Those Zany bush inc. Folks....

Finally, in the eleventh hour, the voice of reason arrives to prevent total anarchy and more needless bloodshed....

heeheeheeheeheeheeheeheeheeheehee . . .

okbye

You're not refering to genetically modified livestock, are you? :wink:

Shirley you meant to address someone else . . .

That depends... if you got a chuckle from my comment, then I was addressing you. If not, I was addressing Timber. :wink:

I remember one night at the beach I got real drunk and ended up in bed with a girl named Shirley who was a real farm animal....but I try not to talk about it......

One night we were crawling down the beach on our hands and knees. All night, we had been drinking Souza at cut rate prices (the beach in question was on the Pacific coast of Mexico). Village dogs had started barking at us, so we got down on our hands and knees and barked back. They all freaked, and ran away, except for one, who ran up an licked all our faces and decided to join the party. We got along famously, until in crawling along, we suddenly found ourselves looking up the barrels of M-16's. They were Mexican GI's, and were not, at first, amused. We make gestures of drinking from a bottle, and said: "Souza, hodito." They rolled their eyes, and waved us on. Don't know what happened to the ladies, but all were reunited in the morning.

we've been eating genitically modified foods for years. If you can find one medical case that shows that some one fell ill as a direct result of this genetic modification in the food they consumed, i'll concede my arguement. But the fact is, no such case exists.

It's the same as irradiation. There was no evidence whatsoever, no cases whatsoever that suggest that eating irradiated food is harmful. It was a far safer method to clean foods than with chemicals and pesticides. But because under the insistence of ignorant advocacy groups, irradiated food was required to carry a label, and because of ignorant consumers who unfairly linked the word irradiated with cancer and boycotted such foods, many people are probably ill today when they shouldn't be as a result of eating chemical/pesticide infested food.

I can point to hundreds of medical cases where pesticides or chemicals on food have contributed to illness. I can point to hundreds of cases where improper and unsanitary conditions for livestock have contributed to illness. These are the foods that should be labeled.

why do you doggedly and purposely miss my entire point?

your point being that they don't want to do that for foods when they do for condoms.

i don't believe the two situations are comparable. refer to my previous posts to see why not.

And considering your last few posts in this thread, you're hardly one to talk about going off topic. LOL

And just out of curiosity, when you claim to be "real veterans", are you referring to the number of posts you have up on A2K. If that's the case. I'm only a few posts away from becoming a veteran myself.

Okay guys, this is just too funny:
GM foods to offer STI protection?

Genetically modified food could soon provide protection against sexually transmitted diseases. An American biotech firm says that it has successfully transferred antibodies that protect against herpes into maize kernels and now hopes to conduct clinical trials next year.

The HX8 therapeutic antibody attaches itself to the herpes virus, thereby blocking its ability to enter the cells of the body. However, HX8 has previously only been produced from the ovary cells of laboratory hamsters, making its mass production impossible.

Epicyte, the biotech company behind the 'plantibody' technology, believes that by transferring the DNA that produces HX8 into crop plants such as maize, the antibody will be much easier to extract and produce. Clinical trials on HX8 will commence after the crop is harvested next year and the firm is already working on developing a plant-carried antibody to block infection by genital warts.

"Condoms provide some protection against herpes infection, but they are not 100% reliable", explained Dr Andrew Hiatt, who helped to develop the technology. "HX8 can provide protection in the vagina for 24 hours. The ultimate goal is that plantibodies will be cheap enough for consumers to buy them over the counter".
http://www.irishhealth.com/?level=4&id=3056
If this came to be, you know bush will have to re-think the whole thing!
And yeah, by the way, I read recently that the GOP DOES get large donations from the food industry.

LOL

I agree with biPolarBear's point; it's bizarre the things Bush comes up with! I think we have more important stuff to worry about in the long run. Some other stuff about GM foods:
The question is as simple as this: do you want a few corporations to monopolize the global food supply? Somebody does!
The U.S. government has launched a new Web site
about biotech crops as part of a special taxpayer-funded project to promote such crops worldwide -- a move criticized by some consumer and farm groups. The efforts, which come amid a tense global debate over genetically modified
foods, outrage opponents, who say the Bush administration is using taxpayer money to support corporate interests for a potentially unsafe technology.
Opponents of biotech crops say the government should be spending taxpayer money to fully evaluate the risks of the crops, rather than relying on corporate assurances of safety.
Moreover, they say, a free market society should not be forcing an unwanted product on the rest of the world. "The State Department's promotion of an unpopular technology shows that these companies are having to turn to the Bush administration ... to basically force these crops on people,"
http://www.organicconsumers.org/ge/force031504.cfm
Safety test technology is inadequate to assess potential harm . WHY CONCERNS ABOUT HEALTH RISKS OF GENETICALLY ENGINEERED FOOD ARE SCIENTIFICALLY JUSTIFIED: http://www.biointegrity.org/health-risks/health-risks-ge-foods.htm

And irriadiated foods?
Irradiated fruits and vegetables benefit the packer and grocer, not the farmer or consumer. The consumer receives an inferior product that appears "fresh," but has depleted vitamins and enzymes. http://www.citizen.org/documents/Research_(PDF).PDF
Irradiation increases the number of free radicals in the food and decreases the antioxidant vitamins that "neutralize" them.
http://www.healthchecksystems.com/antioxid.htm
But we don't have the right for the Bush government to protect us from that?!?
He just doesn't want anyone getting laid!

As a new poster Bi-Polar, I just gotta say......you're one zany guy. LOL

This is my first post, so please everyone, be gentle.

Well well...me and the farm animal story has attracted a doglover...hmmmmmm......

Ohoh, now you've done it, doglover!

BiPolarBear, nice to "see" you! You look just as I would have expected! How's the Mrs? Is she
around A2K? I haven't seen her.

I'm not sure whether to be flattered or insulted. the mrs. is around but rarely posts anywhere. she's busy.

Bi-Polar, I think ewe are a baaaad boy. :wink:

Can you offer me any evidence that it is "potentially unsafe"? Thanks.

"Can you offer me any evidence that it is "potentially unsafe"? - Scrat
Sure, the same evidence you can offer that it's safe! The jury is still out. It's just that some don't seem to want to give the jury time to deliberate!
If you care to, there's lots of research you can look up, some of which I've posted already. Lots of stuff deemed 'safe" in the past has turned out to be quite the opposite. Why rush this business?

biPolar, You look like a rocker, is all I'm saying, and like somebody I would hang out with back in the day, when I was cool. Is that really you? Handsome. :wink: (Now don't take that the wrong way)!