is it dangerous to eat too much vegetal proteins?

Vegan message board for support on vegan related issues and questions.
Topics include philosophy, activism, effective altruism, plant-based nutrition, and diet advice/discussion whether high carb, low carb (eco atkins/vegan keto) or anything in between.
Meat eater vs. Vegan debate welcome, but please keep it within debate topics.
User avatar
eloine
Full Member
Posts: 110
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2016 7:00 am
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Re: is it dangerous to eat too much vegetal proteins?

Post by eloine » Mon Nov 07, 2016 4:17 pm

and I didn't even mentionned the environemental disaster that are pcbs killing fishes and the bovine growth hormone ...EVERYTHING Monsanto created is dangerous!!! they are responsible of climat change, pollution, allergies, diseases and death of bees of animals of bacteries from soil ect..their methods is against nature and is bad, we should promote respect and health not maximum profit and industrialisation....

it's a very controversial company, lot of fight and complains about them, if really they were doing anything good , farmers won't kill themselves, third world countries won't fight against them either and we won't make laws in Europe to bann OGM and forbid round up and other harmful produces they created. They are the macdonald of agriculture! they want to impose their bad products in the world to force people to buy them and to make them sick to sell them meds.

Mosanto is not more than a industry like Macdonald, pepsi cola ... it's not here to make the word a beautiful and peaceful place but to make maximum profit by enslaving people and brainwashing them.

Open your mind people please, stop being in a bubble and thinking only about your own comfort, the world is a disaster and you shouldn't promote any industry polluting the planet, you choose to denigrate real scientifics worrying for the environnement and believing the lobbists instead, good for you but then you shouldn't judge anyone else, even meat eaters, because as being vegan you won't change the world.
Last edited by eloine on Mon Nov 07, 2016 6:14 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
eloine
Full Member
Posts: 110
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2016 7:00 am
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by eloine » Mon Nov 07, 2016 5:18 pm

RedAppleGP wrote: I hope you're trolling here. You obviously have not been paying much attention. I'm not sure if the community will be willing to let you back if this is your behaviour. I'm trusting that you're better than this.
I think you didn't completly read Brimestone post, he had a very bad behavior on several times, by being some sort of extremist NAZI that think he knows everything better than everyone,
First: by making fun of me by saying I am the world first person on earth to have a OGM allergy (as they are lot of people and I am not the only one),

Second: by always accusing every scientifics that has an opinion that defends nature and environnement and health to be "charlatans" (that is his own words)

3rd: by saying that people defending local farmers, the environnement and good agriculture practices are bad extremist people that should be banned ...

4th: By constantly defending a harmful industry that has been proven to make lot of disasters (by introducing pcbs, growth bovine hormones, round up toxic destroying pesticides) for some silly dumb reason that he seems to think it's better to just selfishly go in a supermarket to buy conventional industrialized products rather than encouraging local farmers to have a better happier life and at the same time spending less money on better products and so by boycotting and standing against Monsanto and Bayer industries and all their OGM and petro chemicals based products.

he is the one always trolling, open your eyes please?
and how can you say he knows better than someone else? on what do you base yourself to say this?
he doesn't seem to know anything at all, you shouldn't blindly believe everthing geeks and trolls writes on a forum ;-)

User avatar
eloine
Full Member
Posts: 110
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2016 7:00 am
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by eloine » Mon Nov 07, 2016 7:36 pm

https://www.rt.com/news/gmo-ban-russian-scientists-293/
“It has been proved that not only in Russia, but also in many other countries in the world, GMO is dangerous. Methods of obtaining the GMO are not perfect, therefore, at this stage, all GMOs are dangerous," Ermakova said.

She went on to explain that one of the techniques uses tumor-causing soil bacteria.

"Consumption and use of GMOs obtained in such way can lead to tumors, cancers and obesity among animals," Ermakova said.

She added that doctors have seen a surge of diabetes and cancer in regions where residents have consumed larger amounts of GMO-containing food.

"Biotechnologies certainly should be developed, but GMO should be stopped. [We] should stop it from spreading,” Ermakova added.

In September, Russia endorsed the Rules for the State Registration of GMO and GMO-containing Products. The law enforces compulsory registration of all products containing GM components.

Also in September, Russian authorities temporarily suspended the import and sale of Monsanto’s genetically modified corn after a French study suggested it may be linked to cancer. Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev ordered regulatory agencies to consider a possible ban on all GMO imports into Russia.

User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 9522
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by brimstoneSalad » Mon Nov 07, 2016 8:02 pm

eloine wrote:I am not even going to read all that, I know it is going to be very negative !
It's not negative, it's educational. It is clear that you didn't read my arguments, because if you read them you would realize you are wrong.

Read my posts. If you continue to reply without addressing my arguments, that's a violation of the rules and you will be banned for bad behavior.
eloine wrote:you don't own the truth and should respect other people's opinions! if you love OGM food, good for you, but lot of people doesn't and you should respect that
You are entitled to your own opinions, but you are not entitled to your own facts. If you believe the sky is green and the grass is red, you are just wrong -- that's not an opinion.
Science shows us which facts are correct, and which are wrong.

If you personally think soybeans taste bad, that's your opinion and I won't challenge it. But if you say they cause disease, then that's a claim of fact. When you make a claim, you need to defend it.

I'm showing you the science that proves you are mistaken on this.
You can deny reality or accept it. In order to help you, however, you need to accept reality so I can help you find the cause of your problem.
That's a great study to read, thanks! Now you're talking about facts, and we can look at what it says.

Here is an excerpt from the conclusion:
We could not conclude that the 25-kDa protein band
observed in GMOs on immunoblot is allergenic.
Based on
the results obtained, we propose two hypotheses. First, the
25-kDa band may be a protein unique to the GMO soybean,
an intermediate product in response to the gene recombination
process, and that IgE binding may be the result of
nonspecific binding. Second, our soybean materials, Glycine
max, may evolve differently under different harvesting
environments.
Therefore, additional studies of materials
harvested in controlled environments are necessary.
Our study has some limitations. Its major shortcoming
concerns the collection of patients’ sera. According to the
guidelines recommended by the Food and Agriculture Organization/World
Health Organization, 25 serum samples
showing high IgE are needed, which is in contrast to the
pooled sera used in the present study.
10 In addition, the
collection of sera from children who did not have any severe
clinical symptoms to soybeans also was a limitation.

In conclusion, to assess the allergenicity of GMOs, further
research is needed using a more extensive collection of
patients with a convincing clinical history and using materials
prepared in a controlled environment.
That's from the study you cited.
eloine wrote:as you can see, there are people that has been tested on allergy about OGM soy and some people that are not allergic to natural soy are allergic to OGM,
That's incorrect. They could not conclude this, as the test was limited and subclinical.
They were also comparing different strains grown under different selective pressures; it was not a controlled study.

Different varieties of soybeans, whether they are "wild", or mutated with radiation and chemicals (like Organic ones are), or genetically engineered with precision, have different immunological qualities. Most of this comes down to the natural mutations and gene expression from their environments.

It's interesting to note, though, from the study:
Only eight patients had a positive reaction to GMO
soybeans, among the 13 who showed a positive reaction to
wild soybeans by the skin test. Only one patient had a
positive skin reaction to GMO soybeans but a negative
reaction to wild soybeans.
13 had reactions to the "wild soybeans", nine had reactions to the "GMO soybeans"
The GMO caused less immune response.

I don't think this has to do with them being GMO, but just because they were different genetic strains and were grown in different environments with different selective pressures.
eloine wrote:this test was made in a university in Korea so not financed by any "charlatan" and it's just one example, but I coud find thousand of other, but you just wanna believe what you want to believe anyway.
No you can't. You didn't even find one. The study's conclusions are nothing like what you said it was.
You should read the actual study. Even the abstract is far from conclusive sounding.
It seems like you just read some Anti-GMO conspiracy site, and then parroted that and assumed the study supported that view.

Allergenic qualities are important to study. There are people who aren't allergic to one variety of kiwi, for example, but are dangerously allergic to another variety from another country -- all of them "wild". Plants, even of the same species, have different proteins in them due to their natural genetic variance.
There's no reason to believe this has anything to do with transgenic genetic modification.

User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 9522
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by brimstoneSalad » Mon Nov 07, 2016 8:33 pm

eloine wrote: First: by making fun of me by saying I am the world first person on earth to have a OGM allergy (as they are lot of people and I am not the only one),
I wasn't making fun of you. I said you would be the first documented case. You have to understand based on that, that it's improbable that you are allergic to the proteins involved in the genetic modification when nobody else has been proved to be.
eloine wrote: Second: by always accusing every scientifics that has an opinion that defends nature and environnement and health to be "charlatans" (that is his own words)
I am defending the environment and health. People who defend nature for its own sake are using an appeal to nature fallacy.
The vast majority of the people you reference have no scientific credentials. They are not scientists. It's as simple as that.
The very few that do, have credentials unrelated to the field and are clearly lunatics.
eloine wrote: 3rd: by saying that people defending local farmers, the environnement and good agriculture practices are bad extremist people that should be banned ...
You said GMOs should be banned. You fired the first shots and insulted what I favor.
I say people who want to ban GMOs should be banned.

You lie about caring about respecting others, but you don't respect those who favor GMOs. You have no respect. If you did, you would apologize for saying you want to ban GMOs. Let people have a choice. You're the one who is like a Nazi, trying to ban everything you don't like.

I don't want to ban what you like. I don't want to ban non-GMOs. I would give you a choice. You would take away my choice.
eloine wrote: 4th: By constantly defending a harmful industry that has been proven to make lot of disasters (by introducing pcbs, growth bovine hormones, round up toxic destroying pesticides)
These are all lies from people who slander the industry. There are no such disasters or harm. GMO technology has done far more good for the world than bad.
eloine wrote: for some silly dumb reason that he seems to think it's better to just selfishly go in a supermarket to buy conventional industrialized products
It IS better. And I will pay MORE for non-organic GMO products than for organic non-GMO. I prefer them, and I will spend more on it, because I shop with my conscience and I think organic farming is harmful, and that anti-GMO rhetoric is even worse.
This has nothing to do with selfishness. I'm just basing my decisions on science.
eloine wrote: rather than encouraging local farmers to have a better happier life
GMO technology helps them do that, by giving them disease resistant crops.

User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 9522
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by brimstoneSalad » Mon Nov 07, 2016 8:49 pm

eloine wrote:https://www.rt.com/news/gmo-ban-russian-scientists-293/
“It has been proved that not only in Russia, but also in many other countries in the world, GMO is dangerous. Methods of obtaining the GMO are not perfect, therefore, at this stage, all GMOs are dangerous," Ermakova said.
She is lying. Irina Ermakova is an evil and dishonest person. Her scientific credentials are unrelated to pathology, genetics, or food science.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Irina_Ermakova
These findings were never published in a peer reviewed journal, instead being 'published' in the proceedings of a conference in Germany, co-sponsored by Greenpeace and featuring an all-star cast of anti-GMO cranks.[4] Despite this, these findings were widely disseminated by the anti-GMO movement, and remain an oft repeated talking point.
When the experiments were investigated by other GM researchers, the experiment was revealed to contain multiple flaws.[5]
  • Infant mortality in the control group of rats was very high, suggesting that the rats were treated poorly or had inadequate diets. No useful data can be extracted from feeding trials botched in this way.
  • Weight of infant rats was over 20% below average for both groups, further suggesting the rats were mistreated or malnourished.
  • Ermakova used two uncharacterized fractions of soy. In other words, what she fed to the rats might have been two different varieties or mixtures of varieties with completely different nutrient content.
Her studies were terrible, unethical harm to rats, with no good controls, and that only superficially resembled science, like a child making a mud pie. High school science fairs do better.

Read this if you dare to challenge your dogma (I doubt you will):
http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/v25/n12/full/nbt1207-1356b.html

All she did was torture rats for no reason, in pursuit of her ideological goals.

Yes, she is a terrible person, she is by no means an expert in anything she claims to be with respect to this topic, and her 'work' is rife with dishonesty.

eloine wrote:"Consumption and use of GMOs obtained in such way can lead to tumors, cancers and obesity among animals," Ermakova said.
And Trump said "Too much Monsanto in the Corn Creates Issues in the Brain"
They have about the same amount of credibility on this topic.

Ermakova is wrong. There is no evidence for any of that.
eloine wrote:She added that doctors have seen a surge of diabetes and cancer in regions where residents have consumed larger amounts of GMO-containing food.
This is an issue of correlation. They also have surges of these diseases where people use cellphones and toilet paper. Cancer is more prevalent in ANY population that lives longer and doesn't die of other diseases before middle age.
There are good and bad things about modern society, one of the bad ones is highly processed food rich in sugar and fat. These help cause some of those diseases (like diabetes). It has nothing to do with GMOs.
eloine wrote:"Biotechnologies certainly should be developed, but GMO should be stopped. [We] should stop it from spreading,” Ermakova added.

In September, Russia endorsed the Rules for the State Registration of GMO and GMO-containing Products. The law enforces compulsory registration of all products containing GM components.

Also in September, Russian authorities temporarily suspended the import and sale of Monsanto’s genetically modified corn after a French study suggested it may be linked to cancer. Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev ordered regulatory agencies to consider a possible ban on all GMO imports into Russia.
Which is only evidence of Russia being a backward country which doesn't respect science. This is not a huge surprise.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests