So what will be for dinner tomorrow?

Emergency! Pathogen New to Science Found in Roundup Ready GM Crops?

That would be Tom Vilsack, Obama's Sec Agriculture who used to fly around in a Monsanto corporate jet while governor of Iowa ,and named “Governor of the Year” by the Biotechnology Industry Council.Good luck with that...

It would be much better if we saved the cow manure ,and grew the corn in it so we all can get a good case of e coli.

There are isolated cases like this in the GM industry much like there are in the pharmaceutical industry .Only after approval are the unintended consequences known.
Still ,I caution against Ludditism. GM crops will be a major part of the food supply going forward. GM beats the hell out of crop spraying that pollutes everything around it. What affect did sprayed pesticides have on the cattle... and how was that passed on to human consumers ?

Tom you can complain about luddites all you want but I am glad we don't grow GM crops here. We don't want Monsanto controlling our agriculture

You don't have a complete moratoria on all GM . Somehow canola made it past the ban. Also GM foods are imported there . You have labelling requirements which are OK by me. Give consumers the choice.

Quote:

---

In summary, because of the high titer of this new animal pathogen in Roundup Ready crops, and its association with plant and animal diseases that are reaching epidemic proportions, we request USDA's participation in a multi-agency investigation, and an immediate moratorium on the deregulation of RR crops until the causal/predisposing relationship with glyphosate and/or RR plants can be ruled out as a threat to crop and animal production and human health.

---

Hello Q:

I know little about politics. I know less about farming. What I noticed though, is that the author of the letter asks for an END to DE-regulation. Apparently, he thinks government REGULATION would have PREVENTED this occurrence from happening...

Ever since Ronald Reagan, there has been a trend toward LESS government regulation.. I don't notice that it made us more productive, wealthier, or safer. In fact, I notice stories about the Wall Street bankers who ripped us off, and chemical companies who went off half cocked... If where we're at today is the RESULT of 30 years of deregulation, then it's time to reverse that trend..

There is a PLACE for government regulators. I DO recall tom being quite satisfied knowing his meat supply is safe. That's so, NOT because of the meat packers, but because of the GOVERNMENT.

Excon

Or it could be that in the so called good old days incidents of food poisoning went unreported more often.

But what you imply is a red herring . You are correct in stating that I am in favor of regulations regarding food safety. Historically it is a proper role of government .Further you have no evidence that regulations over food safety have been weakened .

I'll go even further... the new super regulations passed by the lame duck session will prove to be just another nail in the coffin of the small family farm industry without having any substantial increase in overall food safety in this county. I've said it before and I'll say it again , OVER regulation has little benefit... BUT the unintended consequences are that the small players in the industry cannot afford to comply and either get bought out ,or go out of business .The net effect is that consumers have less choice ,In this case... they are forced to consume big Agri products like Monsanto's .

I am not in favor of is over reaction to incidents that destroy industry like we saw when some spinach was tainted with e coli . We should have a little perspective. Does GM food do more harm than good ? I think it does more good ,and will do even more in the future. GM will provide an abundance of food and has the potential to wipe out world wide hunger.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Further you have no evidence that regulations over food safety have been weakened .... I've said it before and I'll say it again , OVER regulation has little benefit ...

---

Hello again, tom:

Couple things. It's true, I have no evidence... But, the author of the letter does, and I just cited him.

We're on the same page as far as regulation is concerned. UNDER regulation has downsides just like OVER regulation does.

excon

The author may have a point about the Roundup ready grain. Prudence would dictate that further research is needed to determine if that is the cause.
But I suspect the author also has an agenda that he can exploit with this . My guess is that it wouldn't be long for the author to extent his moratorium on all GM crops. Also ;this is not a matter of over or under regulation. This is an isolated case and an isolated product that needs further investigation.

I would consider this a reasonably balanced article:

Genetically Modified Foods :: Environmental Facts :: Young People's Trust for the Environment

My main issue is that the risks are simply unknown. Here in the UK surveys have repeatedly shown that 95% of the public want to see GM foods labelled, yet this isn't happening. I don't relish being a guinea-pig in a mass scale experiment without my consent.

There is already some evidence that the build in insect resistance might just be a little too good. With world bee popultions already struggling can we really risk wiping out pollinating insects?

GM food might give us plentiful healthy food. It might also just leave us with none.

By all means let's try and find out. But roll it out wholesale before we know?

Fair enough . I'm all in favor of proper labelling giving consumers a choice.


I'm not saying rush in. But is there any evidence that the decision to allow commercially grown Roundup resistance grains was rushed ? There is a decade + experience with Roundup corn and soy and this is the first evidence of anything negative. Meanwhile the use of Round up has allowed farmers world wide to use no till methods of planting that has done much regarding the problem of soil erosion of productive land.

It is really of basic of human argiculture. Humans have tinkered with genetics since the days of Gregor Mendel.Every domesticated farm animal is the result of human tinkering with the genetic makeup of the animal.

Edit... just read the article you linked and it covered many of the points just made. I can see where there would be a caution in exposing your productive lands.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

You don't have a complete moratoria on all GM . Somehow canola made it past the ban. Also GM foods are imported there . You have labelling requirements which are ok by me. Give consumers the choice.

---

Trials perhaps but GM canola is failing. The way I hear it the seed is sterile after three years needing Monsanto to provide a fresh batch. The labeling is keeping them from being widely adopted

You might not be saying rush in Tom, but that's not the message coming from Obama.

The Moderate Man: Obama OK's GM Alfalfa

Also, this is hardly an isolated case of problems with GM.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2005/jul/25/gm.food

http://www.twnside.org.sg/title/mop1e.htm

Yup I already identified his point man as a shill for agribusiness. The funny thing is the drones here will continue to believe he's some real reformer .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by QLP

You might not be saying rush in Tom, but that's not the message coming from Obama.

The Moderate Man: Obama OK's GM Alfalfa

Also, this is hardly an isolated case of problems with GM.

GM crops created superweed, say scientists | Environment | The Guardian

Independant scientific report highlights risks of GM crops

---

Well Tom I expect they don't call that plant rape for nothing. What does Obama know or care about alfalfa after all it's animal food. Don't like chemical companies Tom they cause too many problems

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

Trials perhaps but GM canola is failing. The way I hear it the seed is sterile after three years needing Monsanto to provide a fresh batch. The labeling is keeping them from being widely adopted

---

Clete ,that's business. Suggest Aussie agribusiness come up with their own version of a seed that can grow in your deserts and still germinate year after year.. You think they could do that and remain in business ?


I have a bigger picture in mind... eradication of hunger through science. The fact that farmers need to purchase a fresh batch of seeds seems like a secondary concern.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

I have a bigger picture in mind.....eradication of hunger through science.

---

Maybe we need an even bigger picture in mind. The crux of the problem, too many people to feed from the resources available.
No matter how clever scientists think they are there has to be a limit to how much food this planet can sustainably produce. Yet still the inexorable rise in human population. Pehaps there's another solution.
Oh wait, where's the profit?.

Spoken like a true Malthusian . What segment of the population do you think should be eradicated ?

I'm not suggesting population eradication lol. My ideals certainly don't follow those of Malthus, however he had one pertinent tenet that the increase of population is necessarily limited by the means of subsistence. I sincerely believe we should do all we can to alleviate hunger.

I'm merely pointing out that heralding GM foods as the end to world hunger may be a little naïve in the long term. I very much doubt that eradicating world hunger is Monsanto's chief priority regarldelss of what it's PR machine spews out.

With large sections of the world suffering from hunger whilst other significant populations suffer from obesity problems there is much that could be done now if there was a real political will.

You may have lofty ideals about the good that GM foods could provide, but I don't see that as being top of the agenda for either the GM food companies nor the politicians that put the interests of big business above the potential welfare of their citizens and that of the planet.

If we really want to deal with world hunger we have to start asking some difficult questions. How can we share the resources we have? How do we face the problem that with the best will in the world those resources are still going to be finite?

Accepting the reality that there is only so far we can stretch what is available does not preclude trying to do so. However, the very reason we have to face up to this long-term reality is because we don't want to reach the point where population growth is checked purely by food availability.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Clete ,that's business. Suggest Aussie agribusiness come up with their own version of a seed that can grow in your deserts and still germinate year after year .. You think they could do that and remain in business ?


I have a bigger picture in mind.....eradication of hunger through science. The fact that farmers need to purchase a fresh batch of seeds seems like a secondary concern.

---

Tom seems we have been doing that successfully for a long time otherwise our agribusiness wouldn't be as successful as it is. We have many agricultural research stations and the last thing we need here is american ideas of agriculture, just inappropriate for our climate and soils.

No Tom the need to purchase fresh seed from a conglomerate is a concern. Seed should be freely available by growing it, not a plant that is sterile without a laboratory. I don't care about resistance to disease, that can be breed for anyway, nor do I care about resistance to Roundup. I know that will kill anything given time and opportunity, use it myself to control weeds, nor do I agree with a conglomerate being able to patent genetic material

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

No Tom the need to purchase fresh seed from a conglomerate is a concern. Seed should be freely available by growing it, not a plant that is sterile without a laboratory.

---

This is a very important point.

The GM genocide: Thousands of Indian farmers are committing suicide after using genetically modified crops | Mail Online