RE: The Minister of Agriculture & Agri-Food

[Omni]

47 minutes ago, blueblood said:

So every technological advancement in anything needs to be labeled.  Sounds costly...

How much can it cost to add 3 letters to a label?

[?Impact]

1 hour ago, blueblood said:

So every technological advancement in anything needs to be labeled.  Sounds costly...

No exactly the opposite. The money is being spent by Monsanto to obfuscate what is included. Get rid of that and the cost goes down.

 

1 hour ago, TimG said:

All food we use has modified DNA. Sometimes through selective breeding/cross breeding, sometimes through mutagenesis and sometimes through direct manipulation. 

Direct manipulation of DNA is a very specific modification, not at all comparable to any of the others. As I stated many times already I would like to see better labeling all around, but we don't have detailed history for the thousands of years that humans have been farming. We do however have the details for genetic modification, it is the companies themselves that insist on that so they can fill their pocketbook. Why are they trying to hide what they already know? 

[blueblood]

1 hour ago, Omni said:

How much can it cost to add 3 letters to a label?

More than without one.

[Omni]

1 minute ago, blueblood said:

More than without one.

Yeah I suppose, how much more?

[drummindiver]

 

 

5 hours ago, Omni said:

I like being able to pick up a product and read the label. It helps me make decisions as to what I'm planning to put in my body. A GMO label would be just as helpful as say, the salt content etc. 

It would not. Salt is detrimental to your health.

5 hours ago, Omni said:

There is evidence that GMO's have negative impacts not only to the body, but also to the rest of agriculture through super bugs and super weeds, and also to the environment. 

Nope, nope and nope. If you have and facts that shown this I can refute them.

 

4 hours ago, TimG said:

Disclosing salt content means you are disclosing the chemical properties of the food. This is necessary. Chemically there is no difference between a GMO tomato and a non-GMO tomato. There is no science based rational decision you could make about your health based on a catch-all GMO label.

nm

4 hours ago, ?Impact said:

Deal with irrational fears by education, not obfuscation. The expensive campaign by the GMO companies to hide what they are doing is a larger contributor to fear than anything. With proper and practical labeling we are not pandering to irrational fears, we are providing facts upon which rational decisions can be based. The irrational fear is that putting the proper and practical label on the food item is somehow going to cause civilization to crumble before us, lets not pander to that irrational fear.

You are buying into social media memes. 

 

4 hours ago, Omni said:

There are DNA differences or it wouldn't be a GMO. And a lot of the pro GMO research is funded by non other than Monsanto. I like the idea of being able to increase the worlds food supply but let's make sure we are doing it safely.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-truth-about-genetically-modified-food/

oye vei....but Monsanto. They are a seed and herbicide manufacturer. 

4 hours ago, ?Impact said:

The GMO strains are well known, right up to the point companies like Monsanto collect their tax. Then they spend millions of dollars more to hide the fact. Why are they costing us more money to hide what they are doing?

This makes no sense and I bet you don't have a cite.i

 

 

3 hours ago, blueblood said:

The organic industry labels their foods as such and charge a premium for being chemical and gmo free.  

The gmos aren't being pushed through covertly, there is literature from the seed companies talking about the strains traits and performance - higher yields, chemical resistance, earlier maturity, frost/drought tolerance.  Think of it this way, if a company made a bad strain which harmed someone they would be on the hook for billions of dollars resulting in the shareholders pulling the plug on the company.

Organics use chemicals more dangerous than Roundup

2 hours ago, ?Impact said:

 

Look at how food is marketed, is the chemical makeup the most important factor? No, it is way, way, way, way, way down on the list. Things like taste, texture, colour, blemish free, etc. rank much higher. Why does Monsanto want to hide what they are doing from the consumer? They know exactly what food is modified because they collect their tax from it, but then they spend millions and millions to hide it from the consumer. This is not credible behaviour.

Because non science is prevalent and ppl buy into Food Babe etal.Should be a level playing field.

Edited December 29, 2016 by drummindiver

[Omni]

Bottom line is I think my right to be informed as to what I'm eating trumps Monsanto's right to hide that from me. 

[blueblood]

19 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

No exactly the opposite. The money is being spent by Monsanto to obfuscate what is included. Get rid of that and the cost goes down.

 

Direct manipulation of DNA is a very specific modification, not at all comparable to any of the others. As I stated many times already I would like to see better labeling all around, but we don't have detailed history for the thousands of years that humans have been farming. We do however have the details for genetic modification, it is the companies themselves that insist on that so they can fill their pocketbook. Why are they trying to hide what they already know? 

And big green is spending scores of money pushing their agenda.

the companies arent trying to hide anything.  They are trying to maintain their sales to keep the shareholders which includes retirees happy.  If you made a product which is baselessly attacked in the media and you are forced at gunpoint to spend extra money putting a label on it to show consumers who have been eating up propaganda about same product you would not want to stick a label on it either.

[drummindiver]

1 hour ago, Omni said:

How much can it cost to add 3 letters to a label?

The uninformed would run squealing to the higher priced more deadly and toxic oganic goods. Be my guest with that.

[Omni]

4 minutes ago, drummindiver said:

It would not. Salt is detrimental to your health.

We have concluded that about salt, not yet GMO's. Put the label on so I can choose. A simple solution that even simple minds should be able to understand.

[Omni]

1 minute ago, drummindiver said:

The uninformed would run squealing to the higher priced more deadly and toxic oganic goods. Be my guest with that.

Take a look at the costs added to your bill by GMO's. It might make you squeal. Well, unless you hold shares in Monsanto.

[blueblood]

Just now, Omni said:

We have concluded that about salt, not yet GMO's. Put the label on so I can choose. A simple solution that even simple minds should be able to understand.

The organics put their own label on and you pay a premium.  You already can choose.  You can also choose to buy some hydroponics and have a steady supply if it's that bad or land.

[?Impact]

5 minutes ago, blueblood said:

the companies arent trying to hide anything.  They are trying to maintain their sales to keep the shareholders which includes retirees happy. 

Sorry, but being an informed consumer trumps their profits. They are exactly trying to hide, and that is unacceptable. They can base their sales on truth, and not trying to push their product down my throat without my knowledge.

[drummindiver]

2 minutes ago, Omni said:

We have concluded that about salt, not yet GMO's. Put the label on so I can choose. A simple solution that even simple minds should be able to understand.

Many many years of testing has been done. GMO'S are safe.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2014/09/17/the-debate-about-gmo-safety-is-over-thanks-to-a-new-trillion-meal-study/#7b91bd5fca93

[Omni]

1 minute ago, blueblood said:

The organics put their own label on and you pay a premium.  You already can choose.  You can also choose to buy some hydroponics and have a steady supply if it's that bad or land.

Put labels on everything so I can choose. I don't think that's a lot to ask since labels are already required here.

[blueblood]

3 minutes ago, Omni said:

Take a look at the costs added to your bill by GMO's. It might make you squeal. Well, unless you hold shares in Monsanto.

And the cost of organics is more.  Don't want gmos you have to pay to play

[blueblood]

2 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

Sorry, but being an informed consumer trumps their profits. They are exactly trying to hide, and that is unacceptable. They can base their sales on truth, and not trying to push their product down my throat without my knowledge.

There already is labels. You can go to the organic aisle or store and inform yourself.  

The option already exists.  

[drummindiver]

5 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

Sorry, but being an informed consumer trumps their profits. They are exactly trying to hide, and that is unacceptable. They can base their sales on truth, and not trying to push their product down my throat without my knowledge.

You have no facts. Most gmos are used for cattle feed. Farmers stay viable because of these seeds.

[Omni]

1 minute ago, blueblood said:

And the cost of organics is more.  Don't want gmos you have to pay to play

Who said I want organics. That's a bit of a scam so I don't usually buy them, but I do trust them when I do. Not so sure about GMO's. So just give me the same old carrots and lettuce I have lived on for years and I'll make my salad and not have to worry about Monsanto's impact, or contribute to their bottom line.  

[blueblood]

4 minutes ago, Omni said:

Put labels on everything so I can choose. I don't think that's a lot to ask since labels are already required here.

The organics do.  You can make a choice guaranteed organic or conventional ag.  Regulations make things more expensive than they need to be

[Omni]

Just now, drummindiver said:

You have no facts. Most gmos are used for cattle feed. Farmers stay viable because of these seeds.

Farmers go out of business because they can't get seeds unless they pay Monsanto.

[drummindiver]

1 minute ago, Omni said:

Who said I want organics. That's a bit of a scam so I don't usually buy them, but I do trust them when I do. Not so sure about GMO's. So just give me the same old carrots and lettuce I have lived on for years and I'll make my salad and not have to worry about Monsanto's impact, or contribute to their bottom line.  

Many deaths and illness to organic food. Even more to conventional.  Zero to gmos but facts. ....

[Omni]

Just now, drummindiver said:

Many deaths and illness to organic food. Even more to conventional.  Zero to gmos but facts. ....

Yeah, show us those "facts".

[The_Squid]

16 minutes ago, blueblood said:

And big green is spending scores of money pushing their agenda.

Who is this "big green" and how much do they spend compared to, say, Monsanto?

[blueblood]

1 minute ago, Omni said:

Who said I want organics. That's a bit of a scam so I don't usually buy them, but I do trust them when I do. Not so sure about GMO's. So just give me the same old carrots and lettuce I have lived on for years and I'll make my salad and not have to worry about Monsanto's impact, or contribute to their bottom line.  

And that's what farmers markets are for.  It's an example of the free market at work.  Some people want cheap mass produced food, some people want all natural food from old McDonald, and some people want certified organic and they can already make that choice.  It's redundant to label gmos when they have been consistently proven safe.  At the same time if people want to freely go to the farmers market and get their organic gmo free stuff they can fill their boots.

[blueblood]

2 minutes ago, Omni said:

Farmers go out of business because they can't get seeds unless they pay Monsanto.

And Monsanto has to make sales. There is no guns to farmers heads to buy from Monsanto.  Usually they will price their seeds at the cost of weed control of non genetically modified seeds.  You want easy weed control and high yields you have to pay to play.  Monsanto wants farmers to make money so they will buy their products.  Farmers go broke because of poor management