Greenpeace's Crime Against Humanity

[Mighty AC]

I don't think we know that Golden Rice is safe yet, but I'm in favour of continued testing.

[Boges]

I don't think we know that Golden Rice is safe yet, but I'm in favour of continued testing.

You could say that with all GMO's. We just don't know right? In 30 years we could all have arms growing out of our heads!

It's like the Jude Law character in Contagion who made money trying to make people use his cure, and when there was a vaccine he said this was just brought about to enrich the drug companies.

Of course there's no real examples of these GMO's causing real harm is there? What kind of side-effect would you expect from eating rice?

Isn't Green Peaces opposition to this more to how it's grown. Not being organic and such.

Edited November 21, 2013 by Boges

[Mighty AC]

My general concerns are more environmental than health related. Sure it would be a tragedy if we introduced something like a nut allergy into say a tomato and unaware consumers died. However, in my opinion, it would be a much bigger disaster if a modified crop became an invasive species as genes flow into natural species creating unintended ecological problems.

[carepov]

My general concerns are more environmental than health related. Sure it would be a tragedy if we introduced something like a nut allergy into say a tomato and unaware consumers died. However, in my opinion, it would be a much bigger disaster if a modified crop became an invasive species as genes flow into natural species creating unintended ecological problems.

GMO crops are tested for allergens and environmental concerns. Have any significant problems come up in the last 30 years?

Doesn't "natural" cross breeding of plants pose the same risks of becoming "invasive species"? We have been doing this (without testing) for generations.

WRT to Golden Rice, just imagine if Beta-carotene escaped into the wild and somehow got into carrot or broccoli crops, oh the horror!

The scientific concensus is that Golden Rice is safe.

[carepov]

Via the Duck Dynasty thead I discovered "The Cult of Dusty" (thanks WWWTT). He some great rants, including this one about GMO's and Monsanto:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulq0NW1sTcI

[carepov]

Fact: nothing you said supports your mega-hyperbolic claims of GP committing a "crime against humanity"... that GP has/is blocking the development of Golden Rice. Again, "A principled stand against GMO (at large), while offering alternatives to Golden Rice, does not meet the measure of your repeated (and unsubstantiated) claims of a "crime against humanity"... that GP has/is blocking the development of Golden Rice".

waldo, if you want we should continue here,

here is my latest post to you:

You're right, I've given my opinion and - at this time - I have nothing further to add. I am genuinely interested in your opinions about Golden Rice, for example:

Do you agree with the IRRI?

Do you agree with HKI?

If it were up to you, would you continue to develop Golden Rice and conduct further trials or would you cancel the entire Golden Rice project?

Edited February 14, 2014 by carepov

[waldo]

waldo, if you want we should continue here,

here is my latest post to you:

my previous comments stand. I suggest you come back when the IRRI updates its own official position relative to ongoing/continued trials... you know, the actual IRRI position and not the selective comment you pulled from a blog reference.

[GostHacked]

My general concerns are more environmental than health related. Sure it would be a tragedy if we introduced something like a nut allergy into say a tomato and unaware consumers died. However, in my opinion, it would be a much bigger disaster if a modified crop became an invasive species as genes flow into natural species creating unintended ecological problems.

That has already happened with a certain GMO wheat strain Monsanto was testing over a decade ago. They cancelled the trials, but are still finding the strain growing in fields close to the original test site.

http://rt.com/usa/gmo-wheat-oregon-mystery-275/

After authorities found GMO wheat growing on the field of an Oregon farmer, they were hoping to quickly trace the origin of the crop. Three months later, though, investigators are even more puzzled than before.

A farmer in Oregon discovered in May that a GMO wheat crop manufactured by biotech company Monsanto and discontinued years earlier had mysteriously sprouted in his field. But after an array of testing was waged from the United State Department of Agriculture and others, it’s still uncertain months later where the crop came from.

A Monsanto-made GMO wheat strain was tested on the field between 1998 and 2005 before the St. Louis, Missouri-based agro-giant withdrew its application from the USDA’s regulatory approval process. By that point, though, it had spent seven years planting a particular strain of wheat that could withstand exposure to Monsanto’s own “Roundup” pesticide. When an Oregon farmer realized two months ago that some plants in his wheat field were surviving despite dousing them with Roundup, he became suspicious. Soon after the USDA did too, even launching a federal investigation.

[carepov]

my previous comments stand. I suggest you come back when the IRRI updates its own official position relative to ongoing/continued trials... you know, the actual IRRI position and not the selective comment you pulled from a blog reference.

Here is the actual IRRI position on GM rice:

http://irri.org/news/hot-topics/genetically-modified-gm-rice

Is there anything that you disagree with?

[waldo]

is there anything in particular you're addressing within your linked reference... other than that part of the generic, high-level statement/position reference speaking to an IRRI position that GM and GM rice, "have the potential to safely deliver unique benefits to rice farmers and consumers that cannot be achieved through other breeding methods"? Pretty much along the lines of some of your earlier posts where I point out to you that your grandstanding and hyperbole rely's upon such definite and absolute words as "potential"...

clearly, you're aware of my position on your ridiculous hyperbole and labeling of GP. Clearly, you're obviously aware of my statements within this thread concerning Golden Rice and assorted trials. Equally, in response to your prior questioning, I've spoken to my current views on GM; and, of course, I've already advised you there are specific earlier MLW threads dedicated to GM. Perhaps you should resurrect one of those if you would like to speak to GM at large... you might get a few bites there from anyone interested.

[carepov]

Clearly, you're obviously aware of my statements within this thread concerning Golden Rice and assorted trials.

No I am not aware of your position on Goldern Rice and that's why I was asking: "If it were up to you, would you continue to develop Golden Rice and conduct further trials or would you cancel the entire Golden Rice project?"

[waldo]

I can't be heard any clearer than through the sound rebuttals I've provided to your gross hyperbole and non-factual statements/claims. I've also suggested you get back to me when the IRRI actually updates its current position statement, presumably tied to some eventuality of a definitive IRRI interpretation of trial success... which, of course, goes beyond the scientific trial proper to also include controlled community study and the signoff of respective national regulators (where trials are held).

[carepov]

Do you support the continuation of such studies and trials?

[waldo]

Do you support the continuation of such studies and trials?

why do you care?

[carepov]

why do you care?

"The number of pre-school age children who suffer from clinical Vitamin A deficiency is 5.2 million"

http://www.unicef.org/factoftheweek/index_54116.html

[waldo]

why do you care?

no - although it's been expressed to you on several levels, direct and indirect, why do you care what my personal view on the continuation of Golden Rice studies/trials? I've clearly not stated any objection to trials... suggesting to you to come back when actual trial success is realized, when the IRRI updates its current position, when controlled community study is accomplished (successfully), when national regulators in field trial countries sign-off, etc.,... suggesting all that should give you an obvious indication that I have no objections to trials continuing.

of course, I could play your same game (without the shock graphic attachment, one you've played now several times). How about I ask you if you're in favour of some/any of the legitimate alternate strategies/solutions proposed by Greenpeace? Correct my recall if inaccurate... when those alternate Greenpeace strategies/solutions have been referenced in this thread, I don't recall you ever commenting on them. Why is that?

[bleeding heart]

I guess we don't negotiate with "terrorists".

Seriously, I find the "crime against humanity" theme to be, at best, profoundly overstated....coming from a poster who has opined that I "blame the West too much"...for actual, proven, uncontroversially-existing "crimes against humanity."

So I'm a bit flummoxed by the whole discussion, to be honest.

[carepov]

I have no objections to trials continuing.

Then your position is contrary to that of Greenpeace - right?

of course, I could play your same game (without the shock graphic attachment, one you've played now several times). How about I ask you if you're in favour of some/any of the legitimate alternate strategies/solutions proposed by Greenpeace? Correct my recall if inaccurate... when those alternate Greenpeace strategies/solutions have been referenced in this thread, I don't recall you ever commenting on them. Why is that?

I am in favour of the othe solutions propsed by GP. They are not mutually exclusive to the development of Golden Rice and are therefore not "alternative" but rather complementary solutions. GP would have more credibility if if was actually implementing some of their solutions and not just impeding the development of Golden Rice.

[waldo]

Then your position is contrary to that of Greenpeace - right?

I am in favour of the othe solutions propsed by GP. They are not mutually exclusive to the development of Golden Rice and are therefore not "alternative" but rather complementary solutions. GP would have more credibility if if was actually implementing some of their solutions and not just impeding the development of Golden Rice.

was this some kind of 'gotcha' you were so pressing for? You're so over-the-top with your inflammatory rhetoric, your parroting of Patrick Moore... you've been challenged several times now to support your claim (as parroted) that Greenpeace is "impeding" Golden Rice. Again, holding a principled position against GMO does not give you the basis for your rhetoric, for your false claims concerning progress/trial success, etc.. Certainly not when viable alternatives have been presented.

[carepov]

I guess we don't negotiate with "terrorists".

Seriously, I find the "crime against humanity" theme to be, at best, profoundly overstated....coming from a poster who has opined that I "blame the West too much"...for actual, proven, uncontroversially-existing "crimes against humanity."

So I'm a bit flummoxed by the whole discussion, to be honest.

"And Greenpeace has openly admitted, in its own reports, that it has pushed these worries: “In the Philippines, we supported and highlighted the community rejection of golden rice in the Mindanao area. We will continue our campaign to halt release of GE rice to the environment, and to support public resistance to GE foods.”"...

"Using an ever-changing but incorrect array of allegations against Golden Rice, opponents have managed to delay the deployment of this product for more than a decade. During this time, about 8 million kids have died from vitamin A deficiency.

Trashing the field trials and potentially postponing Golden Rice could add to the death tally. It is now appropriate to ask: Are the anti-GM activists not at least partially responsible for these millions of dead children?"

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/08/29/bjorn-lomborg-trashing-rice-killing-children/

"For the purpose of this Statute, "crime against humanity" means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack:

(k) Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health."

We believe that Greenpeace's actions during the past 14 years to prevent Golden Rice from being produced and reaching the millions of people who now suffer needlessly from vitamin A deficiency constitute a crime against humanity as defined by the Rome Statute.

There is no doubt that Greenpeace and its allies are largely if not entirely responsible for the opposition to Golden Rice that has effectively blocked its cultivation and delivery to the millions of people who suffer from vitamin A deficiency.

There is no doubt, given the results of clinical trials with animals, adult humans and children that Golden Rice is effective in delivering beta-carotene, the precursor to vitamin A, into human body at levels that will eliminate vitamin A deficiency.

There is no doubt that the continued lack of access to Golden Rice is resulting in "great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental and physical health" and that Greenpeace's actions are "intentional", that their campaign is "a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack."

http://www.allowgoldenricenow.org/crimes-against-humanity

[Michael Hardner]

Seriously, I find the "crime against humanity" theme to be, at best, profoundly overstated....

I feel this way about almost any act of conscience, even those most likely to bring harm - such as refusal of blood transfusions for children. It's obviously a conflicted position for any individual making what they see is a moral choice in the face of potential harm. The same goes for papal pronouncements on birth control and so on.

If we don't have our conscience then what do we have ?

[waldo]

"And Greenpeace has openly admitted, in its own reports, that it has pushed these worries: “In the Philippines, we supported and highlighted the community rejection of golden rice in the Mindanao area. We will continue our campaign to halt release of GE rice to the environment, and to support public resistance to GE foods.”"...

you've been around here long enough to know how to use quote tags... as it turns out, your entire post is nothing but quotes from your linked references; i.e., you've added nothing of your own thought/words to your post... a board rule violation.

in any case, it's not surprising your first links author has conveniently tailored the quote... you should look up that author for past censures he's received from scientific bodies. He's a well known AGW/CC fake skeptic/concern troll. We covered this off previously in this thread; you're simply recycling. You were made aware that Greenpeace disavowed any knowledge, support for, or participation in the vandalism of those fields. The official statement from Greenpeace was quoted previously in this thread; one that came down hard against the vandalism.

as follows, the full quote to counter yours above. The complete quote, not the one your linked author conveniently tailored; I've bold-highlighted a/the most pertinent part that was purposely left out:

In the Philippines, we supported and highlighted the community rejection of golden rice in the Mindanao area. We will continue our campaign to halt release of GE rice to the environment, and to support public resistance to GE foods, by promoting existing, more effective and more sustainable solutions for tackling vitamin A deficiency.

nothing within the above (complete) quote is inconsistent with anything previously presented or discussed in this thread.

[bleeding heart]

Thanks for the source-catch, Waldo.

If we're going to use Pat Robertson as the "expert" on social issues, Camille Paglia for climate change, or Ezra Levant for, well, sane reality.....none of these discussions will go anywhere.

[carepov]

in any case, it's not surprising your first links author has conveniently tailored the quote... you should look up that author for past censures he's received from scientific bodies. He's a well known AGW/CC fake skeptic/concern troll.

Thanks for the source-catch, Waldo.

If we're going to use Pat Robertson as the "expert" on social issues, Camille Paglia for climate change, or Ezra Levant for, well, sane reality.....none of these discussions will go anywhere.

Bjørn Lomborg is a good source. Yes, he was censured by the DCSD but:

"On 13 February 2003, Lomborg filed a complaint against the DCSD's decision, with the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MSTI), which has oversight over the DCSD. On 17 December 2003, the Ministry annulled the decision made by DCSD."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bj%C3%B8rn_Lomborg

[carepov]

In the Philippines, we supported and highlighted the community rejection of golden rice in the Mindanao area. We will continue our campaign to halt release of GE rice to the environment, and to support public resistance to GE foods, by promoting existing, more effective and more sustainable solutions for tackling vitamin A deficiency.

IMO, the bolded text is an admission of guilt by GP.

In adddion to Golden Rice, I support other effective and sustainable solutions for tackling vitamin A deficiency. Just like the HKI and IRRI.