Wake up Canadians

[Ender Miggit]

"The Monsanto Protection Act, essentially both written by and benefiting Monsanto Corporation, has been signed into law by United States President Barack Obama. The infamous Monsanto Corporation will benefit greatly and directly from the bill, as it essentially gives companies that deal with genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and genetically engineered (GE) seeds immunity to the federal courts, among other things.

The bill states that even if future research shows that GMOs or GE seeds cause significant health problems, cancer, etc, anything, that the federal courts no longer have any power to stop their spread, use, or sales."

This, is an outrage, is this what Canada will do next? Or will our so called 'precious' government actually think about it's citizens before itself... Only time will tell. Canada itself, needs to realize that fifteen country's have already banned Monsanto and GMOs, isn't it time we do the same?

Edited May 29, 2013 by Ender Miggit

[bush_cheney2004]

Great news, but probably does not apply in Canada (yet).

[Ender Miggit]

Great news, but probably does not apply in Canada (yet).

Sorry I accidently posted, I just finished editing.

[bush_cheney2004]

The EU has also banned Canada sealing products, even more of an "outrage". Sovereignty says that the Americans can treat GMOs as they please, and it is up to Canada decide risks and benefits in a very competitive market. GMOs are here to stay either way.

[carepov]

"The Monsanto Protection Act, essentially both written by and benefiting Monsanto Corporation, has been signed into law by United States President Barack Obama. The infamous Monsanto Corporation will benefit greatly and directly from the bill, as it essentially gives companies that deal with genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and genetically engineered (GE) seeds immunity to the federal courts, among other things.

The bill states that even if future research shows that GMOs or GE seeds cause significant health problems, cancer, etc, anything, that the federal courts no longer have any power to stop their spread, use, or sales."

This, is an outrage, is this what Canada will do next? Or will our so called 'precious' government actually think about it's citizens before itself... Only time will tell. Canada itself, needs to realize that fifteen country's have already banned Monsanto and GMOs, isn't it time we do the same?

There are at least two sides to every story - here is another side:

http://southwestfarmpress.com/government/farmers-assurance-provision-protects-biotech-crops

[MatthieuJGagne]

We are obviously way behind on too many fronts. The EU refuses to buy our dirty oil, and now we recognize that we are producing dangerous crops... Just combine the two projects and feed the oil to the plants and then ship all the dirty oil foods to china. .. We are so ass backwards it hurts.

IM glad that im making steps to further become less dependant from this shitty gov. and just going to the source. Growing my own food, and begining to generate my own electricity. Why wait for them to come up with bad decisions when i can make my own at home lol

[Moonbox]

I like it when my vegetables and fruits are not only bigger and juicier, but stay fresh longer and cost less. Mmmmm!

[segnosaur]

As a general guideline... when the title of a thread contains the phrase "wake up", you can probably guess that its going to largely consist of anti-science and/or conspiracy nonsense.

"The Monsanto Protection Act, essentially both written by...

Actually it was written by elected representativies.

...and benefiting Monsanto Corporation...

Actually, while it may have some benefit to Monsanto and other producers of GM technologies, the ones that actually receive the most benefit are the farmers. You know, the ones that grow the food.

as it essentially gives companies that deal with genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and genetically engineered (GE) seeds immunity to the federal courts, among other things.

Actually, what it does is protect farmers from frivilous lawsuits.

Basically, once a product has been approved by the FDA, farmers should feel confident that yes, indeed the product is acceptable to use. The link provided by carepov shows why such protection is needed...

- The government, upon testing, found that GM sugarbeets were safe and farmers could plant them

- Years later, a lawsuit was launched. It involved no evidence showing problems with the product, but it allowed a judge to order widespread destruction of the sugarbeet crops

That hurt farmers.

The law is not a blanket protection for Monsanto or any other organization. It does not prevent the government from revoking approval of GM products if actual evidence of harm is found, nor does it allow Monsanto to sell seeds or farmers to grow crops for any product that has actually been found dangerous by the FDA.

This, is an outrage, is this what Canada will do next? Or will our so called 'precious' government actually think about it's citizens before itself...

If its "thinking about its citizens" then it might actually follow through with similar legislation.

There is no hard evidence that any GMO crop that's been approved and is in production causes any harm, either to consumers or to the environment. GMOs can help us grow more food, and protect the environment by increasing crop yields without plowing under more land, and by using less pesticides.

Only time will tell. Canada itself, needs to realize that fifteen country's have already banned Monsanto and GMOs, isn't it time we do the same?

Uhhh... no. The fact that other countries make brain-damaged decisions doesn't mean that we should follow suit.

[Ender Miggit]

No, actually there have been multiple cases of people being harmed by GMOs and Monsanto products.

[Guest]

I just read today about the ingestion of pesticides being implicated in Parkinson's, and maybe other conditions. I read on the other thread that the pesticides in round up (do we have a trademark icon? I don't want Monsanto to sue me) ready produce is actually a part of the crop, and the consumer is unable to wash it off.

Sounds a bit dodgy to me.

[bush_cheney2004]

Here is an example of a Roundup (Glyphosate) trademark from wiki:

[eyeball]

I like it when my vegetables and fruits are not only bigger and juicier, but stay fresh longer and cost less. Mmmmm!

I've long since given up associating size and freshness with juiciness and especially flavour. The strawberries I grow are much smaller and tastier than the brochure strawberries on sale at the local grocery which are huge, virtually flavourless and don't get any better with age.

I can taste my berries already and they're still just blooming.

[Guest]

I've long since given up associating size and freshness with juiciness and especially flavour. The strawberries I grow are much smaller and tastier than the brochure strawberries on sale at the local grocery which are huge, virtually flavourless and don't get any better with age.

I can taste my berries already and they're still just blooming.

Did you ever plant Garlic? The difference between your own and store bought is huge.

[segnosaur]

No, actually there have been multiple cases of people being harmed by GMOs and Monsanto products.

Errr... not really.

Perhaps you can provide some. I've certainly never seen any. Pretty much any claims of harm have been based on either:

- Products that hadn't been released yet (i.e. problems were caught in the testing phase)

- The result of shoddy science

- Based on anecdotes.

[segnosaur]

I just read today about the ingestion of pesticides being implicated in Parkinson's, and maybe other conditions. I read on the other thread that the pesticides in round up (do we have a trademark icon? I don't want Monsanto to sue me) ready produce is actually a part of the crop, and the consumer is unable to wash it off.

Sounds a bit dodgy to me.

The fact is, every farmer uses pesticides of some type. Even so-called "organic" farmers use pesticides (although what they use is considered "natural", but it doesn't work as well so they have to use more of them.) The alternative to using pesticides is to either see farmers loose more crops to disease or insects (which would greatly limit our food supply), and/or see more cases of food poisoning since many of the problems that pesticides handle can also affect health.

The use of GM foods would reduce this problem. Yes, some pesticides would still be needed, but since at least some of the modifications involve protecting against pests, less pesticides would be needed. That means fewer pesticides in the food you eat overall, as well as less damage to the environment (e.g. beneficial insects like bees killed by use of pesticides directed at insects like the European Corn Borer.)

Oh, and the link between Parkinsons and pesticides? A couple of things need to be kept in mind:

- At this point the research results seem to be referring to farm workers who would be handling the chemicals directly (those simply eating products would have much lower levels of exposure, and in many cases of harmful chemicals, dosage matters.

- The results from the studies didn't necessarily involve RoundUp... for example, they were looking at things like paraquat (an herbicide) and maneb (a fungicide) in some of the studies

I'm not discounting that pesticides can be harmful... just that they must be used responsibly, and the alternative would be far riskier. (And using GMO would actually reduce the risk.)

[AlienB]

"The Monsanto Protection Act, essentially both written by and benefiting Monsanto Corporation, has been signed into law by United States President Barack Obama. The infamous Monsanto Corporation will benefit greatly and directly from the bill, as it essentially gives companies that deal with genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and genetically engineered (GE) seeds immunity to the federal courts, among other things.

The bill states that even if future research shows that GMOs or GE seeds cause significant health problems, cancer, etc, anything, that the federal courts no longer have any power to stop their spread, use, or sales."

This, is an outrage, is this what Canada will do next? Or will our so called 'precious' government actually think about it's citizens before itself... Only time will tell. Canada itself, needs to realize that fifteen country's have already banned Monsanto and GMOs, isn't it time we do the same?

Its BS, laws mean nothing especially those that violate the constitution. The law is invalid, anything which effects the health and safety of humans is criiminal conduct, the directors of that company would be thrown in jail if they knowingly caused physical harm to the public, it is assault and could be worse depending on the severity. We as people have the right to shut them down if the government doesn't because it represents a clear and present danger to our health and safety. Of course the idea of causing serious health effect etc.. you need to weigh the actions but no, that sort of protection isn't legal in Canada, it violates the constitution.

It is section 7 of the charter. right to security of person. If someone is endangering my health and wellbeing I can take recourse, much like if someone is committing an assault against myself I can take action to use as much force as is reasonable to prevent a continuance of that assault. If this means destroying their shipping and manufacturing capacities then it is reasonable to do so if there is no other recourse. Of course communication is a first option. This should be weighed into the threat level, it must be reasonable.

I am guessing though the threat level is much lower than you let on here, in terms of health danger.

Personally I think people should have the right to buy what they would like, of course they should be informed of dangers to their health in the food supply, but it should be their choice much like drinking or smoking. However if there is a potential to damage the environment though contamination of the general environment then they must be held to account if they are aware of the risk. If they knowingly endanger the natural food supply they should be lynched. Much like if they knowingly spread chemical or biological agents that cause life threatening diseases or those that degrade the health and wellbeing of the public they should be strung up.

I'm not aware that is the case though, provide more info regarding the dangers to human health and wellbeing kindly.

The key difference is public disclosure, this is why the tobacco companies were sued. There cannot be an attempt to misrepresent the threats to profit, they must be transparent and open and only cause damage to the informed client, not the general public. I am not joking any company that tries to hide threats to the public to profit should be shut down with serious consideration on capital punishment invoked on the diseased mind that tried to make money off public pain and suffering.

Edited June 6, 2013 by AlienB

[Guest Peeves]

When there is a product that is superior and cost less with a general position that franken foods are no different, I tend to go with the majority.

I don't simply listen to nay sayers.

That's what essentially happened with the vacine scare and look where that has lead.