RE: [pf] Risks, imposed or chosen

by David A

18 December 2000 01:29 UTC

Betsy Barnum wrote:
> And 10 years ago, maybe even more recently, there was no 
> such problem, back when there was only "conventionally grown" 
> and "organically grown," and there was no trouble keeping the 
> two separate!

By this argument, then ~30-50 years ago we should not have allowed 
grains grown with pesticides to be intermingled with grains grown 
without pesticides. And before that, I don't know, crops picked by 
nonunion workers separate from union workers, crops produced with 
machines separate from crops harvested by hand, etc. There's no end to 
the separations...and doing so over time would mean that we would have 
production levels akin to 1900 instead of the enhanced levels we have 
today. Which means we couldn't feed the population levels we have today. 


> The extra cost of separating non-GMO food from that 
> which has been genetically tampered is a condition
> that *only* exists because the companies that make GMOs have 
> convinced our regulatory agencies that there's no difference and so > 
> they have not required labeling.

But Betsy, regulators are idiots who bow to the beck and call of 
whatever industry bribes them. (And if you do believe that, I could be 
an equal cynic and say that Greenpeace has been hurting for members and 
is looking only to foment controversy to bring in the dollars.) Again, 
what studies have shown these foods to be dangerous, or what studies 
show deleterious effects from the hundreds of Americans who have been 
consuming the 60% of grocery store food that is GM over the last 15 
years? 

> In most other countries, this has not happened because
> governments have insisted on labeling from the start. 

Are there countries where labeling has been mandatory from the start? 
I'm not up to speed in this area so I'd be interested to know. I thought 
the EU was still grappling with this issue, though perhaps some EU 
countries have already acted.

> And I am asking you how many more plucked eyes and wrenched 
> throats must we pay for in the villages of the poor before we 
> figure out that Congress does the dirty work of corporations and 
> that respectfully petitioning those men and women can only be the 
> work of imperial citizens who are slowly dying.
> --Jerry Fresia, Toward An American Revolution

First, I'm glad you brought this book to our attention, which I'm going 
to look for. I too believe that corporations have too much influence in 
our government. But I'm much less willing to believe that scientists as 
individuals or as a whole, or well-respected bodies such as the National 
Academy of Sciences or the Royal Society, are in the same category. And 
I do trust them much more than Greenpeace or RAFI. I've just known too 
many scientists who are honest, investigative skeptics.

David