Quotes of All Topics . Occasions . Authors
The science just hasn't been done.
GMOs could really land us in trouble
But Fascism cannot continue in a modified form.
But I majored in Drama, modified with Psychology.
Some people are genetically programmed to be difficult.
The words of a dead man are modified in the guts of the living.
Middle-income countries are the biggest users of GMOs. Places like Brazil.
There are GMO skeptics more in Europe maybe than in other places, but not exclusively.
The long-term study of GMO foods is going on in real time and in real life. Not in a lab.
There doesn't seem to be any other way of creating the next green revolution without GMOs.
My father was always getting excited about something. It's genetically inside me somewhere.
I think a big misconception about GMOs is that there is a scientific consensus on their safety.
Many of the genetically modified foods will be safe, I'm sure. Will most of them be safe? Nobody knows.
Any politician or scientist who tells you these [GMO] products are safe is either very stupid or lying.
As consumers, we can buy organic and non-GMO verified products, so look out for those labels when shopping!
The 22nd Amendment should probably be modified to say two consecutive terms instead of two terms for a lifetime.
GMO herbicide-tolerant crops have led to a 527 million pound increase in herbicide use in the U.S. between 1996 and 2011.
So GMOs, who knows? Maybe GMOs will come, they will get maize that produces double. But who knows what else may happen to the maize?
The FDA has received over a million comments from citizens demanding labeling of GMOs. 90 percent of Americans agree. So, why no labeling?
All that is needed to set us definitely on the road to a Fascist society is war. It will of course be a modified form of Fascism at first.
I think people need to know what they're eating. That's why I support "country of origin" labeling. That's why I support labeling of GMO's.
People have freaked out when I tell them that my dragons are scientifically based... what else can you call a genetically engineered life form?
I think the dangers of the impact of GMOs on the environment are undebatable. Genetically modified crops are tied to the chemicals sprayed on them.
I am the same person I was before receiving the Nobel Prize. I work with the same regularity, I have not modified my habits, I have the same friends.
If the Americans like to eat GMO products, let them eat it then. We don't need to do that; we have enough space and opportunities to produce organic food.
But the newest research is showing that many properties of the brain are genetically organized, and don't depend on information coming in from the senses.
The position I took at the time was that we hadn't really examined any of the potential environmental consequences of introducing genetically modified organisms.
Simply because my people are hungry, that is no justification to give them poison, to give them genetically modified food that is intrinsically dangerous to their health.
Back in 1983, the United States government approved the release of the first genetically modified organism. In this case, it was a bacteria that prevents frost on food crops.
All of us, whether guilty or not, whether old or young, must accept the past. It is not a case of coming to terms with the past. That is not possible. It cannot be subsequently modified or undone.
As a scientist I cannot say we don't want to hear anything about GMOs, because these are advances in science. But I think its also important, especially when you are dealing with food, to be cautious.
When it comes to owning the seed for collecting royalties, the GMO companies say, 'it's mine.' But when it comes to contamination, cross-pollination, health problems, the response is we're not liable.
We hear, "Oh, we need to patent GMOs and develop new strains and new chemicals because Nature can't provide what we need." I have to debate people all the time who say that Nature can't provide enough.
Any scientist who tells you they know that GMOs are safe and not to worry about it, is either ignorant of the history of science or is deliberately lying. Nobody knows what the long-term effect will be.
rBGH poses an even greater risk to human health than ever considered. The FDA and Monsanto have a lot to answer for. Given the cancer risks, and other health concerns, why is rBGH milk still on the market?
I frequently compose out the entire metric structure of a piece in modified cyclic form, where each cyclic revolution undergoes some form of 'variation' much as if measure lengths were concrete musical 'material.'
Because GMOs aren't labeled, it's very hard to prove causality in terms of health effects. It's even more difficult because the seeds are patented, so independent researchers have a hard time gaining access to them.
The public should know that the liability issues here have yet to be resolved, or even raised. If you're a farmer and you're growing a genetically engineering food crop, those genes are going to flow to the other farm.
I see worries in the fact that we have the power to manipulate genes in ways that would be improbable or impossible through conventional evolution. We shouldn't be complacent in thinking that we can predict the results.
Fairness forces you - even when you're writing a piece highly critical of, say, genetically modified food, as I have done - to make sure you represent the other side as extensively and as accurately as you possibly can.
Therefore I feel that the aforementioned guiding principle must be modified to read: If you desire peace, cultivate justice, but at the same time cultivate the fields to produce more bread; otherwise there will be no peace.
There are still hungry people in Ethiopia, but they are hungry because they have no money, no longer because there is no food to buy... we strongly resent the abuse of our poverty to sway the interests of the European public.
American consumers are not saying they will not buy GMO foods. What they're saying is "I want to know. I want to know." EU consumers are much happier because they know what they're buying, and they've seen a continued increase in sales.
If you look at all the lobbyists in Washington, this is not a democracy. This is ruled by special interest groups. That includes the military, the pharmaceutical industry, the people who produce mechanized debt, GMO foods. We are prisoners.
I think [GMO] is one area where the is a need for legal regulations to make sure that companies - because at the moment, companies are the ones that have this technology - will not use this technology in a way that could adversely affect the people.
Over time, yes, countries will need to look at specific GMO products like they look at drugs today, where they don't approve them all. They look hard at the safety and the testing. And they make sure that the benefits far outweigh any of the downsides.
As we descend deeper and deeper in this region its inhabitants become more and more modified, and fewer and fewer, indicating our approach towards an abyss where life is either extinguished , or exhibits but a few sparks to mark its lingering presence.
There are plenty of publicly-funded organizations and nonprofits that are trying to develop GMO crops that could help feed people in developing nations by producing disease-resistant or drought-resistant strains of staple crops like cassava or bananas.
GMOs are found in nearly 80% of processed food in the United States. Currently, up to 92% of U.S. corn is consumed what are you eating GMO with zoe lister-jonesgenetically engineered, as are 94% of soybeans and 94% of cotton. In short, they are everywhere.
That said, a lot of people buy products with "green" in the brand name, but make no attempt to understand what it would really take to live sustainably. I think one of the most pernicious examples of magical environmental thinking is the anti-GMO movement.