Amazon.com Widgets
  • Genetically modified orgasms are great.

    Pst GMO's have been in the wild since the 80's people.
    The science is in on this one folks. Greenpeace is not listening, my respect for Greenpeace is diminishing. If they continue ignoring the science and prefer ideology above truth I will ignore them all together. If we want to feed the world the world must accept GMO's as part of the solution.

  • Yes, Greenpeace should stop opposing GMO'S

    While I agree that GMO'S need to be better regulation and people should know what is in their food, people have been genetically modifying food science the beginning of agriculture. Not all GMO food is necessarily safe, but it can help food last longer, grow bigger, and taste better without harmful side effects.

  • Yes, Greenpeace should stop opposing GMOs.

    Yes, Greenpeace should end its opposition to genetically modified organisms, or GMOs. 107 Nobel Prize winners signed a letter imploring the organization to stop its campaign against a modified strain of rice. The rice could help to solve the problem of vitamin A deficiency in poverty stricken regions around the world, greatly reducing childhood blindness and death rates.

  • No, Greenpeace should not stop opposing GMOs.

    No, Greenpeace should not stop opposing GMOs. Many countries do not consider GMOs to be safe. Greenpeace has a great goal and a pure purpose to oppose GMOs, which is what everyone should be doing. GMOs are definitely not healthy than organically grown food, and opposing them is the right thing for Greenpeace to do.

  • No, Greenpeace should not stop opposing GMOs.

    Greenpeace should not have to support GMOs if the organizations members do not want to. Many are opposed to GMOs because of perceived health risks. A lot of consumers want to buy organic foods, or foods that have not been genetically engineered in a lab. Therefore, organizations like Greenpeace have a right to oppose GMOs.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.