Most consumers realize that the FDA does not require genetically
modified food to be labeled. That’s because the FDA has decided that
you, dear consumer, don’t care if the tomato you’re eating has been
cross bred with frog genes to render the tomato more resistant to cold
weather. Some consumers may not be concerned with eating Frankenfood,
but for those who are, here’s how to determine if the fruits and
vegetables you’re buying are (GM) genetically modified.

Here’s how it works:

For conventionally grown fruit, (grown with chemical input), the PLU
code on the sticker consists of four numbers. Organically grown fruit
has a five-numeral PLU prefaced by the number 9. Genetically
engineered (GM) fruit has a five-numeral PLU prefaced by the number 8.

For example:

A conventionally grown banana would be: 4011

An organic banana would be: 94011

A genetically engineered (GE or GMO) banana would be: 84011

These tips are specially important now that over 80% of all processed
foods in the US are genetically modified. Many countries in the
European Union have been banning GM products and produce (including
Austria, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary and Luxembourg).

I say healthy, buy or grow organic wherever you can.

ImStillMags wrote:

>Most consumers realize that the FDA does not require genetically
>modified food to be labeled. That’s because the FDA has decided that
>you, dear consumer, don’t care if the tomato you’re eating has been
>cross bred with frog genes to render the tomato more resistant to cold
>weather.

I'm curious as to why such a food would bother anybody.

On Sat, 24 Mar 2012 12:17:38 -0700 (PDT), ImStillMags
> wrote:

> For conventionally grown fruit, (grown with chemical input), the PLU
> code on the sticker consists of four numbers. Organically grown fruit
> has a five-numeral PLU prefaced by the number 9. Genetically
> engineered (GM) fruit has a five-numeral PLU prefaced by the number 8.
>
> For example:
>
> A conventionally grown banana would be: 4011
>
> An organic banana would be: 94011
>
> A genetically engineered (GE or GMO) banana would be: 84011
>
> These tips are specially important now that over 80% of all processed
> foods in the US are genetically modified.

Does it work the same way with vegetables (9 or 8 in front of a
number)? What number is used for non-organic, non-GM fruits and
vegetables or is it the lack of a 5th number that tells us?

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

sqwishy, are you hung over again? Mary goes to AA off and on. You
should try it.

>>>Most consumers realize that the FDA does not require genetically
>>>modified food to be labeled. That’s because the FDA has decided that
>>>you, dear consumer, don’t care if the tomato you’re eating has been
>>>cross bred with frog genes to render the tomato more resistant to cold
>>>weather.
>>
>> I'm curious as to why such a food would bother anybody.
>
>Perhaps people would rather let vegetables adapt to nature naturally
>rather than....
>
>...explaining it to a[sic] idiot troll.

See, that's one reason I think you oversauced yourself -- inane
punctuation and grammatical errors.

>Never mind. The answer is obvious enough. Go away, Mike. You add
>nothing but noise to this group.

.... and you're fixated on my "true" name. Nothing can penetrate your
Shell Of Omniscience when you're tanked. Please go sleep it off.


If any normal poster has an opinion that differs from sqwishy's
mindless dogma about "nature", I'd like to hear it.

On Mar 24, 1:05*pm, sf > wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Mar 2012 12:17:38 -0700 (PDT), ImStillMags
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > For conventionally grown fruit, (grown with chemical input), the PLU
> > code on the sticker consists of four numbers. Organically grown fruit
> > has a five-numeral PLU prefaced by the number 9. Genetically
> > engineered (GM) fruit has a five-numeral PLU prefaced by the number 8.
>
> > For example:
>
> > A conventionally grown banana would be: 4011
>
> > An organic banana would be: 94011
>
> > A genetically engineered (GE or GMO) banana would be: 84011
>
> > These tips are specially important now that over 80% of all processed
> > foods in the US are genetically modified.
>
> Does it work the same way with vegetables (9 or 8 in front of a
> number)? *What number is used for non-organic, non-GM fruits and
> vegetables or is it the lack of a 5th number that tells us?
>
> --
> Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

The PLU code is four digits, vegetable or fruit. If it has an 8 in
front of the code it's GMO. If it has a 9 it's organic.

Here are the PLU codes for pretty much anything you can think of.

http://www.innvista.com/health/foods/plucodes_abc.htm

On Sat, 24 Mar 2012 12:17:38 -0700 (PDT), ImStillMags
> wrote:

>Most consumers realize that the FDA does not require genetically
>modified food to be labeled. That’s because the FDA has decided that
>you, dear consumer, don’t care if the tomato you’re eating has been
>cross bred with frog genes to render the tomato more resistant to cold
>weather. Some consumers may not be concerned with eating Frankenfood,
>but for those who are, here’s how to determine if the fruits and
>vegetables you’re buying are (GM) genetically modified.
>

>
>I say healthy, buy or grow organic wherever you can.

I don't know. How different is GMA compared to the cross breeding
that has been done for centuries already? We have nectarines don't
we?
Lots of strange things we eat here
http://www.fruitsinfo.com/hybrid-fruits.php

Boysenberry is a cross between blackberry, loganberry and raspberry.
It's a very large bramble fruit with large seeds. The fruit is in deep
maroon color. It turns black when it ripes.

Here's a tasty tidbit
http://www.rahealing.com/Hybrids.html
Did you know the domestic pig is unnatural, it is a product of
science. The modern pig or swine are known to have been developed by
the great scientist named Imhotep AKA Aesculapius the father of
science and medicine. He crossbred the animal for king Zoser in KMT
AKA Egypt to eat the garbage and the dead bodies after wars.

On Mar 24, 2:40*pm, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Mar 2012 12:17:38 -0700 (PDT), ImStillMags
>
> > wrote:
> >Most consumers realize that the FDA does not require genetically
> >modified food to be labeled. That’s because the FDA has decided that
> >you, dear consumer, don’t care if the tomato you’re eating has been
> >cross bred with frog genes to render the tomato more resistant to cold
> >weather. Some consumers may not be concerned with eating Frankenfood,
> >but for those who are, here’s how to determine if the fruits and
> >vegetables you’re buying are (GM) genetically modified.
>
> >I say healthy, buy or grow organic wherever you can.
>
> I don't know. *How different is GMA compared to the cross breeding
> that has been done for centuries already? *We have nectarines don't
> we?
> Lots of strange things we eat herehttp://www.fruitsinfo.com/hybrid-fruits..php
>
> Boysenberry is a cross between blackberry, loganberry and raspberry.
> It's a very large bramble fruit with large seeds. The fruit is in deep
> maroon color. It turns black when it ripes.
>
> Here's a tasty tidbithttp://www.rahealing.com/Hybrids.html
> Did you know the domestic pig is unnatural, it is a product of
> science. *The modern pig or swine are known to have been developed by
> the great scientist named Imhotep AKA Aesculapius the father of
> science and medicine. *He crossbred the animal for king Zoser in KMT
> AKA Egypt to eat the garbage and the dead bodies after wars.

There is a difference in cross breeding plants for hardiness and
introducing genetic material from
animals, reptiles, etc. To me it is no longer a fruit or a plant,
it is now something whose genetic make up is not necessarily something
I want to put in my body. We don't know the long term consequences
of eating a fruit or vegetable that has been 'frankenfied'.

On 2012-03-24, ImStillMags > wrote:

> There is a difference in cross breeding plants for hardiness and
> introducing genetic material from
> animals, reptiles, etc.

Much like the whole issue of global warming, there will be
disbelivers. Da' Nile is a long and ancient river.

notfooled


--
Fight internet CENSORSHIP - Fight SOPA-PIPA
Contact your congressman and/or representative, now!
http://projects.propublica.org/sopa/
vi --the heart of evil!

On Sat, 24 Mar 2012 12:17:38 -0700 (PDT), ImStillMags
> wrote:

>Most consumers realize that the FDA does not require genetically
>modified food to be labeled. That’s because the FDA has decided that
>you, dear consumer, don’t care if the tomato you’re eating has been
>cross bred with frog genes to render the tomato more resistant to cold
>weather.

It's more like the FDA is there to represent the corporations, not the
consumer.

>I say healthy, buy or grow organic wherever you can.

Exactly, at least whilst you can still legally do so.

On Sat, 24 Mar 2012 15:32:00 -0400, George M. Middius
> wrote:

>ImStillMags wrote:
>
>>Most consumers realize that the FDA does not require genetically
>>modified food to be labeled. That’s because the FDA has decided that
>>you, dear consumer, don’t care if the tomato you’re eating has been
>>cross bred with frog genes to render the tomato more resistant to cold
>>weather.
>
>I'm curious as to why such a food would bother anybody.

Buy the April/May 2012 issue of Mother Earth News, go to page 42 and
start reading from there.

Ross.

Ross@home wrote:

>>>Most consumers realize that the FDA does not require genetically
>>>modified food to be labeled. That’s because the FDA has decided that
>>>you, dear consumer, don’t care if the tomato you’re eating has been
>>>cross bred with frog genes to render the tomato more resistant to cold
>>>weather.
>>
>>I'm curious as to why such a food would bother anybody.
>
>Buy the April/May 2012 issue of Mother Earth News, go to page 42 and
>start reading from there.

Thanks. BTW, you're now on sqwishy's miles-long shitlist.

In article >,
says...
>
How different is GMA compared to the cross breeding
> that has been done for centuries already?

What has happened for centuries, is hybridisation (cross fertilisation)
within a species or genus.

Genetic Modification can produce DNA alterations that could never occur
by hybridisation. For example fish, virus and soil bacteria genes inserted
into plants.

Janet.

Janet wrote:

>> How different is GMA compared to the cross breeding
>> that has been done for centuries already?
>
> What has happened for centuries, is hybridisation (cross fertilisation)
>within a species or genus.
>
> Genetic Modification can produce DNA alterations that could never occur
>by hybridisation. For example fish, virus and soil bacteria genes inserted
>into plants.

And that's bad because...

(a) It's new and scary.
(b) It violates the fish's and bacteria's patent rights.
(c) If it wasn't made by God, it's the Devil's work.
(d) other: ____________________

In article >,
says...
>
> In article >,
> says...
> >
> How different is GMA compared to the cross breeding
> > that has been done for centuries already?
>
> What has happened for centuries, is hybridisation (cross fertilisation)
> within a species or genus.
>
> Genetic Modification can produce DNA alterations that could never occur
> by hybridisation. For example fish, virus and soil bacteria genes inserted
> into plants.

Viruses insert their genes into plants all the time. It's what viruses
do. Usually the result is a dead plant, sometimes things go wrong for
the virus.

sqwishy be incensed!

>>>>I'm curious as to why such a food would bother anybody.
>>>
>>>Buy the April/May 2012 issue of Mother Earth News, go to page 42 and
>>>start reading from there.
>>
>> Thanks. BTW, you're now on sqwishy's miles-long shitlist.
>
>Huh, WTF??? Damn, you are way out there in outer space. You don't
>even make sense any more. What are you prescribing yourself?

It's pretty simple, so even a drunkard like you should be able to
follow. (a) You are terribly bothered by me and you take every
opportunity to launch your little insults at me, and your enormous ego
deludes you into believing you're the Top Cook in this group. (b) Ross
replied civilly to me, defying your self-appointed authority. Ergo (c)
Ross is a traitor and must be shunned.

>Needless to say, Ross is far from on my shit list. And hasn't even
>been close to it for a few years.

Too drunk to obey your own precepts. What a shame. Mary has been
trying to dry out and fly straight for a while -- why don't you give
it a try as well?

P.S. I always laugh when you call me "idiot". Clearly you're stuck in
pre-adolescence when it comes to insults. You're quite the messed up,
sad little troll, aren't you.

On Mar 24, 7:42*pm, George M. Middius > wrote:
> Janet wrote:
> >> *How different is GMA compared to the cross breeding
> >> that has been done for centuries already?
>
> > *What has happened for centuries, is hybridisation (cross fertilisation)
> >within a species or genus.
>
> > *Genetic Modification can produce DNA alterations that could never occur
> >by hybridisation. For example fish, virus and soil bacteria genes inserted
> >into plants.
>
> And that's bad because...
>
> (a) It's new and scary.
> (b) It violates the fish's and bacteria's patent rights.
> (c) If it wasn't made by God, it's the Devil's work.
> (d) other: ____________________

I choose D. The reason is that GMO plants pollinate non-GMO plants,
and then folks who want to raise crops from their own seeds are
forbidden to do so, even though they never set out to have their
plants pollinated by GMOs. It's like if your next door neighbor had a
goat, and the goat wandered over into your yard and shit there, then
your neighbor tells you that you can't grow anything in your yard
because the goat shit is such good fertilizer...

The way that patent laws are being applied is insane.

--Bryan

In article ocal>,
says...
>
> In article >,
> says...
> >
> > In article >,
> > says...
> > >
> > How different is GMA compared to the cross breeding
> > > that has been done for centuries already?
> >
> > What has happened for centuries, is hybridisation (cross fertilisation)
> > within a species or genus.
> >
> > Genetic Modification can produce DNA alterations that could never occur
> > by hybridisation. For example fish, virus and soil bacteria genes inserted
> > into plants.
>
> Viruses insert their genes into plants all the time. It's what viruses
> do. Usually the result is a dead plant, sometimes things go wrong for
> the virus.

I was referring to proteins from human viruses being inserted into
plants.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/...ccine-success-
comes-too-late.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3887517.stm

Janet.

Bryan wrote:

>> > *Genetic Modification can produce DNA alterations that could never occur
>> >by hybridisation. For example fish, virus and soil bacteria genes inserted
>> >into plants.
>>
>> And that's bad because...
>>
>> (a) It's new and scary.
>> (b) It violates the fish's and bacteria's patent rights.
>> (c) If it wasn't made by God, it's the Devil's work.
>> (d) other: ____________________
>
>I choose D. The reason is that GMO plants pollinate non-GMO plants,
>and then folks who want to raise crops from their own seeds are
>forbidden to do so, even though they never set out to have their
>plants pollinated by GMOs. It's like if your next door neighbor had a
>goat, and the goat wandered over into your yard and shit there, then
>your neighbor tells you that you can't grow anything in your yard
>because the goat shit is such good fertilizer...

I didn't really follow most of that. Who's doing the forbidding? When
did GMO seeds become available for home gardeners? What does a goat
have to do with it?


>The way that patent laws are being applied is insane.

Go onnnnn......

On Sat, 24 Mar 2012 20:38:37 -0700 (PDT), Bryan
> wrote:

> I choose D. The reason is that GMO plants pollinate non-GMO plants,
> and then folks who want to raise crops from their own seeds are
> forbidden to do so, even though they never set out to have their
> plants pollinated by GMOs. It's like if your next door neighbor had a
> goat, and the goat wandered over into your yard and shit there, then
> your neighbor tells you that you can't grow anything in your yard
> because the goat shit is such good fertilizer...
>
> The way that patent laws are being applied is insane.

Absolutely agree as far as that. It's up to them to keep their
pollens under control, not the farmer down wind. It's a Pandora's Box
with cross bred wind driven pollens. You're just making super weeds
and that means people/agribusiness will be demanding even stronger
weed killers than RoundUp, which is what most of these GMOs have been
bred to resist.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

On Sat, 24 Mar 2012 18:17:43 -0400, George M. Middius
> wrote:

>Ross@home wrote:
>
>>>>Most consumers realize that the FDA does not require genetically
>>>>modified food to be labeled. That’s because the FDA has decided that
>>>>you, dear consumer, don’t care if the tomato you’re eating has been
>>>>cross bred with frog genes to render the tomato more resistant to cold
>>>>weather.
>>>
>>>I'm curious as to why such a food would bother anybody.
>>
>>Buy the April/May 2012 issue of Mother Earth News, go to page 42 and
>>start reading from there.
>
>Thanks. BTW, you're now on sqwishy's miles-long shitlist.

You're welcome.
BTW, I have no problem with Steve and I'm sure he has none with me.

Moving back to the original issue, here's a link to a report on the
overall global failure of GMO's. The only ones benefitting from GMO's
are multinational corporations like Monsanto, DuPont, et al.
http://www.panna.org/sites/default/f...sNoClothes.pdf
It's a long read but, well worth the time spent.

Ross.

sqwishy's delusional omniscience swells up and fills his entire
cavernous ego-space.

>With our GM foods we're practically re-engineering
>animals, plants, and insects as a permanent side effect. It's obvious
>many of the rise in human diseases, syndromes, and allergies are the
>result of GMO and GE.

It's "obvious"? What kind of fool are you, anyway?

On Mar 24, 3:57*pm, Janet > wrote:
>
>
> * What has happened for centuries, is hybridisation (cross fertilisation)
> within a species or genus.
>
> * Genetic Modification can produce DNA alterations that could never occur
> by hybridisation. For example fish, virus and soil bacteria genes inserted
> into plants.
>
> * Janet.

How about lichens? Made up of a combination of plant and fungi.
How about humans? Made up of (at least) a combination of animal and
bacteria? Just two examples of many.

GMO food is not good for health. It has low nutritious value and sometimes may be harmful for human body. It is always good to have a food grown in farms without any genetically modified contents.

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 24 Mar 2012 20:38:37 -0700 (PDT), Bryan
> > wrote:
>
>> I choose D. The reason is that GMO plants pollinate non-GMO plants,
>> and then folks who want to raise crops from their own seeds are
>> forbidden to do so, even though they never set out to have their
>> plants pollinated by GMOs. It's like if your next door neighbor had a
>> goat, and the goat wandered over into your yard and shit there, then
>> your neighbor tells you that you can't grow anything in your yard
>> because the goat shit is such good fertilizer...
>>
>> The way that patent laws are being applied is insane.
>
> Absolutely agree as far as that. It's up to them to keep their
> pollens under control, not the farmer down wind. It's a Pandora's Box
> with cross bred wind driven pollens. You're just making super weeds
> and that means people/agribusiness will be demanding even stronger
> weed killers than RoundUp, which is what most of these GMOs have been
> bred to resist.
>

If a crop is bred to be RoundUp resistant then the farmers can spray their
RoundUp over the whole field and kill the weeds with no resistance. The
farmer then harvests his crop and sells it to us the consumer covered in
RoundUp. Glyphosate is not something I would willingly drink nor would I eat
it on or absorbed in to a crop.

Mike
..

On Fri, 30 Mar 2012 01:54:52 +0800, "Bloke Down The Pub"
> wrote:

>
> "sf" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Sat, 24 Mar 2012 20:38:37 -0700 (PDT), Bryan
> > > wrote:
> >
> >> I choose D. The reason is that GMO plants pollinate non-GMO plants,
> >> and then folks who want to raise crops from their own seeds are
> >> forbidden to do so, even though they never set out to have their
> >> plants pollinated by GMOs. It's like if your next door neighbor had a
> >> goat, and the goat wandered over into your yard and shit there, then
> >> your neighbor tells you that you can't grow anything in your yard
> >> because the goat shit is such good fertilizer...
> >>
> >> The way that patent laws are being applied is insane.
> >
> > Absolutely agree as far as that. It's up to them to keep their
> > pollens under control, not the farmer down wind. It's a Pandora's Box
> > with cross bred wind driven pollens. You're just making super weeds
> > and that means people/agribusiness will be demanding even stronger
> > weed killers than RoundUp, which is what most of these GMOs have been
> > bred to resist.
> >
>
> If a crop is bred to be RoundUp resistant then the farmers can spray their
> RoundUp over the whole field and kill the weeds with no resistance. The
> farmer then harvests his crop and sells it to us the consumer covered in
> RoundUp. Glyphosate is not something I would willingly drink nor would I eat
> it on or absorbed in to a crop.
>
That's a given.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

On 3/28/12 1:41 AM, RussianFoodDire wrote:
> GMO food is not good for health. It has low nutritious value and
> sometimes may be harmful for human body. It is always good to have a
> food grown in farms without any genetically modified contents.

citations please?