Hacker News Reader

Start by asking yourself how humans have established that a given food, genetically engineered or not, is long-term safe?

View on HN

Ok. Show me something that would be a food but for "delayed bad things". Like, delayed by decades or even years. Just so we're clear, nutritional deficiencies aren't of any interest.

As far as I'm aware this angle is FUD.

If we want to apply the same standard to pesticides I'm not sure any high ground exists. That said, whatever effect they have on mortality appears to be miniscule given the trends over the last century.

Transfats fit this perfectly.

The problem with trans fats seems to be a matter of degree rather than kind. See the note on palm oil on Wikipedia. Also note that deaths attributable to coronary artery disease, the quantifiable thing linked to trans fat consumption, are hugely decreasing over the period where trans fats became common, suggesting again it's not a high order bit.

If we consider this in the context of GMO it sure seems like FUD to me.

We're pretty terrible at it, honestly. Look at half the crap we eat currently, I wouldn't describe much of it as "long-term safe."

Yes. So we need to be careful about making it worse.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com