Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GMO Labeling in Hawai'i

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Re: GMO Labeling in Hawai'i

    Interesting discussion. Lot of good information was discussed, but I suspect that if you are for GMO labeling going into the debate, you will still be for labeling and if you are against GMO labeling, you will still probably be against it. I do not believe there was any earth shattering information provided.

    Since I am for labeling of GMO products (I am not against GMO, until further observations can be made, but I would like to know what is and isn't GMO), one thing that I thought was a pretty weak way to try to convince the panel that GMO was safe was when Mark Phillipson stated that since GMO was introduced, cases of stomach cancer has dropped significantly. I would have fired back a challenge that if that logic is what he would like to use, then what about the dramatic upswing of chrohn's disease and other ailments?

    It was pointed out that because there is no GMO labeling, there is essentially no real studies on how GMO is affecting our lives. In other words, there can be no long term studies because we won't know who is consuming GMO products and who isn't. Does that sound like a logical decision?

    Again, I am for labeling of GMO, but am open to any information that could change my position.
    Whoa, Mista Buss Driva, eh, you can stop the buss o wat?

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: GMO Labeling in Hawai'i

      Originally posted by Moto View Post
      It was pointed out that because there is no GMO labeling, there is essentially no real studies on how GMO is affecting our lives. In other words, there can be no long term studies because we won't know who is consuming GMO products and who isn't.
      I heard that stated several times, but I didn't understand it. From the fact that foods are not labeled, it doesn't follow that the GMO status can't be determined. For instance, the UH prof when asked rattled off the names of papaya varieties that are GMO ("rainbow", ...) and those that are not ("sunrise", ...).
      Greg

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: GMO Labeling in Hawai'i

        Originally posted by GregLee View Post
        I heard that stated several times, but I didn't understand it. From the fact that foods are not labeled, it doesn't follow that the GMO status can't be determined. For instance, the UH prof when asked rattled off the names of papaya varieties that are GMO ("rainbow", ...) and those that are not ("sunrise", ...).
        That works well for papayas. Now take the two largest GMO crops corn and soybeans. Unfortunatly, you cannot track those items as you can Papayas. To make matters worse, corn and soybeans are ingredients used by many other products. Those are examples of GMO products that you could easily ingest without knowing that you are consuming GMO products. Even if you eat staight corn on the cob or soy beans, there are no identifyable varieties as in Papayas that you could differentiate GMO or not.
        Whoa, Mista Buss Driva, eh, you can stop the buss o wat?

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: GMO Labeling in Hawai'i

          Originally posted by Moto View Post
          Those are examples of GMO products that you could easily ingest without knowing that you are consuming GMO products.
          I still don't follow the reasoning. Why should studying the health effects depend on whether people know they're eating GMO products? We're not worried about psychological harm. It might be easier to get unbiased evidence if people don't know.
          Greg

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: GMO Labeling in Hawai'i

            Along the line of GMO labeling, why shouldn't every genetic variation be labeled in our food products? There's nothing special about GMO over natural variation. Sure, a GMO may have harmful characteristics, but it's just as likely that a natural variant has similar harmful characteristics. In fact, it's more likely that a GMO may have harmful characteristics removed than inserted, since modifications are intentional and safety tested. GMOs are patented, which means liability can be assigned in case of damages - that's a safety-net bigger than any non-GMO product carries.

            My position is for voluntary labeling of non-GMO products - not mandatory labeling of GMO products. The cost will go up a bit for non-GMO labeled products (costs are already presumed higher or GMOs wouldn't be used in the first place), but it will be a cost that is voluntarily absorbed (or not) by the consumer. Here's the BIG question - Why won't activists be satisfied with the same voluntary system used for 'organic' products? Organic products usually carry a premium that includes the extra cost of labeling, why shouldn't non-GMO carry that extra expense as well? Organic production came first, just as non-GMO production came first, so let the cachet adhere to the 'original' products, not the more recent and economical products.

            [Next thing they'll want is a statement of fossil fuel consumption to produce and transport each product to market - ugh!
            'This banana was hand-grown with natural soil supplements produced on site, then bicycled to market - that'll be $12, thank you!']
            Last edited by salmoned; December 14, 2012, 11:13 AM.
            May I always be found beneath your contempt.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: GMO Labeling in Hawai'i

              Does the manipulation of genetic material in a way that does not occur in nature really give a reason to think the resulting products are dangerous or unwholesome? Those who think so may be following the thought of Jean-Jacques Rousseau. See if this excerpt from his Wikipedia entry strikes a chord:

              In Discourse on the Arts and Sciences Rousseau argues that the arts and sciences have not been beneficial to humankind, because they arose not from authentic human needs but rather as a result of pride and vanity. Moreover, the opportunities they create for idleness and luxury have contributed to the corruption of man. He proposed that the progress of knowledge had made governments more powerful and had crushed individual liberty; and he concluded that material progress had actually undermined the possibility of true friendship by replacing it with jealousy, fear, and suspicion.

              In contrast to the optimistic view of other Enlightenment figures, for Rousseau, progress has been inimical to the well-being of humanity, that is, unless it can be counteracted by the cultivation of civic morality and duty.
              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Jacques_Rousseau
              Greg

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: GMO Labeling in Hawai'i

                Originally posted by GregLee View Post
                I still don't follow the reasoning. Why should studying the health effects depend on whether people know they're eating GMO products? We're not worried about psychological harm. It might be easier to get unbiased evidence if people don't know.
                My saying that there are GMO products that you could ingest without knowing was to support the comment that in the case of Bananas grown locally, you are able to identify which products are GMO and which are not. But in the case of soybeans and corn, it isn't easily traced, because you will not know the brand of corn you're eating. When you see corn or soybeans in the markets, it is usually bulk corn or soy beans if they're fresh. Then is corn or soy beans are ingredients of a product, such as tofu, soy sauce, corn chips... you don't know if they're using GMO or not.

                Getting back to your statement, in order to study the health effects of GMO, you would need to know if the person is consuming GMOs. Right now, I don't even know the extent I am consuming GMOs because they are not labeled. If I don't know what I am consuming and I contract an illness or cancer, I do not know, nor would any study know if GMO can be linked to my illness or cancer. That is why Mark Phillipson can make statements such as, there has actually been a decrease in stomach cancer since the introduction of GMOs. Leading you to believe that GMOs are safe. My counter statement that there has been a significant increase of Crohn's disease since the introduction of GMOs is along the same lines and is bogus, because it appears to link GMOs to Crohn's disease. But without studies on long term effects of GMO, nobody really knows. If food products are not labeled GMOs, you cannot perform a study, because you won't know what group you fall under, 1) consumes large quantities of GMO 2) consumes moderate quantities of GMO 3) consumes minimal quantities of GMO or 4) consumes no GMO products (this one is tough unless you prepare all of your meals).

                Again, I am not arguing that GMOs are bad, I do not have sufficient data to come to that conclusion at this point in time. If you ask me, could GMOs be bad? I would have to respond with a definite yes, but then again, it could be good too. I do know that if they are labeled, I can make my own choice on if I would like to risk consuming GMOs freely or just moderately and avoiding them whenever possible (I know because I love to eat out, I would never fall into category 4 above).
                Whoa, Mista Buss Driva, eh, you can stop the buss o wat?

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: GMO Labeling in Hawai'i

                  Originally posted by salmoned View Post
                  Along the line of GMO labeling, why shouldn't every genetic variation be labeled in our food products? There's nothing special about GMO over natural variation. Sure, a GMO may have harmful characteristics, but it's just as likely that a natural variant has similar harmful characteristics. In fact, it's more likely that a GMO may have harmful characteristics removed than inserted, since modifications are intentional and safety tested. GMOs are patented, which means liability can be assigned in case of damages - that's a safety-net bigger than any non-GMO product carries.

                  A lot of the modifications being introduced to the seeds are to allow the crop to be resistant to certain pesticides and herbicides such as roundup. That is why Monsanto has an active role. You buy their seeds and you can spray with roundup and kill all other weeds, spray with specific insecticide and kill desired insects and not harm the crops. The crops will still absorb the insecticide and herbicide and you will consume them. Now, because the crops are resistant, you can use less to be effective. But now they're finding out that the insects and weeds too are becoming more resistant to the specific herbicide and insecticides. So now they will need to use more chemicals defeating the original purpose. Crops will absorb more pesticides and herbicides as a result . (By the way, I don't know if this is better or worse that what is currently being used in Non-GMO crops at this time). In other cases they modify the crop such that when the insect ingests the crops, they die, now, what happens to humans who ingest large quantities of this crop for 5 - 15 years on almost a daily basis?

                  My position is for voluntary labeling of non-GMO products - not mandatory labeling of GMO products. The cost will go up a bit for non-GMO labeled products (costs are already presumed higher or GMOs wouldn't be used in the first place), but it will be a cost that is voluntarily absorbed (or not) by the consumer. Here's the BIG question - Why won't activists be satisfied with the same voluntary system used for 'organic' products? Organic products usually carry a premium that includes the extra cost of labeling, why shouldn't non-GMO carry that extra expense as well? Organic production came first, just as non-GMO production came first, so let the cachet adhere to the 'original' products, not the more recent and economical products.

                  As Mark Fergusson tried to explain last night, that works for organics. And it may work for basic crops (although I learned last night that if there is cross pollination, then an originally non-GMO crop is pollinated from a bee that just came from a GMO farm, then that non-GMO crop could now become a GMO crop, although it appears that farms communicate with one another to try to prevent this from happening). But when you try to make a non GMO meal commercially, you need to find out if all of your individual ingredients are GMO or not, in order to claim non-GMO. This still works for items such as Tofu, where there is only one check and that is the Soy Beans. But what about a vegetable soup where you're using 8 or 9 different vegetables plus an additional dozen spices (some of which could be derived from vegetable crops). Without GMO being identified, then it becomes a costly endeavor. If GMOs are labeled at the start, then he GMO chain will be easily identified.

                  [Next thing they'll want is a statement of fossil fuel consumption to produce and transport each product to market - ugh!
                  'This banana was hand-grown with natural soil supplements produced on site, then bicycled to market - that'll be $12, thank you!']
                  Please don't get me wrong, I still eat bad food, but try to eat healthier since my wife went to the Dr. Shintani course to get you off of medications (which by the way is the 4th largest cause of deaths in the US). I just want to be able to make my own decisions on what I eat and may be willing to pay more to stay off of medications. That will be the price I pay. However, without studies, nobody knows if GMOs are contributing to weight problems, diabetes, etc. And it would be a shame if someone is able to link the increase in these diseases with long term effects of GMO in the future but it is too late since we have essentially gone to the point of no return.
                  Whoa, Mista Buss Driva, eh, you can stop the buss o wat?

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: GMO Labeling in Hawai'i

                    Originally posted by Moto View Post
                    If food products are not labeled GMOs, you cannot perform a study, ...
                    This is obviously not so. To perform a study you need to know what foods actually contain GMOs, regardless of how they're labeled. The link being made between labeling and the possibility of doing studies is bogus. I hope this is finally clear, because I'm giving up on it now.
                    Greg

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: GMO Labeling in Hawai'i

                      Originally posted by GregLee View Post
                      This is obviously not so. To perform a study you need to know what foods actually contain GMOs, regardless of how they're labeled. The link being made between labeling and the possibility of doing studies is bogus. I hope this is finally clear, because I'm giving up on it now.
                      Greg for studies to determine Long Term effects, you cannot conduct this in a laboratory. This will be done in the real world. Similar to how lung cancer was linked to cigarettes. They looked for people who developed lung cancer and asked if they smoked cigarettes and if so the volume of usage. All I am saying is, they will not be able to do this with any disease and GMO because when asked if you consume GMO, you will not know (probably yes if you live in the US) but the volume and extent will be unknown. Laboratory tests that try to simulate long term effects would be to administer large quantities of a substance and try to correlate that to a time equivalent. But that may or may not work for every case. I am not trying to win a argument here, I am trying to post my concerns with what I have learned. I too will stop on this subject.

                      Thanks for the discussion on this subject.
                      Whoa, Mista Buss Driva, eh, you can stop the buss o wat?

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: GMO Labeling in Hawai'i

                        If you're interested... Dec. 30th!
                        The Aina Fest walk for safe food. From Diamond Head (corner of Diamond Head Rd. and 18th Ave.) to Kapiolani Park (opposite Aquarium).
                        Family activities and speakers. Noon, walk back to start. Prizes for costumes and signs. Hope to see you there!
                        Last edited by Menehune Man; December 26, 2012, 11:38 AM. Reason: Forgot Dec. 30th!
                        Life is either an adventure... or you're not doing it right!!!

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: GMO Labeling in Hawai'i

                          I'm for safe food!
                          `AINA FEST - Food Sovereignty Now! Dec. 30 ❤ OAHU
                          Walk for Safe Food
                          Sunday, December 30, 2012
                          9:00am until 1:00pm

                          9AM - Meet at entrance to Diamond Head Crater on Diamond Head Road, across the street from Kapiolani Community College.

                          Hope to see you there!
                          Life is either an adventure... or you're not doing it right!!!

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: GMO Labeling in Hawai'i



                            Here's the sign I made to carry with me.
                            Should be fun!
                            Life is either an adventure... or you're not doing it right!!!

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: GMO Labeling in Hawai'i

                              Additional information about side effects found in Canada on GMO food products currently on the market here in USA.
                              Whoa, Mista Buss Driva, eh, you can stop the buss o wat?

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: GMO Labeling in Hawai'i

                                "Dr. Shiva has authored more than 20 books on globalization, food supply, eco-feminism and biotechnology. Her writings reveal that modern industrial agriculture, a high-cost, chemical-intensive method, is actually a recipe for hunger. As an expert on biodiversity and intellectual property rights (IPR) legislation, Dr. Shiva has received numerous awards. She has assisted Africa, Asia, Latin America, Ireland, Switzerland and Austria in grassroots campaigns against genetic engineering. Time Magazine named her an environmental hero in 2003."

                                You may or may not agree with her opinion (I do), but here's some interesting reading on the topic!
                                http://honoluluweekly.com/cover/2013...d-as-weapon-2/
                                Life is either an adventure... or you're not doing it right!!!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X