37 votes

For those who think that GMOs should be allowed to run unchecked

More information coming out of one of the biggest and most underrated subjects.

A virus gene that could be poisonous to humans has been missed when GM food crops have been assessed for safety.

GM crops such as corn and soya, which are being grown around the world for both human and farm animal consumption, include the gene.

A new study by the EU's official food watchdog, the European Food Safety Authority(EFSA), has revealed that the international approval process for GM crops failed to identify the gene.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2266143/Uncovered-to...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I began my fight in 1993

It's one reason I became a Granger.. Ron Paul showed me the error of my ways.. IF I want to consume 100% that is my business, and I can share in my cheffing with my consumers. But it's not up to me to force others to eat, like I eat.

Monsanto feeds billions of people.

I now live in a county that is GMO free, I have my garden, my chichens, my connections with farmers and gardners and bee keepers too. So I worked to make MY life what I wanted, and if others are interested, I share with them. If not, then they can enjoy their Monsanto, they don't need me to rage and rant at them, because it doesn't help and doesn't work.

Have a great posting day.

Should'nt I have the right to label my organic food non-GMO?

According to Monsanto and the FDA I would be discriminating against GMO crops. so they made it illegal to label non-GMO. I am talking about letting the free market work, let people decide the fate of GMO's. If we didn't have a fascist government Monsanto wouldn't have a chance.

Ron Paul hates fascists and thats why I voted for him and donated to his campaign. If Ron Paul were POTUS it would be a slow death for the fascist company Monsanto.

So lets let a company freely label a food NON-GMO if they want without being sued by the FDA or Monsanto.

BTW little people that tried this usually get raided by gun toting FDA agents!

Gold standard: because man can not be trusted to control his greed

What's the point of that?

People who demand organic have lables. Why do you or them need to make your lable anything thing more than a proud statement of your product as is 100% ORGANIC. Is that not good enough for a sale? Isn't that what the market is all about? SALES.

Wouldn't you be concerned that people might be put off by a GMO anywhere on what they eat even with the pre-NON?

And why don't you agree with the GMO and Monsanto, that the addition of NON-GMO is not to identify your product better, but to discriminate.. why employ your product to a war, rather than simply allow it to heal those who appreciate it for what it is already?

I don't see it as "free market". I see it as political and not helping people choose 100% organic because it says Non-GMO. 100% IS non-GMO.

I do not believe that Ron Paul would end GMO because it is the bulk of our food, people would starve being there is not enough certified organic to replace the GMO, and a free market allows for GMO.. CHOICE.. you may not like GMO, but there are people who love it.. so taking it off the market id not a free market.

Let's take another product for example.. clothing made in the USA. If clothing made in the USA is important to a consumer, they are already looking for a USA lable. Correct? So if the manufactorer wants to lable his clothes, "Made in the USA NOT China". You don't think China would take offence, after all, there are many nations selling clothes in the USA besides China.. just as there are other non-organic foods, GE, transgenic (animal genes) and so on..

If GMO's are so great Monsatan should be

promoting them, not hide behind laws to save their ass! If you put the GMO and NON-GMO on the labels Monsatan would be heading for the bankruptcy courts.

Whar right does Bayer and Monsatan have to put poison in their corn soybeans and kill most of the insect population. I used to operate 300 beehives, this will be my last year because of the poison in the corn. I have watched my bees fall out of the sky on the pavement dead! I have had bees for 40 years and never seen this ever in my life time or ever heard any thing like this. I have built up a following for my honey that other beekeepers would kill to get, but it is all destroyed by a criminal organization!

Make sure you eat to 1 meal of Walmarts sweet corn daily and see what happens in 6 months. It is 100% GMO sweet corn produced by Monsanto exclusively for Walmart!

Gold standard: because man can not be trusted to control his greed

I NEVER said GMOs were great

Don't fear monger me with food beeman. It's one thing to be a shinning example of great health by refusing to eat anything from Monsanto. It's completely another to attempt to force others through fearmongering and threats to do it YOUR way.

Adding three letters to an

Adding three letters to an already existing label will not cost one red cent moose breath.

There is no Left or Right -- there is only freedom or tyranny. Everything else is an illusion, an obfuscation to keep you confused and silent as the world burns around you." - Philip Brennan

"Invest only in things that you can stand in front of and pr

Possibly.

To keep or extend existing contracts, as I sometimes deal with, vendors will accomodate. Adding three letters shouldn't be a problem to keep the customer happy. Or, there's always a competing competitor in a free market society ;-)

"What if the American people learn the truth" - Ron Paul

That's absolutely amazing to find out

In the world I live in, adding anything costs. Please educate me further how that is possible? Is it prison labor? no that would cost the tax payer.. How do you get someone to remake a lable for free?

Let me ask you then.

Why would labeling GMO's make them more expensive?

I don't support government forced labeling or forced non-labeling and I do eat organic whenever possible. I can't prove 100% compliance due to cross-contamination. I also grow my own heirloom veggies.

The government involvement with seed patents and Monsanto is troubling at best.

As far as cross-contamination of organic crops. Would this not be a property rights issue?
Does a conventional GMO farmer have the right to contaminate an organic farmers crops?

Because the consumer will have to pay for the labeling

I live in a county that has banned GMO crops in 2004 with Measure H. This is a step you can take in your county.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mendocino_County_GMO_Ban

I know a ton about label printing.

After the one time cost of a new plate or plates, costing about $300 including art, the cost of running the label on press is the same as it was previously.
Unless there was no label at all before, then the costs would be new, recurring and a problem.

I'm not sure I want GMO's banned.
Thats my problem.
Monsanto makes a patented seed that some growers want to use.
Fine.
The problem is that I don't want to eat that product.
The FDA along with Monsanto doesn't want me to know what I'm eating.

I'm thinking the added costs would come if the masses knew and understood they were eating genetically altered food. Many who could afford to would move toward organic, leaving a smaller pool of customers for the GMO product.
Free Market solution.

Could be a one time cost

that would be for every farm, and every crop that farm produces, eh? I believe the masses know they are eating GMO, but what is more imporant to the masses, is that they get a good deal on food.

Grocers would not distribute SALE ads if they were not what people were interested in.

We have one corporate grocery where I live. Every friday is $5 friday and they have specials.. chicken, meatloaf, grapes, beer, sodas, soap.. fish.. they select products and advertize "Save $2.89".. the parking lot is so full on that day, and many times the $5 specials run out... one day their special was fried chicken and they ran out when I was there, and there was nearly a riot. I stopped going at that point.. but my point here is people want cheap food more than GMO free food.

I work at a soup kitchen and what's interesting is majority of greens, vegetables, and fruit we use are ORGANIC, because people don't buy that as much as what is on sale.. and I know plenty of people who will drive 70 miles or more to go to stores like Costco where they say they save money, and what they are buying is not organic, even though they are very health conscience.. with diets of chia and hemp seed.. still.. they find a reason to go all that way to buy non-GMO.

So then

how can I be assured I'm not eating GMO food?
Must I be forced to eat GMO food because everyone else wants cheap food?
Where's the balance?
Or do I need to just eat something I don't want to so others can have cheap food?

I can tell you for certain, the labeling cost difference between adding text to a color already present on the label is not a major contributing factor to cost.

There is only one way I know

Buy certified 100% Organic.

It's available, costs more, but absolutely available, so what's the complaint?

To you, Organic is more important than cheap.. Majority don't care, and that is a fact.

Do you really think going into a store and seeing millions of GMO labels is going to make your life happier or better, when you're still buying the products that say CERTIFIED 100% ORGANIC anyways?

Must everyone who doesn't give a damn if food is GMO, be forced to read GMO on their lables, when YOU already have lables on your food stating CERTIFIED 100% ORGANIC?

The government is too invloved already.

Personally I don't want to consume GMO food.
The FDA made rules not allowing GMO-free labeling, saying it was impossible to prove.
Sadly most people will buy whatever is cheapest regardless of its consequences.

Thanks

Shared on Twitter.

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
http://www.dailypaul.com/203008/south-carolina-battle-of-cow...
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

So how...

would the government have prevented this? Unless, you're insinuating that the people who grow these crops intend to kill their customers.

They would have taken the science

seriously when the products were up for review. The FDA chiefs during the time of approvals (and still) were former (and future) employees of the companies. Staff resignations were given over the blatant conflict of interest, and rulings contradicting their recommendations. "Substantial equivalence" is the ruling of the govt/industry heads.

-OR- they would have denied patents on living organisms at the patent office.

So rather...

than letting the market decide you'd much rather have the highly corrupt bought and paid for organization that is the single most evil establishment entity second only to the Fed taking care of these problems...Seems legit.

No, I only prefer that

in your imagination. I don't think GMO can survive in a free market.

In my imagination?

You certainly seemed to insinuate that these companies would have been more careful had the FDA been involved.

The FDA was involved

They approved GMO strains against the recommendations of FDA staff scientists.

not saying yay or nay about the subject matter, but...

"EU's official food watchdog"

a group funded by and administrators are appointed by the EU. they are about as independant as our supreme court justices. take their information with a grain of salt.

the easiest way to get something done isnt to change the behavior; its to change the meaning of existing behavior. like a cut isnt a cut, torture isnt torture, its enhanced interrogation. war isnt war, its kinetic military action. declaring war now appare

Further Proof to keep the Government Out of our Food.

So clearly government approval is extremely flawed. The masses have come to believe anything that the FDA says is safe, is actually safe. Because the government has vowed to "protect" us from ourselves or our decisions to eat this or that, or to take this medication or that medication, most people are okay with giving the government the responsibility of acting like our parents and deciding what is safe for us. If the government had never given its seal of approval of GMOs, the general population would have been much more skeptical of a new technology. Independent researchers don't exist anymore because the governments have monopolized this service.

Asking the government for help (banning GMOs, approving foods as safe, etc.) will only create a larger and more powerful government.

I Don't Recall Anyone Asking

the FEDERAL government to do anything. That would be a conflict of interests for them. I think STATES should have the right to ask to know what's in food. They put the ingredients on packaging. What's the difference?

skippy

No Difference.

In the case of the USA, I agree that States should have the right to do as they please. In a libertarian sense, I don't think the government should be telling anyone how to sell their products. If someone chooses to sell drugs that are dangerous, so be it, it is the buyer's choice to buy it, with or without any warning on the product. The same goes with ingredients, if a seller chooses not to place the ingredients, you can choose to buy it or not. I like having the ingredients on there, but I won't force anyone to put it on.

Would you pay a private certifier,

like a United Laboratories for agriculture, to test and examine your operation, in exchange for a reputable seal?

Most Difinitely

That is, if you as my client are willing to pay for the extra costs that I will incur. Why would a business be against making more money or making their product available to more buyers? The problem Shrader, is that GMOs aren't looked upon as necessarily being dangerous to one's health. It has the approval of the FDA and most people trust that more than they do some business such as United Laboratories that is making money by testing products and creating safe food labels. For some reason people believe that the government will only do good, that they always have the people's best interest in mind.

So a seal from United Laboratories stating that a product is non-GMO and safe doesn't have much weight to it, it isn't worth much because people would rather trust what the FDA says.

So you think the libertarian

solution is unworkable, and you don't support a government based solution: labeling, or bans on food that are dangerous. You grow GMO soy because Monsanto is the dominant player. (You say you can't move non-GMO soy). You justify capitulation to the dominant player, because as a libertarian, you have the right to choose what you want to grow (even as the company, allied with big govt, eliminates the other choices). So you are a hopeless romantic? You believed FDA, that GMO was safe? You still believe, because you wouldn't knowingly grow and sell product that harmed people, or the environment, or ended a long history of free agriculture. That would be a horrible realization, but one to celebrate! (if true)

we dont live n a libertarian socety

If we did then there would be no fda and thus gmos would have had a much more dificult time obtaining the market share that they have today. The large gov created the problem and the only way to solve it is to shrink the gov back. My libertarian principles are useless in a society that wont respect them.

Since changing the american political system seems imposible, i've left the country for one that is much freer. Here the system is about 90% libertarian and i have a chance of improving it even further. So no, i'm not a hopeless romantic, instead i get to actually live it.