I think there is a terrible disinformation involved in this issue, Many of us are strongly in support of scientific research in the case of stem cell research and, indeed, in genetic research generally. At the same time we are strongly opposed to GMO 'foods'. The reason for the latter is partly scientific and partly economic. The economic, as Michael points out, is that it leads to corporate monopoly control of the food chain, and to the detriment of the independent farmer -- the Shmieser case in Canada is a good example. But this is not the end of it in that it leads, as in Mexico, to the eradication of indiginous genetic seed sources. I could go at long lengths on this point but increased corporate control of the food chain is bad, bad, bad, no matter how one looks at it, scientific, economic, social. Several other points (that my fellow Welshman seems to ignore). Genetically modified food has not been sufficiently tested in terms of long term tests, to know how safe it is for human consumption, nor how effective it is for food production. There is considerable evidence, in the case of GM canola that, though it is great for the first couple of generations in terms of protecting canola from pesticide use, the genetic protection soon passes to the weeds such that the 'benefit' ceases to the farmer and remains only with the chemical producer. In short, much research indicates that GMO technology does not benefit the farmer or the consumer but only the chemical companies. I am all in favour of research that explores the effects of GMO foods, good and bad. I just want to know when I pick up a package of food if I am consuming artificially modified food, or the old 'real' food, organic if possible. The fact that the seed/chemical companies oppose the labelling of food to indicate whether or not it is genetically modified seems to indicate that they fear the negative effects of GMO food on consumers, or at least on their profits. In short, Daniel, I am not opposed to research. I welcome it. I just don't want my choice of food to be restricted to non-organic supplies that are untested to be safe by scientific research nor restricted in supply by legal monopoly.
Paul P Jim Devine wrote:
[there's not a reasonable case to make against genetically-modified foods? is it reasonable to simply reject critics of GM foods as luddite lunk-heads?] --
-- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.3/395 - Release Date: 7/21/06
