"
is the same thing as scientific testing.
This isnt worthy of slashdot, its heckling
not debate.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-lustig-md/fda-food-additives_b_3384629.html
A lot of shyte in our food stores is shyte, sold to us
by the people who use lobbyists to make laws
that allow the by-passing of testing, for example.
There should also be a question along the lines of "How much do you give a shit about this survey?" Because someone who does't give a shit is probably going to read "“Mandatory labels on foods containing DNA," assume it's about GMOs, and answer the question as if it *were* about GMOs. And then continue not giving a shit after the question is answered.
I can see it now. "WARNING: This lettuce contains lettuce DNA. Eat at your own risk. Wholefoods is not liable for side effect due to the consumption of lettuce DNA"
Most people don't have the knowledge to assess by themselves if a product fits their expectation. Not only for food, any product needs a thoughtful advice/label from an independent and competent / national team to guide customers. What difference does it make for a customer who reads for the first time "chicken raised outdoors" and "chicken from battery cages"? The answer is here, and it's a big long, but a summary on a sticker would help customers to chose more wisely - and that would dramatically improve competition between very-low quality products sold 0.9 X against a much better product sold X (while the manufacturing cost of a "good" product would be twice the cost of a "bad" product). People tend to chose the cheapest one, by lack of information.
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
I'm tired of Organic food! I asked, "Where is the inorganic food! I cannot stand the taste of carbon - even at the molecular level!!"
This reminds me of a Penn & Teller episode that got hundreds of people to sign a petition to ban water.
"May cause sprouting"
I googled for "GMO Hazards"
https://www.google.com/search?...
and out of the top 10 sites not one had actual problems that were caused by GMO foods
Lot of might and could be, but no actually. No "Killer corn ate my baby "
So How bout labeling foods that are produced from selective breeding genetically engineered as well ?
Strictly speaking, the phrasing is designed to generate the wrong answer so the respondent can then be mocked.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
From one of the sites
http://foodrevolution.org/blog...
I refute the claims of the biotechnology companies that their engineered crops yield more, that they require less pesticide applications, that they have no impact on the environment and of course that they are safe to eat.
That's nice he ought to let the farmers know they can buy cheaper seeds and still do as well.
If it seems like I am laughing at these people and the Euros who seem to think it's in their interest to pay more for food, I am.
There's also GAME-C (Group for Atomic Material Exposure Control), a group which has launched a campaign to force the pharmaceutical industry to label medicines comprised partially or entirely of atoms.
Water consists of hydrogen and oxygen, but while it also contains oxygen, especially if it has been around the fountain a few times, it does not contain noteworthy amounts of hydrogen. Instead of messing with the people he's supposed to protect, he should have been warning them about the copious amounts of dihydrogenmonoxide in the fountain. People who are afraid of "food that contains DNA" are children and need to get an allowance and otherwise be absolved of their decision making powers. They certainly shouldn't be allowed to make decisions that could result in offspring.
Read the article you stupid motherfucker.
I read on many different topics. The last book on diet and nutrition I read was "The Big Fat Surprise" and that's because I read it last week. There was one before it, and for the life of me, I cannot remember what the hell it was right now.
Speaking of "The Big Fat Surprise", not only is it about nutrition, but it has a wonderful example on how the scientific process can be derailed by prominent people in a field and by group think - even among scientists who are supposed to be above that nonsense; at least according to Slashdot groupthink.
This is humor in the same vein as, "Do you want a Hertz donut?"
Strictly speaking, the phrasing is designed to generate the wrong answer so the respondent can then be mocked.
My brain hertz.
This appears to follow the general pattern that people will lie to interviewers to seem more smart, educated, or intellectual than they are.
There is some phenomenon at work. School curriculum seems to contain the essentials of literacy and a general sense that a modern world exists to be explored and understood, but for a great many children now and their twenty-something parents, there seem to be great gaps of knowledge... it is as if a great pool of historical and practical trivia such as that which would be imparted by oral tradition as conversation and interaction with elders, has gone 'missing'.
Perhaps it is not the educational system that has failed us, but a knowledge-transfer process between the generations. I speak not of a direct and simple connection with one's parents and grandparents, but ongoing dialogue with anyone 20+ years older.
From pre-school through college children are becoming independent at younger ages and are managing to slice out their own separate social lives. We encourage this, shape it even. It is possible for them to maintain contact principally with others their own age right into adulthood. Their parents are typically distracted and engaged with work, and everyone has their own directed entertainment to immerse in at the end of the day. Are sundown get-togethers between generations a thing of the past?
Until the post-war '50s there was little in the way of a teen-age subculture. Even before graduation there were life choices to make. You would typically be home by sundown, a great deal more interaction with adults and steady pressure for at least one of the younger to adopt the traditions and vocations of parents was real. Who will manage the farm, who will be the first apprentice at the clock shop? Who will join the Marines, who will be the teacher?
Throughout the Nuclear Age the nuclear family has been in steady decline. Where we had once been paced by the animals and family tradition we were increasingly paced by tides of external stimuli. Diverse political ideology, lifestyle options and the fossil fuel-rich economy encouraged far migration. Today families span more geographical distance on average than at any time in history.
Modern technology helped this to happen. We are a push-button society and kids push buttons as well as anyone. This extends to push-button entertainment and distraction. Maybe we've spent the last three decades of pushing separate buttons instead of spending long hours talking to one another about the little things and the big things.
What if this simple, sad message of generational estrangement as voiced by Harry Chapin... could be applied to a whole country?
Perhaps it's not too late to open those channels again.
Call your Mom.
Ask her what DNA is.
<blink>down the rabbit hole</blink>
I need to start marketing the Ronco DNA Extractor. Safely and quickly remove any residual DNA to make smart, healthy family meals.
This showed up in The Washington Post a week ago... and I'm still aghast.
Slashdot has classified this as a "humour" story, but I find it simply frightening. There's always going to be a certain quantity of dullards on the left end of the curve, but... 80%?! 80% of Americans are unfamiliar with one of, if not *the* most fundamental concepts of biology? This isn't "Dihydrogen Monoxide" trickery, DNA is DNA and it's functionality is taught in high school- usually repeatedly.
However, the thing that really, really scares me and keeps me awake at night is that *these fuckers vote*.
People have always been frightfully quick at obediently accepting a popular held belief, no matter the actual facts in the matter.
These days its trendy to speak concerned platitudes about what we eat.
So as a result organic foods become popular, despite the fact that no scientific study has ever proved conclusively that there are any positive health effects compared with conventionally farmed food.*
And genetically modified crops become demonized. Despite the fact that the campaigns and arguments about GMOs are little more than fear mongering.
*But the environment! Even if assume that pesticides and herbicides even in tiny amounts are harmful to the environment, the fact remains that there is no way we could feed 7 billion people with organic farming. It's not very long ago, less than a century, that there were actual famines, or a risk thereof, in Europe. Thanks to the green revolution and the use of pesticides/fungicides thats a thing of the past.
It's not nice to make fun of people who are less educated than you.
You can drink too much H2O, water. Hyponatremia is a real thing.
Anyone who lives in California has seen the prop 65 warning and knows how useless that is. Good intentions (probably not) but useless. The required warning
"WARNING: This product contains chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm."
Also used in some variation to say something like "Products used at this location..." The end result is this is slapped on everything, everywhere and means nothing.
i gotta stop reading slashdot. it's articles like this that help to explain why socrates chose the hemlock over paying the fine and the situation ain't changed at all.
"Pregnant women are at very high risk of passing on DNA to their children."
Kind of the point isnt it? Its not normal if the child only get the male DNA?
This is humor in the same vein as, "Do you want a Hertz donut?"
Strictly speaking, the phrasing is designed to generate the wrong answer so the respondent can then be mocked.
My brain hertz.
Hertz Donut?
...can finally advertise as 100% DNA free!
Since college, I have been encouraging people to help save the American Clay Pidgeon, colorfully-marked creatures "fragile as eggs" that a slaughtered every day and left to rot in fields at the hands of wildly enthusiastic gunners.
"I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
I mean if they said "Do you think Americans should fear X" and it turns out that X is a simple skin exfoliating technique whose name happens to sound like "global thermonuclear destruction". The respondents just assume the survey is talking about whatever related phenomenon they've heard about in the news, and they have no reason to suspect that it's a "fake ha-ha funny survey" designed to expose subtle flaws in their scientific understanding. So they hear "food with DNA in it" and even if they do catch the mistake they're not too concerned with observing OHMYGOD ALL FOOD HAS DNA IN IT, THIS SURVEY HAS A DRAMATIC FLAW, I'D BETTER NOT RESPOND TO IT!!
Which is all fine so far as it goes. But axe-grinding bloggers will turn that into axe-grinding claims about "the American public". This is the sort of dumb hipster attack logic that has dominated the current Presidential administration for years now.
-Legal.Troll
The scary thing is, these people vote. You can see from the study how easy it is to manipulate them into thinking or believing anything you want. This is one of the reason why money wins elections. Perhaps we should fund a massive study that will convince people that voting will give them cancer to get these people out of the voting pool?
You sir, are my hero.
I'm not sure what the point is here. Could it be:
Furthermore, if you use the name "di-hydrogen monoxide" for water, I'm going to assume you've had no chemistry beyond high school. No chemist would say "monosilicon dioxide" for quartz (SiO2) or "tri-iron tetra-oxide" for Fe3O4, for example. So if you're ridiculing people for not recognizing "dihydrogen monoxide", you're also looking like an noob to people who know better.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Someone told me a big mac is free of DNA.
no, I don't have a sig
This is kind of a dishonest way for the food/chemical industry to try to push an agenda. Most people don't listen to the questions they're asked. They start thinking of an answer before the question has even been completely asked. I'll be most were really answering the question, "Do you support mandatory labeling of food that's been grown using intellectual property developed by companies that are famous for creating the world's most deadly products?" And the answer to that question about labeling of GMOs is always over 90% when the public is asked.
I can understand that faced with such overwhelming public sentiment for labeling that the chemical/food industrial complex would try anything to turn things around, but this is pretty underhanded. The fact is that consumers overwhelmingly want one little bit of information, as innocuous ask the little kosher "K" commonly on food labels. A simple yes/no to the question, "Does somebody own the intellectual property on the corn in this cereal?" is apparently so dangerous that the answer must be forbidden to consumers at all costs.
It can never be "pro-science" for information to be withheld from consumers. Even if that information is inconvenient to certain powerful corporations.
You are welcome on my lawn.
The was my first though with a cursory vieeing of the article headlined. I naturally went to thinking wow, that many people support labeling GMO foods.
It wasn't until i read more that i realised this was about DNA alone. I have no doubt that othes did the same but didn't bother going deeper into it.
Ah, the dangers of anything that isn’t “natural and organic”, anything that might “contain chemicals.” Arsenic is ”natural” and hemlock is “organic.”
It's another way for the Genetically Modified industry to say that clearly people aren't to be trusted with decisions on such things as whether GM foods are not safe... While I guess the technology is basically safe, I don't want see a world where a few big corporations eventually own every basic foodstuff through patents, and I'm not allowed to grow vegetables in my garden because of copyright and patent infringement...
1) people nearly always want to answer a question rather than admit "i don't know" if it is a question which is knowledge oriented.
2) if you frame a question in about "do you think people should be informed about substance A being in consumer product B" many people will simply answer Yes no matter the substance. Try it with something innocuous : it works nearly always.
So the study is not really about that specific question, but about a known psychological pitfall.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
we all know it causes global warming... banning carbon in food would be a good first step in saving the planet.
I, for one, welcome our new robot overlords.
Waka Waka!
Do you think congress should vote on it?
Well, given that the point of such a survey would be for some racist to show how dumb and ignorant those Black Africans were, and then you the superiority of the White Race, it would be.
But as a liberal, I just think this survey is showing how con artists can work to exploit reasonable people. An unfortunately common thing, such loathsome predators are real, but that should not stop us from doing the right thing.
Personally, I think it just wasted time proving the obvious. Not like I can't find a number of examples of such exploitation, whether it be Cardholder services, Billy from Microsoft or the FBI stings.
... to the Age of Belief, self expression and senate voting on whether climate change is real.
Don't bother us with your complicated scientific facts - we can google our own facts
WARNING! Air contains over 70% nitrogen which in excess can cause asphyxia - breathe at your own risk!
Looking at the survey results, it's clear that the question pertaining to DNA was giving in the context of other questions on governmental policies. If I answered the survey, I would have answered based on what I thought the researcher meant by the question, and not the literal text of the question. When I saw the question, I would ask myself, should I be a smartass and answer the question as written, or should I assume the researcher means to ask, "Mandatory labels on foods containing modified or isolated DNA"
did Monsanto or Archer-Daniels-Midland or any of those other HUGE agriculture corporations ever consider what genetically modifying crops would do to its DNA? what if their GM crops DNA meddling is like chemistry where mixing foreign sources cause unexpected and unintended results that could be harmful to people and the farmland's environment in which they grow?
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
It sounds like a great idea; show how silly someone is acting by duping them into even more stupid actions that use similar logic, but people don't remember logical steps as much as they remember emotion. They'll remember that you made them feel bad and that you proposed stupid ideas. They'll stop listening to you and double down on their next stupid idea.
Oh no. I think that trillions in research should be spent on this.
We are now entering another political silly season. The next time one of the political ideologues (aka, candidates) try to push your buttons, one good question to ask is “who is the majority holder of the national debt and how did that debt come about?” If he can’t answer that simple question, he is asking for a mandatory label for foods containing DNA. Iif you can’t answer that question, and others, you are going to get the government you deserve.
In the McCarthy era a poll quoted the Bill of Rights and people said it was Communist propaganda. This is a symptom of the failure of the US education system. It has nothing to do with people being stupid or not stupid. This is stuff you're supposed to learn in school and if people didn't, it's because the schools suck.
Nobody at whole foods buys lettuce. That's what rednecks buy at Walmart. Whole foods shoppers by kale which is DNA and chemical free.
Strictly speaking, the phrasing is designed to generate the wrong answer so the respondent can then be mocked.
You must fe fun at parties . . .
Nothing new here. Move along please.
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
These are not the people who vote. These are the people silly enough to take online surveys. Probably for reward, meaning they are likely old people or very poor people trying to make additional income so either want to get the answer "right" or are literally clicking yes to everything to get through it as fast as possible.
I for one would like to know if some pervert squirted his DNA all over my food.
The story about the water fountain sign reminds me of the sign at the Foucault pendulum at the uni where I studied. They had problems with people touching the pendulum, stopping it, etc. So they put up a sign that said, "Danger, do not touch! 10,000 ohms." Haven't had problems with people messing with it in many years!
“Do you support or oppose the following government policies?”
“Mandatory labels on foods containing DNA”
I want all food I buy to be labeled with things like ingredients, so I'd mark yes for that question. The question says nothing about what the label would look like. No where does it infer that the label would be something like "This product contains DNA". I would interpret this question as someone wanting to remove the already mandatory labels as a law saying "No mandatory labels on foods containing DNA" means all current mandatory labels can be removed. Thus I'd vote 'Support' and people would call me stupid.
This is another example of a poorly designed survey. Surveys should leave nothing to interpretation. They should have provided examples for all of their questions.
Nobody uses these names, but technically the IUPAC systematic name for ammonia is "azane", and water is "ozane". (Google says they're a Star Refrigeration subsidiary in the US and an exterminator business in New Jersey.)
I'm imagining Slashdot stories like "Fracking Fluid Contains Significant Amounts of Ozane", "Ozane Responsible For Rising Sea Levels", "Guantanamo Prisoners Tortured Using Ozane", "Oncoming Ozane Crisis Threatens Civilization", "Weak Beer Found To Contain Excess Amounts of Ozane", "Linus Torvalds: Ozane Has No Role In Linux", "Ozane Layer Disappearing Along East Coast", "Tesla Motors Introducing Ozane-Based Fuel Cells", etc.
Just another demonstration in order to discredit the public. Studies such as this bolster the argument that the public is too stupid to make informed decisions and therefore only an elite class of experts is entitled to.
Struggling back from near extinction after decades of being hunted for their colorful hydes and unusual meat, sold under the brand name "SPAM".
Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
THIS IS A 100% MATTER PRODUCT: In the unlikely event that this merchandise should contact antimatter in any form, a catastrophic explosion will result.
http://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/200002/zero-gravity.cfm
THIS FOOD IS 100% ORGANIC*
(*contains carbon)
Because people don't know anything about it, GM foods are safe? Is that the message?
That's akin to "Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
..if they do catch the mistake they're not too concerned with observing OHMYGOD ALL FOOD HAS DNA IN IT...
Oh yeah? What about salt?
"dihydrogen monoxide" - hundreds (if not thousands) times higher than vx, plutonium, black mamba venom & hundreds of highly lethal chemicals!!!
And the average person (or at least myself) who does realize that the question is about DNA is going to think that the poll is hilarious and answer yes to it anyway.
Supporter of the +1 Over Dramatic mod option. In memory of apk.
I have gout, caused by excess uric acid in the bloodstream. Uric acid is formed from the purines we eat. Purines come from the DNA in cells of plants and animals. It would be nice if food products listed the amount of purine.
I know that lowering my intake of purines won't completely cure gout, but it would be nice to lower the risk of flareups.
Its a great blight upon all mankind, help sign this petition to end the suffrage of woman!
on a side note, wouldn't most dirt also contain dna or micro organisms? My shit has DNA!
Terrorists, white sharks, ebola viruses, and lettuce may contain desoxyribonucleic acid, but they may also contain hydroxylic acid a.k.a. DHMO. The latter is more dangerous, but can be rinsed away with water. We recommend against smoking lettuce.
I used to work for a restaurant and I once witnessed one waiter adding some of his personal DNA to a salad for a particularly difficult customer.
Because it's easy to misinterpret the question ..
Do you want to label foods with DNA as
Do you want to label foods with foreign DNA added from other plants, insects and animals (or even entirely created).
Yes... I'd like to know if you added peanut genes to my tomato. It may taste fine- but it would be nice to know.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
This "headline" is outright ludicrous! Nearly all foods, apart from chemicals like salt, sugar, vinegar and synthetic concoctions like soda-pop, contain DNA because these foods contains cells from plants and animals, which, generally speaking, contain DNA. As I used to tell my students: DNA is food. It contains healthful sugars (deoxyribose) and minerals (N and P). Ms. Abel's headline should have included some sort of qualifier, such as "recombinant", "heterogenous", or "artificially introduced" along with the term DNA.
I won't bother ranting about the level of ignorance of most of the people, when it comes to understanding the implications of modern technology, mainly because that's a well trodden path here on Slasdot
Instead, as a secondary rant, I'd like to point out that this kind of lazy writing, is an example of the kind of grammatical ignorance that is rampant in the professional media. As I see it, the people composing the news copy bend the language to the point of breaking because, I suppose, we are expected to know what they mean. Here is a challenge to you Slashdot sub-genii residing in the USA: Watch a news broadcast (it can be the network evening news or a local broadcast) and count the number of times you hear mangled grammatical constructs. A common example is the case of sentences ending with the word "of". The print media is only slightly better, be it the "Podunk Crier" or the "New York Times". Extra points: read the Congressional Record, the official record of those loudmouths belonging to the U.S. legislative branch and then ask yourself why these people should be leaders.
I wonder how many respondants will find fault with this posting, which would come as no surprise since, after all, I'm a product of my society.
...are the only proof needed that the American "educational" "system" is really neither, and alone justifies removing from it every human being currently involved with it. Like the IRS, the FBI, the NSA, it's a government tumor metastasizing all over our society. When 80% of Americans are this badly educated it is inevitable they will elect a lying charlatan like Obama every time. Anyone with the least knowledge of arithmetic knew he was lying during the entire 2008 campaign yet he was elected twice and has since proved himself to be the worst disaster this country will ever likely face. For the rest of history Americans will use the phrase "the Obama years" the way our parents used "the Great Depression" as the definitive yardstick for deceitfulness, incompetence, and failure so complete and so thorough as to defy explanation.
There is often an assumption that people who are against GMOs are uneducated or generally ignorant of research in genetics. I assure you that in the United States, State and Federal laws require children to attend schools, and that the majority of adults have at the very least a High School education. There are plenty of College educated citizens that are well aware of how genetic manipulation works that are also against GMOs. To claim that people who are against GMOs are uneducated is a willfully ignorant rationalization.
I will also remind the pseudo-intellectuals that our own FDA, Food and Drug Administration, has approved a multitude of drugs deemed perfectly safe for use that were then recalled due to excessive harm or a large number deaths caused by those drugs. This has occurred to the point that there have been television commercials advertising for class action lawsuits against a given drug manufacturer over harm caused by these FDA approved drugs.
The problem really lies with people who are high on the illusion of intellectual superiority who praise and worship all scientific advancement as zealously as any follower of any religion. That line of thinking comes from a human need to belong to something greater than themselves. Some find that sense of belonging in a fan club or even a street gang. The worst manifestation of this is in people who do not actually understand scientific method, peer review, or how a meta-study actually works, yet will chant the phrase "We're doing science!!!" as if it makes them look intellectual.
“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge.” - Daniel J. Boorstin, The Discoverers: A History of Man's Search to Know His World and Himself
... provide an excuse for their buddies in the chemical, pesticide, and GMO industries that allows them to ridicule the American consumer as a bunch of no-nothings. "See... these rubes^Wpeople don't even know what they're talking about so why should we have to label food that contains man-modified genetic material or household chemicals that contain chemicals that nobody's been able to prove with 100% certainty cause cancer?"
Perhaps the paper was trying to indict the educational system but, more likely, that's not how this poll's result are going to be used.
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
I thought it was very funny.
I remember when I first ran across the "controversy" of dihydrogen monoxide, years ago.
I'm like, "WTH?" and then I Googled "dihydrogen monoxide."
It's kinda like getting bit by The Onion, and stuff.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Do you realize that these idiots are allowed to vote? I know it's all the rage right now to blame politicians for everything, but why don't we take a good, hard look at the people who put them into office.
-1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
Please do not hide the fact that this is NUCLEAR DNA!!! A lot of cancers starts from when cell containg nuclear DNA dissobey non-proliferation status.
So the worning should be modified: "WARNING: This product contains nuclear deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA)..."
I selected "yes" because I support mandatory labeling of all food. The fact that DNA is present in the food is a secondary issue.
The actual survey question is:
“Do you support or oppose the following government policies?”
with several cases, one of which is:
"Mandatory labels on foods containing DNA"
The first thing you should notice is that the word "warning" does not appear. Kudos to the reporters and slashdot poster who either did not read the survey or did not understand what they read.
Almost all foods already have labels, and for most foods (presently) anything more processed than a raw banana must have a label.
So, the question is, should all foods (containing DNA) be required to have a label?
For example, "This is a banana" would meet the definition of the question.
or, "You're looking at a steak"
I can support that, especially for processed foods, and we already have that law, so, yeah, I support mandated labels.
especially for those weird roots that appear in the bin at the grocery store.
WTF is that I ask? I dunno, there's no label.
Including the people taking the survey, I suspect.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
Which books did you read? Oh, all of them.
"Strong like bull; Smart like tractor." -- old Ukrainian saying about dumb people
No wonder the world is in trouble when people of such high intelligence are allowed to vote and "have a voice." People voting in support of this are stupid enough that they should just shut the hell up, sit down, and watch their damned NFL and NBA.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
there's some beverages with no dna in them, though.
vodka should be pretty clear of it too.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
A survey like this is a scam. It just takes the standard "leading to get the wished for answer" to its limits. Then it gets connected to something the surveyor wants to promote, in this case GMO. And the people tricked into wanting a label are being portrayed as defective. And guess what? You're the one who fell for it hook line and sinker, SUCKER.
There is also the possibility that people interpret by context. So someone is taking a survey and they pause a bit at that question. They check the box for labeling and mutter how people who make surveys are complete idiots. Have you never answered a question that was nonsense on its face but you assumed the meaning behind it?
Are you still beating your wife?
Yes, your "friend". Generally what I look for in friends is something beyond the ability to photosynthesize or absorb water through a root system.
I assume this "Friend" has you doing her homework. I'm sure she thinks of you as a "friend" too.
It's chemical and GMO free, too! I'm excited to receive this vacuum bag. http://www.amazon.com/Salt-Him...
I don't know who's wife I'm beating. She might be yours?
Obviously they actually mean "recombinant DNA" aka GMO products. The survey was purposely or accidentally vague in its wording (likely dependent on the axe-to-grind by the funders of the survey).
I never eat food containing DNA - it's bad for the digestion and ruins my diet.
So that's why my book on Darwinian Agriculture is selling so poorly.
How many people, including Slashdot posters, exaggerate, puff up, or outright lie when talking about "who they really are" or "what they really think"? I see you got rid of your sig. Not so tranny proud anymore?
You know what I'll do with your beneficial insects? I'll eat those fuckers too! Seriously guy, your name ought to be weirdlogic, because you really did play the "Won't SOMEBODY think of the insects!" card.
Oh come on! You're a fighter/mage/thief! We know you'll take whatever donut you can get. A gluten-free Hertz donut, a dna-free hertz donut, a gluten & dna-free donut, a hertz donut, a donut from a Hertz, a plain donut, or a Ford escort. You multi-classers just can't make your minds up!