Khyberkitsune wrote:

Kumorii wrote:

I'm partially blind in my right eye and it gets noticeably worse every couple months. I've mentioned it on here before but still haven't gotten a doctor to legitimately check it out.

Might help if i actually wore my glasses, though.

Please see a doctor ASAP. This can be a serious sign of onset diabetes, glaucoma, or retinal/neurological degeneration.

I'm far too thin and eat too well to have diabetes. Lol. I know i should, but it's another instance of "its not hindering so why bother". My left eye is nearly perfect so worst case scenario, I'll have a bitchin' eyepatch.

Bitches love eyepatches.

I have 20x20 vision and see all colors without complication.

Kumorii wrote:

I'm far too thin and eat too well to have diabetes.

You don't have to be fat and eat poorly to have diabeetus. That's just usually the case, but I went to school with a guy named Mike who was my size ( 130 pounds, 5'10 ) who dieted and even got a lot of exercise ( he was an avid skateboarder ) and he had diabeetus. Like really bad diabeetus too, one time he had gotten rushed to the hospital during class.

Doohl wrote:

Difference between diabeetus:

Type 1 - Not your fault.
Type 2 - You're a lardass.

They are both caused by all the chemicals in the food.
Just eat raw, real! Avoid processed.

Want an organic, non genetically-modified banana? Here you go:



Enjoy. As for me, I'll stick with my badass GMOs that are larger, more delicious, and healthier for you.

I get organic banana's from time to time and they don't look anything like that. Offering one photo with no source (and the file title of "wild banana") and claiming chemically doused GMO crops are better and healthier for you is akin to saying murderers and rapists are actually good for society.

You should be ashamed, but clearly you have no human traits relative to the capacity of forming emotions; Let alone the extent of empathy or compassion that is required to understand this situation.

Eat whatever you want, but you cannot eliminate others options of better choices. Shill for the industry if you must, but you really shouldn't do it here.

P.S. I can post pictures too:
The GMO corn is so toxic, the bugs/birds/etc won't even eat it.

Without context (at least proof that there's some control for the myriad of variables that would be involved in this) that picture means nothing. It'd like doing an experiment once and drawing up ultimate conclusions based on the results of that one test. That's just backwards and contrary to scientific rigor.

Of course, instead of having a rational discussion about the nature and potential threat of GMOs and non-organic ("processed") foods, you instead opt to insult me because I don't share your opinion. Seems more like you want to win an argument than broaden your perspective beyond your own opinion.

Not entirely sure I believe that picture because the 'organic' is taller than the GMO when GMOs are the reason we have corn that size anyway. On top of that, GMOs were invented to make food larger and more resilient. So if birds/bugs aren't eating the corn, it's likely because the corn was bred to be unappealing to birds/bugs more than it is 'because it's toxic'. In addition, the GMO that makes it toxic to bugs isn't toxic to humans.

They are both caused by all the chemicals in the food.

The GMO corn is so toxic, the bugs/birds/etc won't even eat it.

I get organic banana's from time to time and they don't look anything like that.

...You do realize that there are next to no actual scientists that hold that GMO foods are bad, right? Organic doesn't mean GMO-free. It doesn't mean pesticide free. It doesn't mean "natural". "Organic" is meaningless.

The problem isn't with "chemicals" in our food. The problem is that our lifestyles promote too much consumption and too little physical activity. Our diets have way too much sugar and crude protein, too little fiber and vegetable matter.

In the end, it really doesn't matter what "chemicals" you consume so long as you get the right balance of nutrients and don't consume too many calories overall.

The debate about GMO vs Organic isn't a health issue. Trying to present it as a health issue is just plain irrational. Organic food actually on average has been found to have lower yields, higher rates of contamination and less nutrient load. The reason we modify staple crops is because it improves their yields, flavor, appearance, and amount of nutrients. It also protects them from contamination to a degree.

The problem with GMO crops is when it impacts soil viability due to improper farming methods and genetic diversity of the staple crop supply. GMO crops also have legal implications due to patents being applied to specific strains of modified crops.

None of these are health issues, and framing the GMO/Organic debate around health concerns us fundamentally anti-scientific and dishonest.


Many of the studies that prove that GMOs are bad for you are fallacious. For instance, a pesticide commonly found in GMOs was found in fetal blood of pregnant women. They cited this as reason for banning the protein despite not finding adverse health reactions and despite the fact that humans lack the receptors to process this protein. Further, the chemical is found in pesticides certified as organic-safe.

There's also the absurd notion that spliced DNA can somehow hurt humans that eat the crops. We don't incorporate genes from cows when we eat steak. This argument is fundamentally stupid.

GMOs cause Gluten Disorders? Nope. It was found that the IRT actually fraudulently made this claim in reference to a study that wasn't actually a study. It was a blog post. The IRT spreads most of this ant-GMO propaganda. It's run by an activist named Jeffrey Smith. He is the only employee. It's not peer reviewed. It's a blog masquerading as a research institute. He is not a scientist. He has zero credentials on the subject. He also runs the society for responsible technology, which is also an Anti-GMO outlet. This guy is a fraud.


I could go on, but seriously. The anti-GMO debate is real. It's just got nothing to do with your personal health. It has to do with the impact of human agriculture on the planet's biosphere. If you have never heard this argument before, it's because you have been fooled by pseudo-science and fringe activists pretending to be scientists.