GM foods story in papers

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 03 Oct 2014, 15:48

http://www.gmfreeme.org/

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 14 Nov 2014, 11:30

Largest international study into safety of GM food launched by Russian NGO

The $25m three-year experiment will involve scientists testing thousands of rats which will be fed differing diets of a Monsanto GM maize and the world’s most widely-used herbicide which it it is engineered to be grown with.

The organisers of the Factor GMO [genetically modified organism] study, announced in London on Tuesday and due to start fully next year, say it will investigate the long-term health effects of a diet of a GM maize developed by US seed and chemical company Monsanto.

“It will answer the question: is this GM food, and associated pesticide, safe for human health?” said Elena Sharoykina, a campaigner and co-founder of the Russian national association for genetic safety (Nags), the co-ordinator of the experiment.

Hmmm. It'll test to see if GMOs are safe or not for rats' health.

So who's paying for all this?

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 14 Nov 2014, 16:20

Living with GMOs - a letter from America

NGOs, scientists, anti-GM groups, celebrities, food manufacturers, and others representing 57 million Americans today publish an Open Letter to the UK and the entire EU warning of the serious and manifold hazards of GMO crops - and promising their support in our fight against them.

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 05 Dec 2014, 14:46

Monsanto 'not a GMO' company, according to Monsanto.

They said it, so it must be true.

A new EU law will allow the UK government to push GMOs in Britain.

another_exlurker · Post by **another_exlurker** » 10 Dec 2014, 21:27

A new law will place restrictions on scientists with clear knowledge on GMO dangers, and create room for experts with overt financial ties to the biotech and pharmaceutical industries affected by EPA regulations. H.R. 1422, which passed 229-191, is an earthquake rumbling through the Environmental Protection Agency’s Scientific Advisory Board.

Original article.

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 08 Jan 2015, 14:24

Britain needs...revolution

Britain should gear up for the next ‘agricultural revolution’ and adopt GM crops, the Environment Secretary Elizabeth Truss said on Wednesday.

She nearly gets it right here:

“Decisions on issues like pesticides and GM cultivation [should be] made on scientific evidence alone,” she told the conference.

And John Krebs, who bills himself as some kind of climate change expert (and indeed advises the UK government in that area) has come out saying GM crops will help reduce CO2+e emissions. He's figured out, possibly with the aid of a few bottles of organic wine, that organic farming helps create climate change.

another_exlurker · Post by **another_exlurker** » 08 Jan 2015, 16:10

emordnilap wrote:[
She nearly gets it right here:

“Decisions on issues like pesticides and GM cultivation [should be] made on scientific evidence alone,” she told the conference.

Yeah, she missed out the words "independent", "peer" and "reviewed".

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 08 Jan 2015, 16:13

another_exlurker wrote:
emordnilap wrote:[
She nearly gets it right here:

“Decisions on issues like pesticides and GM cultivation [should be] made on scientific evidence alone,” she told the conference.

Yeah, she missed out the words "independent", "peer" and "reviewed".

And, most importantly in my view, 'precautionary principle'.

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 03 Feb 2015, 12:42

One brave woman

Zen Honeycutt (great name) takes on the head of one of the most evil companies in the world.

Then I lowered my voice just a bit and looked deeper into his eyes. "You know it takes a big man to make such a big and powerful company but it takes and even bigger man to acknowledge when it is not working and change direction."

Fascinating article.

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 17 Feb 2015, 15:26

emordnilap wrote:Brian John calls Anne Glover a liar

I am not impressed when somebody in your position purports to be unaware of this very large body of evidence.
Go Brian!

Glover got into trouble again on BBC's Hardtalk.

F'rinstance:

a novel definition of “consensus”, saying it means “the general perceived view is that the technology is safe”. In fact Glover would have a hard job finding very many scientists who would be prepared to make such an unscientific generalisation about “the technology”

and then one Ian George, who may or may not be related to Glover but probably is, gets into a spot of bother.

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 18 Feb 2015, 11:06

Here's an article worth bookmarking for reference.

anti-GMO campaigners or certain scientists are ignorant, engage in bogus science or are ‘demagogues’ who use emotion and ideological rhetoric to sway opinion.

Let us address these accusations.

careful_eugene · Post by **careful_eugene** » 18 Feb 2015, 11:13

emordnilap wrote:Living with GMOs - a letter from America

NGOs, scientists, anti-GM groups, celebrities, food manufacturers, and others representing 57 million Americans today publish an Open Letter to the UK and the entire EU warning of the serious and manifold hazards of GMO crops - and promising their support in our fight against them.

This is a great letter, I will be forwarding it to my (labour) MP, I consider it vital that we do not accept GM crops in Europe but am worried the TTIP will see it introduced. The stand out sentence for me is

"Through our experience we have come to understand that the genetic engineering of food has never really been about public good, or feeding the hungry, or supporting our farmers. Nor is it about consumer choice. Instead it is about private, corporate control of the food system."

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 18 Feb 2015, 11:24

careful_eugene wrote:This is a great letter, I will be forwarding it to my (labour) MP

Hey, good on you! Thanks.

Andy Stirling, Professor of Science and Technology Policy at Sussex University, wrote:The main reason some multinationals prefer GM technologies over the many alternatives is that GM offers more lucrative ways to control intellectual property and global supply chains.

Post by **kenneal - lagger** » 18 Feb 2015, 14:40

There have been huge gains in productivity in Africa by the use of companion planting but this gets no research money and no publicity because there's no profit in it. All you get with GMOs is less biodiversity, lower productivity and more profit for multi nationals. Three negatives as far as I'm concerned.

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 19 Feb 2015, 15:43

This is now the norm: Over half the experts in Argentine GMO regulatory body have conflicts of interest with industry.

And will be more so once TTiP and TiSA are forced upon us.

The public health consequences of GMO cultivation in Argentina have been extensively publicised, with cancer and birth defects skyrocketing in areas where GM crops are sprayed with Roundup herbicide.

GMWatch and Earth Open Source (which published the “Roundup and birth defects” report) initially raised these issues with UK and European politicians and retailers back in 2010.

They met with the response that these were internal issues for the Argentine government and nothing to do with them. Some said that if things really were that bad, the Argentine government would “not allow” it to go on and regulators would step in and ban the cultivation of GMOs.