On 18 May 2013
in
Non-GMO SALT now available!!! Please walk, don't run!,
YesYNot said:
donjumpsuit says
People gave up this right when they decided to move from the farm to the city.
That's bullshit.
donjumpsuit says
The public has a right to make informed choices about the products they purcahse, but it is the responsiblity of the CONSUMER to find trusted sources of these products.
Again, bullshit. We live in a democracy and vote on rules for disclosure of information on consumer producs. Caveat emptor applies to buying a used car on Craigslist. The same cannot be said for food. We are having this debate, because many states have put this disclosure up for a vote. The majority of people think GMOs should be labled. Companies have spent millions scaring people into thinking that it would drive food prices too high. Again, this is bullshit. Most of food prices to into marketing, packaging, distribution, and waste. Forcing GMO labels would have a minor impact. Earlier you linked a web site claiming that 70 milliion euros or something have been spent testing GMOs. Nearly as much as been spent scaring the public about the price of labels. That's pretty shameful.
You are correct in my misuse of the word synthetic. However, genetic engineering of plants has blurred the distinction that was more clear over the preceding 100 years of chemistry.
It was sloppy writing, as was this...
donjumpsuit says
is that GMO's main goal is to reduce the environmental impact of growing
GMOs do not have goals. Many people who worked on developing GMOs have goals.
and this...
donjumpsuit says
which is toxically relevant (harmful) in a toxicology study (MSDS)
An MSDS is a material safety data sheet. It is not a toxicology study.
donjumpsuit says
For most of those items, there is a toxicology report (it's called and MSDS in Science)
A material safety data sheet is called an MSDS period. In Science has nothing to do with it.
donjumpsuit says
It's only silly because you don't own a food company, or a seed distribution business.
Exactly. To everybody else, it is silly. The people who stand to take a slight haircut are the ones selling gmo seeds.
I'm not even against gmo foods. I do think that people have the right to make their own decisions and be informed. Labeling would let people know what is and is not gmo. It would also bring the debate forward in the media, and people would become educated. Insisting that people are not smart enough to understand and should be kept in the dark is ridiculous and it is a short-sighted strategy for food companies.
On 17 May 2013
in
Non-GMO SALT now available!!! Please walk, don't run!,
YesYNot said:
donjumpsuit says
rdiovascular Institute and Complementary Medicine Program at New York-Presbyterian Hospital.[11] His research interests include heart replacement surgery, mini
That gmo pundit site is funny. So, there have been 200 articles published by people not working at gmo seed companies claiming gmo food is safe. In the grand scheme of things that's an absolutely miniscule amount of research. Also, 70 million Euros - not a lot of money to be spent on the issue.
The main reason for labeling GMOs is that people have a right to know when a major shift like this happens in their food supply. The horse is already out of the barn for sure, but people still have a right to decide for themselves what to eat.
There are legitimate reasons that people might want to avoid gmo food like: (1) concern over crop monocultures and their effect on insects, food stability, etc. (2) concern about the social impact on farmers (3) concern about eating active synthetic chemicals (inside the plant as opposed to on the surface where they can be washed off). There may be more reasons - I'm not an expert.
Crying about labels driving up the cost of food is silly. No one is asking for labels with pictures of disfigured children and warnings about consuming gmos. They simply want a label, much like one saying that a garment is made in China. People can decide how to spend their own money. Pink slime was considered safe as well, but people resent not having the option to make that choice on their own.
