Comments on: Prospect’s new issue—the real GM food scandal http://blog.prospectblogs.com/2007/10/24/prospect%e2%80%99s-new-issue%e2%80%94the-real-gm-food-scandal/ Fri, 21 Nov 2008 03:48:56 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Leanne http://blog.prospectblogs.com/2007/10/24/prospect%e2%80%99s-new-issue%e2%80%94the-real-gm-food-scandal/#comment-4563 Leanne Fri, 23 May 2008 11:34:20 +0000 http://blog.prospectblogs.com/2007/10/24/prospect%e2%80%99s-new-issue%e2%80%94the-real-gm-food-scandal/#comment-4563 To all the supporters of the GM food, you eat it and enjoy the benefits. Europe can do without. To all the supporters of the GM food, you eat it and enjoy the benefits.
Europe can do without.

]]> By: Saraswati Kavula http://blog.prospectblogs.com/2007/10/24/prospect%e2%80%99s-new-issue%e2%80%94the-real-gm-food-scandal/#comment-3404 Saraswati Kavula Fri, 25 Jan 2008 10:11:28 +0000 http://blog.prospectblogs.com/2007/10/24/prospect%e2%80%99s-new-issue%e2%80%94the-real-gm-food-scandal/#comment-3404 Dear Jim, There are far too many scientists being "defended" for their work. the corporations are doing it for them. Some one had made a comment that the anti-gm activists are creating paranoia. Please give us a break. Why don't we just try to find out, how many meals a day, Monsanto's head eats GM food? Or the diet of Donald Rumsfield, George W Bush? I bet they are eating natural food...as do most of the heads of state of India. But when farmers unions demand for a compensation for lost crops by way of GM crops, the State Govt.'s power to regulate the large corporations has been taken away by the Central govt. Since the Indian Prime Minister is a stooge of the mighty corporations. Today in this country - India, anyone who wants to oppose or speak critically about GM does not get space in any kind of media (unless it is an alternative media-which doesn't reach many) - no one, no newspaper, tv channel, radio wants to discuss this - if ever they will say, we will discuss but at the end of the day, we must follow the directions of the agricultural departments (which are pro-gm) it is an unwritten rule. It has been proven beyond point that pesticides are failing, Harmful pesticides like Endosulphan are banned all over the world, but these very same pesticides are RECOMMENDED to farmers in the Govt run television programmes, as well as all private channel farmers programmes...where is the choice of information for the millions of illiterate farmers? There are plenty of advertisements on TV speaking about hte benefits of GM crops...but do the farmers ever get to hear the other side? NO WAY...you must go to a village and see how the marketing is done...with much fan fare, farmers are lured with free seeds, credit advances...(in a country where it is easier for a middle class person to get a loan to buy a mercedes benz it is difficult for an illiterate farmer to get 200 dollars worth crop loans from a bank...so what does the farmer do? Readily accepts whatever choice he is given...he has to feed his family, so even if it is GM seeds, he doesn't care...for he is looking at his immediate needs...not in a position to think about the future. So, are the farmers making an "informed choice" as far as GM or pesticides are concerned? No Way...that choice to know the truth and know the facts has been taken away from them. Everyone is bought and sold...Governments are bending over backwards to accommodate large corporations. Not just for seed sales...but in everyway, India and her poor are being raped. Just today there was a news that farmers in the most fertile region of Andhra Pradesh, the rice bowl of the country were given notices over night to vacate their lands and their villages (13 villages in all) in order to set up a multinational corporations' SEZ (special economic zone). They are now being forced out by the police. In this country which is now in the hands of the corporations, where poor peasants are thrown out of their homes and farms at gun point and sometimes even killed, to facilitate development of "the big corporations", can we expect Governments to act in the interest of people? And one person was speaking of companies working against law are taken to task in the US...what a joke. You have no law in your land or any land...Law is meant to be manipulated. Haven't you seen how many lies you were told to make you all partners in the Crime called Iraq? And yet if you believe in your governments and the corporations that fund them, you either are too naive or you are living in a fools' paradise. Forty years ago, people were told chemicals were needed to feed the hungry of the world. Forty years later, they are a failed case, besides causing death. So now we introduce GM...ten years down the line, Scientists may wish to apologize for their mistakes called GM...but then it may be just too late... Dear Jim,

There are far too many scientists being “defended” for their work. the corporations are doing it for them. Some one had made a comment that the anti-gm activists are creating paranoia. Please give us a break. Why don’t we just try to find out, how many meals a day, Monsanto’s head eats GM food? Or the diet of Donald Rumsfield, George W Bush? I bet they are eating natural food…as do most of the heads of state of India. But when farmers unions demand for a compensation for lost crops by way of GM crops, the State Govt.’s power to regulate the large corporations has been taken away by the Central govt. Since the Indian Prime Minister is a stooge of the mighty corporations.

Today in this country - India, anyone who wants to oppose or speak critically about GM does not get space in any kind of media (unless it is an alternative media-which doesn’t reach many) - no one, no newspaper, tv channel, radio wants to discuss this - if ever they will say, we will discuss but at the end of the day, we must follow the directions of the agricultural departments (which are pro-gm) it is an unwritten rule.

It has been proven beyond point that pesticides are failing, Harmful pesticides like Endosulphan are banned all over the world, but these very same pesticides are RECOMMENDED to farmers in the Govt run television programmes, as well as all private channel farmers programmes…where is the choice of information for the millions of illiterate farmers?

There are plenty of advertisements on TV speaking about hte benefits of GM crops…but do the farmers ever get to hear the other side? NO WAY…you must go to a village and see how the marketing is done…with much fan fare, farmers are lured with free seeds, credit advances…(in a country where it is easier for a middle class person to get a loan to buy a mercedes benz it is difficult for an illiterate farmer to get 200 dollars worth crop loans from a bank…so what does the farmer do? Readily accepts whatever choice he is given…he has to feed his family, so even if it is GM seeds, he doesn’t care…for he is looking at his immediate needs…not in a position to think about the future.

So, are the farmers making an “informed choice” as far as GM or pesticides are concerned? No Way…that choice to know the truth and know the facts has been taken away from them. Everyone is bought and sold…Governments are bending over backwards to accommodate large corporations.

Not just for seed sales…but in everyway, India and her poor are being raped. Just today there was a news that farmers in the most fertile region of Andhra Pradesh, the rice bowl of the country were given notices over night to vacate their lands and their villages (13 villages in all) in order to set up a multinational corporations’ SEZ (special economic zone). They are now being forced out by the police.

In this country which is now in the hands of the corporations, where poor peasants are thrown out of their homes and farms at gun point and sometimes even killed, to facilitate development of “the big corporations”, can we expect Governments to act in the interest of people?

And one person was speaking of companies working against law are taken to task in the US…what a joke. You have no law in your land or any land…Law is meant to be manipulated. Haven’t you seen how many lies you were told to make you all partners in the Crime called Iraq? And yet if you believe in your governments and the corporations that fund them, you either are too naive or you are living in a fools’ paradise.

Forty years ago, people were told chemicals were needed to feed the hungry of the world. Forty years later, they are a failed case, besides causing death. So now we introduce GM…ten years down the line, Scientists may wish to apologize for their mistakes called GM…but then it may be just too late…

]]> By: James Wachai http://blog.prospectblogs.com/2007/10/24/prospect%e2%80%99s-new-issue%e2%80%94the-real-gm-food-scandal/#comment-3304 James Wachai Tue, 08 Jan 2008 15:15:33 +0000 http://blog.prospectblogs.com/2007/10/24/prospect%e2%80%99s-new-issue%e2%80%94the-real-gm-food-scandal/#comment-3304 It seems what people resent are corporations, not the technology behind genetically modified foods. Is it then safe to say that marketing departments in these corporations need to retool their messages? Scientists do a sterling job of innovating novel technologies, but they fail terribly to market it to consumers. Anti-technology activists with their solid social science background take advantage of this to misrepresent scientific facts. On my blog, <a href="http://www.gmoafrica.org" rel="nofollow">GMO Africa</a>, I repeatedly urge scientists to come out and defend their work. No one else will ever do it. It seems what people resent are corporations, not the technology behind genetically modified foods. Is it then safe to say that marketing departments in these corporations need to retool their messages? Scientists do a sterling job of innovating novel technologies, but they fail terribly to market it to consumers. Anti-technology activists with their solid social science background take advantage of this to misrepresent scientific facts. On my blog, GMO Africa, I repeatedly urge scientists to come out and defend their work. No one else will ever do it.

]]> By: Tim Roberts http://blog.prospectblogs.com/2007/10/24/prospect%e2%80%99s-new-issue%e2%80%94the-real-gm-food-scandal/#comment-3188 Tim Roberts Wed, 12 Dec 2007 19:15:11 +0000 http://blog.prospectblogs.com/2007/10/24/prospect%e2%80%99s-new-issue%e2%80%94the-real-gm-food-scandal/#comment-3188 Perhaps Dr David King would be willing to debate "under the opposite banners of the controversy"? Perhaps Dr David King would be willing to debate “under the opposite banners of the controversy”?

]]> By: David Llewellyn Foster http://blog.prospectblogs.com/2007/10/24/prospect%e2%80%99s-new-issue%e2%80%94the-real-gm-food-scandal/#comment-3187 David Llewellyn Foster Wed, 12 Dec 2007 10:31:46 +0000 http://blog.prospectblogs.com/2007/10/24/prospect%e2%80%99s-new-issue%e2%80%94the-real-gm-food-scandal/#comment-3187 A last few words on this issue. It is excellent to see both sides of this debate in evidence, however I think we should all recognise that some of the leading scientific opinion against GMO's is neither sufficiently listened to nor properly acknowledged by the mainstream media. Dr Mae-Wan Ho is a biophysicist who specialises in the physics of organisms and is eminently qualified to present an informed opinion. Her independent Institute for Science In Society and associated journal are of profound interest to anyone with an open mind. Dr Vandana Shiva trained in quantum physics and has a superb grasp of the economic, ecological, social and ethical issues pertinent to the situation in India. Although she runs her own centre for research into sustainable practices where they offer ecologically responsible courses, she teaches regularly at Schumacher College in Devon. How often are these two powerfully motivated women invited to participate in ethical public debate? Prospect should ask both of them to contribute individual articles or engage in dialogue with GMO proponents of equal stature. Of course there may not be any other pro-GMO scientists up to the task, so maybe that is why we don't get the specialised debate at the levels of expertise and understanding the public deserves. A last few words on this issue. It is excellent to see both sides of this debate in evidence, however I think we should all recognise that some of the leading scientific opinion against GMO’s is neither sufficiently listened to nor properly acknowledged by the mainstream media. Dr Mae-Wan Ho is a biophysicist who specialises in the physics of organisms and is eminently qualified to present an informed opinion. Her independent Institute for Science In Society and associated journal are of profound interest to anyone with an open mind. Dr Vandana Shiva trained in quantum physics and has a superb grasp of the economic, ecological, social and ethical issues pertinent to the situation in India. Although she runs her own centre for research into sustainable practices where they offer ecologically responsible courses, she teaches regularly at Schumacher College in Devon. How often are these two powerfully motivated women invited to participate in ethical public debate? Prospect should ask both of them to contribute individual articles or engage in dialogue with GMO proponents of equal stature. Of course there may not be any other pro-GMO scientists up to the task, so maybe that is why we don’t get the specialised debate at the levels of expertise and understanding the public deserves.

]]> By: Perry http://blog.prospectblogs.com/2007/10/24/prospect%e2%80%99s-new-issue%e2%80%94the-real-gm-food-scandal/#comment-3167 Perry Tue, 11 Dec 2007 15:07:20 +0000 http://blog.prospectblogs.com/2007/10/24/prospect%e2%80%99s-new-issue%e2%80%94the-real-gm-food-scandal/#comment-3167 Hi, You will find an extensive and interesting response to Mr Taverne's The Real GM Scandal here: http://www.ekogaia.org/the-real-gm-food-scandal.html Hi,

You will find an extensive and interesting response to Mr Taverne’s The Real GM Scandal here:
http://www.ekogaia.org/the-real-gm-food-scandal.html

]]> By: Peter Behlen http://blog.prospectblogs.com/2007/10/24/prospect%e2%80%99s-new-issue%e2%80%94the-real-gm-food-scandal/#comment-3154 Peter Behlen Sun, 09 Dec 2007 03:09:46 +0000 http://blog.prospectblogs.com/2007/10/24/prospect%e2%80%99s-new-issue%e2%80%94the-real-gm-food-scandal/#comment-3154 I haven't been able to read all of the interesting posts, but wished to comment as an American farmer who has used GM crops for years. First of all, it's true that corporations have too much control over farmers since chemical companies have purchased seed companies and are starting to dictate what we can purchase by what they make available. However, that's not a question of safety but of the marketplace. Some have said that GM crops don't increase yields or diminish chemical use. I beg to differ. They do both. We just went through a bad drought this year and had poorer than normal yields. It is generally agreed that ten years ago without the new genetics we would have had nothing. My chemical use has decreased substantially through the use of GM crops. I don't have to use dangerous insecticides that require great care to apply. As an aside, these insecticides are the synthetic version of the very chemicals used by organic farmers. It's also true that over time pests will/may become resistant. This is because of poor farming practices however, and doesn't have to be the case. In the U.S. we are required to plant refuge acres for our BT and RW corn to prevent this from happening. It's the crops that resist glyphosate herbicides where we see the greatest problems. You see, this herbicide is much cheaper than others and much safer to apply, so farmers want to use it on all their crops. whenever you use one product at the exclusion of all others you will get resistance. Another writer was correct when he said there is no sterile gene. That was shot down a few years ago because of the public outcry. There are those that say we shouldn't be using GM crops because we don't know the long term effects. If we take this argument to it's logical conclusion we won't try anything....because we don't know it's long term effects. Because we're not using it. Yes, we must be careful but let's also be sensible. An interesting article, that is refreshing in it's candor. I haven’t been able to read all of the interesting posts, but wished to comment as an American farmer who has used GM crops for years.
First of all, it’s true that corporations have too much control over farmers since chemical companies have purchased seed companies and are starting to dictate what we can purchase by what they make available. However, that’s not a question of safety but of the marketplace.
Some have said that GM crops don’t increase yields or diminish chemical use. I beg to differ. They do both. We just went through a bad drought this year and had poorer than normal yields. It is generally agreed that ten years ago without the new genetics we would have had nothing. My chemical use has decreased substantially through the use of GM crops. I don’t have to use dangerous insecticides that require great care to apply. As an aside, these insecticides are the synthetic version of the very chemicals used by organic farmers.
It’s also true that over time pests will/may become resistant. This is because of poor farming practices however, and doesn’t have to be the case. In the U.S. we are required to plant refuge acres for our BT and RW corn to prevent this from happening. It’s the crops that resist glyphosate herbicides where we see the greatest problems. You see, this herbicide is much cheaper than others and much safer to apply, so farmers want to use it on all their crops. whenever you use one product at the exclusion of all others you will get resistance.
Another writer was correct when he said there is no sterile gene. That was shot down a few years ago because of the public outcry.
There are those that say we shouldn’t be using GM crops because we don’t know the long term effects. If we take this argument to it’s logical conclusion we won’t try anything….because we don’t know it’s long term effects. Because we’re not using it. Yes, we must be careful but let’s also be sensible.
An interesting article, that is refreshing in it’s candor.

]]> By: Briton Walker http://blog.prospectblogs.com/2007/10/24/prospect%e2%80%99s-new-issue%e2%80%94the-real-gm-food-scandal/#comment-3145 Briton Walker Sat, 08 Dec 2007 10:25:21 +0000 http://blog.prospectblogs.com/2007/10/24/prospect%e2%80%99s-new-issue%e2%80%94the-real-gm-food-scandal/#comment-3145 Excellent article. One small correction. The much publicised rejection by Zambia of US GM maize is not the whole story. Zambia did reject the maize for several reasons, the major being that in spite of FAO, OXFAM, USAID BBC etc stating there was a 200,000 tons shortfall, in fact there was a surplus coming and indeed Zambia did export about 100,000 tons that year. Though an irrational dislike of GMOs does hold sway in Zambia, partly fuelled by advice from the EU, this was not a relevant factor at that time. More importantly perhaps, and this was reported by the then US Ambassador to Washington, this was partly due to the strong anti US feeling in most of Africa following Iraq etc. This case does show how it is often hard to get to the real truth when spin merchants have undue influence on the media, sadly even on the BBC. including sadly Excellent article. One small correction. The much publicised rejection by Zambia of US GM maize is not the whole story. Zambia did reject the maize for several reasons, the major being that in spite of FAO, OXFAM, USAID BBC etc stating there was a 200,000 tons shortfall, in fact there was a surplus coming and indeed Zambia did export about 100,000 tons that year. Though an irrational dislike of GMOs does hold sway in Zambia, partly fuelled by advice from the EU, this was not a relevant factor at that time. More importantly perhaps, and this was reported by the then US Ambassador to Washington, this was partly due to the strong anti US feeling in most of Africa following Iraq etc.
This case does show how it is often hard to get to the real truth when spin merchants have undue influence on the media, sadly even on the BBC. including sadly

]]> By: Tim Roberts http://blog.prospectblogs.com/2007/10/24/prospect%e2%80%99s-new-issue%e2%80%94the-real-gm-food-scandal/#comment-3086 Tim Roberts Thu, 06 Dec 2007 11:57:26 +0000 http://blog.prospectblogs.com/2007/10/24/prospect%e2%80%99s-new-issue%e2%80%94the-real-gm-food-scandal/#comment-3086 Since reading his letter in the August 'Prospect' I no longer have any interest in what AC Grayling thinks about anything - my loss, no doubt. Let's have reasons rather than authorities. Let's base our views on facts, not myths. The story about sterile corn in this month's 'Prospect' is a myth. 'Terminator' is not on the market anywhere yet. The campaign against it has been so successful that it may not ever be. The letter-writer (like some of those above) appears to think that all GM seed on the market is sterile. None is. Since reading his letter in the August ‘Prospect’ I no longer have any interest in what AC Grayling thinks about anything - my loss, no doubt.

Let’s have reasons rather than authorities. Let’s base our views on facts, not myths. The story about sterile corn in this month’s ‘Prospect’ is a myth. ‘Terminator’ is not on the market anywhere yet. The campaign against it has been so successful that it may not ever be. The letter-writer (like some of those above) appears to think that all GM seed on the market is sterile. None is.

]]> By: David Llewellyn Foster http://blog.prospectblogs.com/2007/10/24/prospect%e2%80%99s-new-issue%e2%80%94the-real-gm-food-scandal/#comment-3059 David Llewellyn Foster Mon, 03 Dec 2007 21:53:10 +0000 http://blog.prospectblogs.com/2007/10/24/prospect%e2%80%99s-new-issue%e2%80%94the-real-gm-food-scandal/#comment-3059 (PS Dear St Trinians - that's a compliment no sane man could ignore...I appreciate your wicked sense of humour.) I can't help wondering what A.C. Grayling thinks about all this GM business. Also, Steve Borodin mentions fears fears about "health, contamination, biodiversity and a few other specifics..." being allayed by some facts. What facts would those be? Certainly not the same facts that many of us have recognised as plausible, probable and almost certainly true according to the highly informed opinions of reputable scientists like Mae-Wan Ho. It is indeed another fact that the emotional response often over-rides the capacity for rational reflection, but it may also be evidence of an instinctive reflex, not just a cultural prejudice. After all, we are getting pretty close to the genetic bone here. I would invite Mr Borodin to consult the works of both Dr Ho and Vandana Shiva, before he accepts any "facts" about the impeccable "science" of genetic modification at face value. Also he could have a look at Jonathan Porritt's and Colin Tudge's first draft articles. (PS Dear St Trinians - that’s a compliment no sane man could ignore…I appreciate your wicked sense of humour.)
I can’t help wondering what A.C. Grayling thinks about all this GM business. Also, Steve Borodin mentions fears fears about “health, contamination, biodiversity and a few other specifics…” being allayed by some facts. What facts would those be? Certainly not the same facts that many of us have recognised as plausible, probable and almost certainly true according to the highly informed opinions of reputable scientists like Mae-Wan Ho. It is indeed another fact that the emotional response often over-rides the capacity for rational reflection, but it may also be evidence of an instinctive reflex, not just a cultural prejudice. After all, we are getting pretty close to the genetic bone here. I would invite Mr Borodin to consult the works of both Dr Ho and Vandana Shiva, before he accepts any “facts” about the impeccable “science” of genetic modification at face value. Also he could have a look at Jonathan Porritt’s and Colin Tudge’s first draft articles.

]]>