Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Paying to find non-GE wild corn?
On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 20:16:23 GMT, "Gordon Couger"
wrote: "Moosh:]" wrote in message .. . On 25 Jul 2003 09:48:22 -0700, (Hua Kul) wrote: "Gordon Couger" wrote in message t... "Oz" wrote in message ... Hua Kul writes Another naif who seems to believe that governments and their regulations will save us. It was a British government regulation requiring cattle to be heavily dosed with organophosphate pesticides which may have triggered the BSE outbreak. See Mark Purdy's research. Had organophosphates caused it or fairies dancing ainti clockwise on the dark of a blue moon BSE is still no more than a fart in a hurricane in the problems of world health. Gordon You missed my point, which was that government actions (regarding *anything*, and no matter how well intentioned) can't be relied upon to protect us from much of anything, as you seemed to imply by your vague "testing" post. Elect a proper government, and it is the only thing that will protect you. The public are incapable of knowing the full story, the corporations are doing their job making money for their shareholders. An elected, effective regulator is the only thing left. The USDA does a very good job with food safety. Not as good as the guys in OZ they seem to have it down right. The FDA has a good record as well. Many think that they are too careful. I reckon they do a reasonable job considering. Although there are some who think they are too careful, there are many who think that they are in the pockets of Monsanto, et al. You still haven't addressed my larger point, posted in response to your challenge, that the pharmaceutical industries are intent upon using elements of our food production systems not to improve the food but to contaminate it for the purpose of increasing their profits, Their sole job in life! To do that job they must provide safe product. Well yes, that generally follows. But it is not a foregone conclusion. If shareholders returns are increased by cutting corners where possible, guess what will, and arguably should, happen A recall cuts deeply into those profits and the loss of pubilc turst puts them out of business. But that is the regulator doing its job. So many complain that the regulator is useless, and is taking kickbacks. I know a substantial number of people in the food producion and seed prodution business and every one is trying to make money by making the products that the market wants. That seems to be the logical way to succeed in the long haul. But those who do otherwise should (and usually do) get clobbered by the regulator. They don't risk their business by tying to make a few cents intentionaly adultring their products. Well no, not generally, but there was a large alternative pharmaceutical company here who let bad product through more and more with inadequate regulation which finally shut them down and prosecuted. If they get caugt intentionaly endangering the public the inspection system does not deal with them very kindly. Nope, and a good thing too. Both of us seem to agree that the regulator does a reasonable job in a very tough environment. If you are not pleasing everyone equally, you have it just about right and the demonstrated danger in that being the total contamination of an entire crop globally, as is happening with Monsanto's Starlink GM corn. If you don't like what they do, get your regulator to change its legislation. QED. To me that one example is enough to totally prohibit any GM changes, with the possibe exception of those changes that actually improve the nutrition, safety, or yield of the crop. What about chages that improve the crops impact on the envionement. Less erosion and less pesticide aren't those good for society as a whole. Absolutely. And I would hope that is take into account. Cotton account for 25% of the insecticde used it the the world. BT cotton can cut that by 50 to 100% will the world not be a better place if we use 12 to 20% less insceicide? Yep. Humans don't eat any protien from the cotton plant that hasn't be run throug a cow first becuse it is natuarly toxic to simple stomaced animal from cotton's own built in insecticide. Yep, we are at one mind |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
[IBC] Non-traditional forms {WAS: [IBC] good quote (non-bonsai, but related)} | Bonsai | |||
NW: Best grass for a non garden/non mowing kind of guy | Gardening | |||
GM crop farms filled with weeds (Was: Paying to find non-GE wild corn?) | sci.agriculture | |||
Comparison photos of GM/non-GM (Was: Paying to find non-GE wild corn?) | sci.agriculture | |||
Paying to find non-GE wild corn? (Was: Soy blocked in NZ) | sci.agriculture |