GMO's

This election for Maui county which includes Molokai and Lanai has a bill to eliminate GMO crops. Sorry if I sound a little biased Maui has a sizeable population of old Hippies and Health food people that have painted a picture of GMO's as a health threat. They have even had movie stars in protest marches.

GMO's saved the papaya crop in Hawaii. GMO flood resistant rice has saved countless numbers in crop flood prone areas. The list goes on. There is no credible evidence that they are a health risk. But rumors abound that they cause cancer to colds. To me it is all based on bad science.

If this passes a lot of people will be out of work. Molokai has very few jobs they depend on agriculture. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

It's a conundrum for environmentalists because GMO's are great for the environment: less water consumption, less fertilizer, less pesticides, etc. If we can work our way thru this fear (which I hope and think is unfounded) it will save millions from starvation and could bring on the next golden age of farming.

Going to be tough to stay within bounds here. I like that GMOs feed a lot of people that otherwise would not eat. Don't like that they don't germinate but understand why producers make it that way. I'm with you on the science - don't know that I've seen any with merit.

Wish they would make a lawn grass that stayed green 12 months a year, fed on leaves, dog poop and weeds, and a single application had a 20 year warranty.

GMOs are great, assuming they do not carry any hidden risks that have not been discovered. GMOs are lab forced mutation on crops that have not been given time to fully understand the possible side effects. Just like thalidomide, flame retardents in furniture, lead in gasoline, asbestos, PCB, the harms were not discovered until the damage was already done or were suppressed by industry because money came first.

When I was a kid we had Eagles, DDT softened the eggs & almost wiped them out. Not anti- environment at all. Just do not see any proven harm in GMO and it is not all about the money. Many scientist with nothing to gain have found nothing wrong. We have been eating them in different foods for years.

Have watched debates from both sides the opposition is very good at making wild claims putting the scare in people that GMO's will destroy their health.

[video=vimeo;102395631]http://vimeo.com/102395631[/video]

There is no health risk and no environmental risk as long as they don't germinate. The problem is big agricultural monopolies.

Wow. Just wow.
I'm no expert, and sure i'm biased because i spent a decade in the natural foods industry. I don't wanna go off lets just say look at Monsanto's track record, they have brought the world all the goodness of:
PCBs
DDT
Agent Orange
rGBH/rSBT, growth hormones now federally banned for use in milking cows

Not a company I would trust with my food, just sayin'.

We have been using GMO for millennium - its called breeding and cultivating.

Right now the problems are four fold:

1. Genetic splicing has to be proven to be safe by the producers.

2. Producers are generally unsympathetic. Monsanto are no angels.

3. Some form of heavily engineered crop (the plants that produce their own roundup, or are herbicide resistant) are probably taking stuff too far, too fast.

4. The whole idea of copyrighting a seed, and accusing people of copyright infringement is extremely troubling.

5. Monocrops are bad idea - we need diversity. Because some smart guy will engineer some pest that thrives on GMO crops (hey, that tech works both way) and we will have bad case of no crops for a decade.

6. The corporations are already having way too much power. This thing gives a lot of power for political blackmail.

So I am against the GMO in their current incarnation.

Many of the GMO plants were created to withstand heavy use of herbicides. That heavy use is starting to be shown to have a link to the serious decline in pollinators like bees, which affect many food sources.

GMO is nothing new...the method that some crops are being engineered is "new" but is basically just speeding up what was previously done with cross/hybrid polination, etc.

I think i good stance to have is this...if all the movie stars are for it, its best to be against it. that goes for anything political in my mind, anything these celebrity nut jobs are petitioning for is usually not something worth my time.

Anyone else think the world is really starting to look like the movie Team America?? corporations, terrorists, celebrity involvement, etc.

Adirondack said:

Many of the GMO plants were created to withstand heavy use of herbicides. That heavy use is starting to be shown to have a link to the serious decline in pollinators like bees, which affect many food sources.

Click to expand...

Bees need a cycles, seasons flowers for cross pollination. With GMO's it is more a lack flowering time, not GMO's killing the bees. If there are nothing but fields of GMO corn & soybeans bees cannot cross pollinate. GMO's certainly are not the whole food process by a long shot. Farmers have found that planting wildflower borders increases bee production. Flowers are good for bees the more the better. It takes all kinds of farming to get the food on your table. Organic has been used thousands of years and cross breeding of plants, animals, and humans is also. Some of us may have a little Neanderthal genes in our DNA.

The moon, Jupiter, Venus all affect earth which rotates on an axis in an elliptical swing around the sun. A wobble of the earth on this path is thought to have affect on the ebb and flow of ice ages. Oahu has geological evidence of much higher and lower sea levels in the several million years since it erupted from a hot spot in the ocean floor. That means periods of little Ice caps at all one extreme to full on Ice Ages where the sea level much lower. All of these extremes long before any industrial revolution. Most all of the rise in Human civilization has been in a 10,000 year warm spell.

I think the Human population which continues to rise needs many types of farming to feed it. Diversity, Protecting the Ocean and Land environment is important. But it does not mean have to be anti- everything Evil large corporations, Black and White, it is not as simple as that.

One of my favorite German authors once wrote "If you are not a communist at age 20, you don't have a heart; and if you are still a communist at age 30, you don't have a brain". I am in my 50s now, but I have retained that antipathy against huge corporations usurping (is that a word?) markets, lobbying their interests to suppress any dissenting entities, and dominating the markets by killing off producers who cannot even be considered competitors anymore. I have not read enough about the actual pros and cons of the genetic modifications, but I am deeply suspicious of any company aiming for total market domination through questionable strategies - and that is what I am seeing here. They (thinking mostly of Monsanto here) just rigged the system by excellent lobbying, placing people into powerful positions (like the supreme court) and buying influence where they can. I am not a romantic, expecting all will be well if we only all eat organic food and save the bees. But I don't think the extinction of thousands of genetic varations for the benefit of a few selected (patented! - whatever that means) varieties is the way to go.

My 2 cts.

Stefan

The Irish potato famine happened because everyone was growing the same type potato. These were not GMO,
but a lack of genetic diversity (sound familiar) allowed the blight to almost ruin an entire country. By comparison when people in the Andes have problems with one potato strain, the other 99% of strains are not affected and there food supply is protected. I'm not 100% against GMO's, but see no reason at all that they shouldn't at least be labeled as such just so people can make an informed decision. As for me, organic, non-GMO it's the only way to go.

Cross breeding and hybridization of agriculture is not the same as GMO...GMO takes dna from anything living in order to yield results. Montsanto has been promising miracles and better food for over fifty years. Yet third world countries are still starving.

Organic farming has been successful and proven. GMO is not something that has been tested much. I personally like to eat simple foods. Do I really need fish dna in my tomatoes? No thanks.

there is so much mis-information out there, especially on the internet about GMOs. Its become such a political issue, and people that have honest concerns are drowned out by all the tin foil hats.

Well the GMO Ban passed by less than a thousand votes. Monsanto spent a lot of money trying to get a no vote with local ads. Showed the victors with two ears of corn crossed with a Death's head. GMO's Kill!!

When asked how it will be enforced, good question more tax payers money to set up task force, I don't think so. Also they want detailed study of effects of GMO's. Again more money, the people behind this bill are not farmers or scientist.

But damn! Don't it feel Good???

daveb said:

But damn! Don't it feel Good???

Click to expand...

Yup. And isn't everyone's opinion equally valuable on matters of science?

Opinion is just that. I have mine too:soapbox: Like GMO corn on the cob wt. garlic butter salt & pepper. Been eating GMO papaya's for years. Do I care heck no, just do not believe at all that they are bad for my health.

Well the people have spoken it will be interesting to see how this plays out. It will be hard on the economy of Maui County esp. Molokai.

Zwiefel said:

Yup. And isn't everyone's opinion equally valuable on matters of science?

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, yes...

The language as to what, EXACTLY, constitutes a genetically modified organism is also very important. It can let a lot of things that should be outlawed slip in and ban perfectly safe and sane products from markets.

I am all for the ban. First of all, I think it is the company's responsibility to proove that there are no negative effects - it is not my or the state's obligation to prove the products are harmful. Secondly, the simplification of the production methods and the creation of genetically modified varoeties in almost all cases means that the original variety gets lost, and that is almost tragic. I think there were something like 3000 types of apples out there, but because some can be a bit quirky or don't look polished, we focus on a dozen and lose the genetic information and variety of the rest. Companies like Monsanto go so far as to forbid growers to grow anything but their product. I always wonder why so many people turn crazy when the government wants to forbid them to do something, but it is ok when a global industry giant does that...

Stefan

apicius9 said:

I think it is the company's responsibility to proove that there are no negative effects - it is not my or the state's obligation to prove the products are harmful.

Click to expand...

Can you prove that your handles have no negative side effects? What if someone is allergic to the glue you use? or goes into anaphylactic shock b/c of particular batch of wood you happened to use? this would have a strong effect on prices as well, with very little effect on health/safety. these kinds of regulations destroy small businesses and favor corporations. (contrary to public opinion: corporations do not dislike regulation, they love it as it gives them an advantage over smaller businesses w/o the resources to comply with the regulations. In fact, they frequently participate in writing up such regulations b/c they can both improve their image vis a vis "social responsibility" and create regulations which favor them particularly.)

apicius9 said:

I always wonder why so many people turn crazy when the government wants to forbid them to do something, but it is ok when a global industry giant does that..

Click to expand...

b/c you cannot opt out of a government ban. This is a voluntary agreement between private parties.

Proven to be healthy (for us and/or the planet) or not, I would like to have them labelled so I can make the choice when I'm paying/consuming.

Cheers

chinacats said:

Proven to be healthy (for us and/or the planet) or not, I would like to have them labelled so I can make the choice when I'm paying/consuming.

Cheers

Click to expand...

I'm all for informed consent...but labeling isn't as simple as it sounds. Also, most produce sold in the US is already labeled in a manner that would allow consumers to determine if it is a GMO product...via the PLU codes.

http://www.snopes.com/food/prepare/produce.asp

and

http://www.plucodes.com/

For reference.

I think a lot of people are swayed by media and hype. Biotech was my major and i can say some people here are completely misinformed genetic splicing has been used for centuries in oil trees, grapes, cows etc. There are thousands of patients who have organs grown in pigs, will the organic eaters refuse a new heart because it was grown in a pig using science? "Organically" grown food has shown to have a higher nutrient levels but they are also given more attention (ph balance, proper soil nutrient levels) Most of the stable foods, wheat, corn, rice etc are helping feed people in many counties. A lot of EU nations have banned GMOs so can the US feed the world alone? The potato famine occurred because they didnt have knowledge of crop rotation and depleted the soil which is whats happening with Cuban tobacco now. Yes i agree the products should be labeled as GMO but this Organic label is a bunch of wish wash. An i dont agree with tailoring specific pesticides but the pharma companies put the idea forward with cancer meds and such and where is the rebuttal for that? I think the main concern should be replacing all these worthless plants with fruit bearing plants.

there is so much fear of science it makes me sick. If people don't understand something, the response is fear mongering. and this isnt exclusive to GMOs either.

My favorite FB post i have ever seen is where someone posted a very long list of ingredients/chemicals and said "would you be willing to eat this if you knew what it was made of?" after a while, they posted it was the makeup of an organic red delicious apple. people see big long words they cant pronounce and assume its bad for them. should have seen all the dumb dumbs fall for it.

DDPslice said:

"Organically" grown food has shown to have a higher nutrient levels but they are also given more attention (ph balance, proper soil nutrient levels)

Click to expand...

I have only seen studies that there are no signifcant differences in nutrients or perceived flavor quality. If I remember correctly it was found that there is more variation between different farms than organic/conventional. Do you have a specific study you can direct me to?

The problem isn't GMO's, it's the corporations that make them.

Zwiefel said:

b/c you cannot opt out of a government ban. This is a voluntary agreement between private parties.

Click to expand...

That is only true if the private parties are roughly the same size/wield roughly the same power. When one party is couple of orders of magnitude bigger than the other the agreement is anything other than voluntarily, it is much closer to extortion.