Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low-Carb Studies & Research / Media Watch > Low-Carb War Zone
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #76   ^
Old Tue, Jun-26-18, 17:08
Verbena Verbena is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 820
 
Plan: My own
Stats: 186/155/150 Female 5'4"
BF:
Progress: 86%
Location: SW PNW
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Susky2
It's also a mischaracterization. The fish-to-tomato gene process was done on an experimental basis, it didn't produce the desired effect, and the experiment was halted years ago. There is nobody shoving fish DNA into plants, and there are no such products commercially available today.

https://www.motherearthnews.com/rea...es-zmaz00amzgoe


I stand corrected. However, even if not fish genes, the GMO process inserts foreign genes into organisms that could not acquire those genes from any natural source. Some people object to eating these foods. Others don't. Like everything having to do with nutrition (and just about everything else) personal choice plays a huge role.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #77   ^
Old Tue, Jun-26-18, 21:23
BillyHW's Avatar
BillyHW BillyHW is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 378
 
Plan: Keto + IF
Stats: 260/300/165 Male 5' 6"
BF:
Progress: -42%
Location: Alberta, Canada
Default

"I use brown sugar and honey, because it's unrefined and healthier."

Keep on shining princess.
Reply With Quote
  #78   ^
Old Tue, Jun-26-18, 23:52
Meme#1's Avatar
Meme#1 Meme#1 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 9,087
 
Plan: Atkins DANDR
Stats: 210/183/160 Female 5'4"
BF:
Progress: 54%
Location: Texas
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Verbena
I stand corrected. However, even if not fish genes, the GMO process inserts foreign genes into organisms that could not acquire those genes from any natural source. Some people object to eating these foods. Others don't. Like everything having to do with nutrition (and just about everything else) personal choice plays a huge role.


Another problem with GMO is that corporations end up owning and controlling farming and our food supply. I've read a little about this. Not so long ago rice farmers would plant rice seed and grow a crop with a second crop to follow, sprouted from the dropped rice left in the fields. Now that's not allowed because Monsanto owns the patents and with not allow a second grow because they want to be paid.
I read a story about an organic farmer who had his crops contaminated from adjacent GMO crops cross-pollinating their fields and they were sued by Monsanto for use of the pollination without compensating them even though it ruined the Organic crops.
Reply With Quote
  #79   ^
Old Wed, Jun-27-18, 05:59
Susky2's Avatar
Susky2 Susky2 is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 88
 
Plan: Keto-ish
Stats: 339/294/245 Male 76 inches
BF:
Progress: 48%
Location: Central PA
Default

Good points...but these are also blown out of proportion by social media.

For many decades, hybrid seeds have been used, and it's pretty well known that second generation plants from those seeds don't produce true replicas of the original generation. As a result, farmers regularly buy first generation seeds from providers, rather than attempting to reuse whatever falls in the field. Saving seeds generally doesn't make economic sense anyway, and it's pretty regular practice to just buy seeds that carry quality guarantees and plant those.

The farmer in question that you read about is Percy Schmeiser, and the case involving him has been overhyped. Hey, it's the internet, ya know? Read about Percy and his case here:

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Percy_Schmeiser

There have also been claims that Monsanto has pursued legal action from farmers for accidental cross pollination...but there has been no actual record of such activity. Again, baseless accusations propagated by social media.
Reply With Quote
  #80   ^
Old Thu, Jun-28-18, 06:16
Susky2's Avatar
Susky2 Susky2 is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 88
 
Plan: Keto-ish
Stats: 339/294/245 Male 76 inches
BF:
Progress: 48%
Location: Central PA
Default

In response to newbie questions about keto and LC:

"Go watch [insert documentary name] on Netflix."

This means that everything I know I learned from watching biased presentations designed to portray one side of any given story, and I'm neither savvy nor eloquent enough to digest, question, analyze, and summarize the information I've received.
Reply With Quote
  #81   ^
Old Thu, Jun-28-18, 07:34
thud123's Avatar
thud123 thud123 is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 4,762
 
Plan: ~25NC/IF
Stats: 342.2/196/000 Male 182cm
BF:
Progress: 43%
Default

"My" as in

"My Smoothie"
"My famous pumpkin pie"
"My flax gravy"
"My weight loss"

My oh, my oh my!
Reply With Quote
  #82   ^
Old Thu, Jun-28-18, 08:16
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 12,838
 
Plan: mostly milkfat
Stats: 190/152.4/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 104%
Location: Ontario
Default

Self-deprecatory remarks about a person's previous, overweight self. Or for that matter, current self. If you wouldn't say it about somebody else why be so hard on yourself? Also I think we can hit unintended targets, people will apply things you only meant for yourself to themselves.

This especially applies to people with like ten extra pounds to lose. Somebody's watching who has ten times that to lose, how are they supposed to feel watching you tear yourself a new one?
Reply With Quote
  #83   ^
Old Thu, Jun-28-18, 09:21
Ambulo's Avatar
Ambulo Ambulo is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,135
 
Plan: No GPS/OMAD (23:1)
Stats: 150/125/120 Female 64 inches
BF:
Progress: 83%
Location: the North, England
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thud123
"My" as in

"My Smoothie"
"My famous pumpkin pie"
"My flax gravy"
"My weight loss"

My oh, my oh my!

My pet hate on fasting forums is "my calories" as in " How do I eat all my calories in my eating window?". Because some app unaware of time restricted eating has told them to eat 1437 calories and it is more than they can comfortably consume on that day.
Reply With Quote
  #84   ^
Old Thu, Jun-28-18, 09:59
Susky2's Avatar
Susky2 Susky2 is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 88
 
Plan: Keto-ish
Stats: 339/294/245 Male 76 inches
BF:
Progress: 48%
Location: Central PA
Default

"fat burning"

Good lord, this is really starting to chap my hindquarters. Our bodies do not burn anything. We metabolize. And different nutrients metabolize differently. It's the whole science behind ketogenic eating. Using the term "burning" is a throwback to the inaccurate and oversimplified calorie-in-calorie-out mantra, and I really wish keto people would understand that there are better ways of expressing the concept of metabolizing consumed and stored fat.
Reply With Quote
  #85   ^
Old Thu, Jun-28-18, 10:14
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 12,838
 
Plan: mostly milkfat
Stats: 190/152.4/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 104%
Location: Ontario
Default

I don't know if this has been said yet. But the idea that if ketones are low, it may be because you're metabolizing them more "efficiently." Ketones entering the cell are controlled partly by transporter expression, partly by the gradient, the concentration outside vs. inside the cell, a very low blood ketone level simply can't support much in the way of ketones for brain metabolism etc.

Also the idea that ketones don't matter on a ketogenic diet. There's nothing wrong with a low carb diet that's not ketogenic. Why call your diet ketogenic if ketones don't actually matter to you?
Reply With Quote
  #86   ^
Old Thu, Jun-28-18, 16:17
BillyHW's Avatar
BillyHW BillyHW is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 378
 
Plan: Keto + IF
Stats: 260/300/165 Male 5' 6"
BF:
Progress: -42%
Location: Alberta, Canada
Default

"It's all about finding a balance."

See "Everything in moderation."
Reply With Quote
  #87   ^
Old Thu, Jun-28-18, 19:37
BillyHW's Avatar
BillyHW BillyHW is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 378
 
Plan: Keto + IF
Stats: 260/300/165 Male 5' 6"
BF:
Progress: -42%
Location: Alberta, Canada
Default

"Farm To Table."

What they are really saying: It came out of a can.
Reply With Quote
  #88   ^
Old Fri, Jun-29-18, 09:02
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 12,838
 
Plan: mostly milkfat
Stats: 190/152.4/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 104%
Location: Ontario
Default

"All things being equal."

They're not.

"All diets work equally well with compliance."

I find diets work when they're conducive to compliance. Diet drives compliance.
Reply With Quote
  #89   ^
Old Fri, Jun-29-18, 11:25
Susky2's Avatar
Susky2 Susky2 is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 88
 
Plan: Keto-ish
Stats: 339/294/245 Male 76 inches
BF:
Progress: 48%
Location: Central PA
Default

"Support"

I'm looking to be coddled and given permission for past and future dietary transgressions. If you tell me that I did something wrong and that I could do better, you're a bully.
Reply With Quote
  #90   ^
Old Fri, Jun-29-18, 12:08
Meme#1's Avatar
Meme#1 Meme#1 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 9,087
 
Plan: Atkins DANDR
Stats: 210/183/160 Female 5'4"
BF:
Progress: 54%
Location: Texas
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Susky2
Good points...but these are also blown out of proportion by social media.

For many decades, hybrid seeds have been used, and it's pretty well known that second generation plants from those seeds don't produce true replicas of the original generation. As a result, farmers regularly buy first generation seeds from providers, rather than attempting to reuse whatever falls in the field. Saving seeds generally doesn't make economic sense anyway, and it's pretty regular practice to just buy seeds that carry quality guarantees and plant those.

The farmer in question that you read about is Percy Schmeiser, and the case involving him has been overhyped. Hey, it's the internet, ya know? Read about Percy and his case here:

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Percy_Schmeiser

There have also been claims that Monsanto has pursued legal action from farmers for accidental cross pollination...but there has been no actual record of such activity. Again, baseless accusations propagated by social media.


You’ve heard the controversy about genetically engineered foods (GMOs) and whether they’re safe to eat (and the question of safety is nowhere near settled, despite what the companies that create GMOs would like you to think). But the rest of the story about GMOs is far more complex: for biotech companies, the real purpose of GMOs is power and control over the food supply, and ultimately it’s about profits. The undeniable fact is that GMOs are bad for our environment, our food system, and the people in it.

Here are five reasons why everyone should be concerned about genetically engineered foods:

1. GMOs increase the corporate control of our food

Increasingly, the food industry is dominated by a handful of powerful corporations that control nearly every aspect of how our food is produced. Monsanto, for example, now owns a staggering number of seed companies that were once its competitors. For people who buy groceries, it’s distressing to realize that the dozens of brands in the grocery store are mostly owned by a few parent companies. When a company has a virtual monopoly on a whole aisle of the grocery store or a set of agricultural products, they make decisions based on what’s best for their profits, not what’s best for their customers or the planet.

This consolidation of control is easy to see in the corporations that create GMOs. Biotech companies like Monsanto, Dow, Dupont and Syngenta create not only GMO seeds, but an entire system of food production. If there’s profit to be made in selling one product farmers need to buy, there’s far more profit to be made from creating a system of products designed to work together; for example, linking seeds with specific chemicals that these companies also sell, like Monsanto soybeans that are engineered to withstand Roundup, the weed killer produced by Monsanto. If a farmer plants those soybeans, they’re going to buy Roundup as well.

Nor is it easy for farmers to avoid planting GMOs. In our increasingly consolidated food industry, farmers have fewer and fewer options, and the advice they hear at every turn is “go GMO.” This happens not just in the United States, but increasingly around the world as well.

2. GMOs don’t live up to the hype

GMOs often don’t even do what they’re supposed to do. You’ve probably heard that “we need GMOs in order to feed the world,” on the presumption that only GMO crops have a high enough yield to keep up with a growing population. The trouble is, that simply isn’t true. Studies on certain GMO crops have found little to no yield improvements, and long-term studies of organic farming show that organic can match conventional agriculture’s yields.

In other cases, biotech companies claim that their GMOs have nutritional benefits, or will solve some other pending crises. Take “golden rice,” which is supposed to cure vitamin A deficiency in the developing world. Unfortunately, it doesn’t: the beta-carotene in golden rice can’t be absorbed by the body unless combined with certain fats and oils, which is not helpful for people living in poverty with a limited diet. Plenty of non-GMO foods, like carrots and sweet potatoes, are rich in vitamin A and don’t require millions of dollars to produce and grow. Golden rice makes for good PR, but it won’t solve the world’s nutritional problems.

Other times, GMO crops serve no practical purpose at all – at least for the people who eat them. Do we really need science to stop apples from turning brown when we cut them? Non-browning GMO apples are purely a marketing scheme, a way to make produce look fresher than it actually is and to make life easier for processors who want to sell cut-up apples to fast food chains.

3. More GMOs means more chemical use

Many GMO crops are specifically engineered to resist certain weed killers, such as the potentially carcinogenic Roundup, so planting GMOs means that farmers end up using the associated chemicals, and using them in more ways, when they use GMO crops. Those chemicals end up in the environment and threaten the health of farmers and farmworkers, as well as the communities they live in. The system for making sure these chemicals don’t end up in our food is extremely weak.

What’s even worse is that, because of increased chemical use, the pests are catching up. Over time, weeds and insects evolve a resistance to the chemicals we use against them. The more we use, the faster they adapt. Many common herbicides are no longer effective on our farms, which leaves biotech companies to encourage the use of harsher chemicals, which the pests will eventually adapt to… leading to an arms race of dangerous chemicals where people and the environment will inevitably be the losers.

4. GMOs and organics can’t coexist

Trying to keep a farm GMO-free is harder than you might think. Some GMOs don’t stay put where they’re planted. It’s quite common for them to contaminate neighboring farms, or even farms many miles away when pollen from GMO crops drifts on the wind. Seed supplies can be contaminated with GMOs, too. In 2013, an Oregon farmer found GMO wheat in his field – an unapproved crop that hasn’t been field tested since 2005. This is a serious problem for organic farmers, who are not allowed to use GMOs.

5. The research is biased

There is a great deal of research out there about the safety and effects of GMOs – but far too much of it is conducted, funded or otherwise influenced by the biotech industry. Disturbingly, this includes research done at public universities. When GMO advocates claim that there’s a “scientific consensus” about GMOs, or that leading scientific organizations are on their side, they’re often cherry-picking points from reports that cast the debate in a more nuanced light. We need more truly independent long-term safety research into the effects of GMOs on our health and the environment.

There are plenty of good reasons to be concerned about GMOs. But for consumers who are concerned, it’s not always clear in the marketplace where these crops end up – and biotech and food companies are fighting tooth and nail to stop new requirements that GMO foods be labeled

https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/n...know-about-gmos
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 19:24.


Copyright © 2000-2018 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.