Comments on: Global plantings of biotech crops Global environmental challenges Wed, 16 Nov 2016 08:14:55 +0000 hourly 1 By: mteresh Sat, 20 Nov 2010 21:18:30 +0000 The topic of discussion – should we or shouldn’t we develop, grow, and eat GMO plants, fish, animals, or yeast, bacteria, etc. – is the same as if the world scientists would start debating whether should we reshape the shape of planet Earth, change its atmosphere, or use human “a..” instead of brain for thinking process. I apologize for this very rude three-letter word.

There are millions of people in the United States alone who do not want to eat or wear GMO. Our talking here will never stop the research, development, and production of GMO unless each single GMO or partially-containing GMO product will be labeled as such and very precisely. Any agencies that will be in charge of such a labeling have to be equipped with the most high-tech equipment capable of detecting even 1% of such GMO parts in food and also be independent (of Monsanto or other GMO-producing, or benefiting from it) companies.

USA produces GMO crops 3-100 times more than other countries in the world now. Why? Because other countries are not that much advanced to understand that GMO is great for humankind and planet? No, it’s just quite opposite – they do know it would bring our planet to its death. It’s a cave-man mentality and lack of education here in the United States to imagine that the GMO objects could be safe.

Not a single gene or any bio object on this planet can be altered by splicing genes and changing it by any means without an immediate domino-effect interference with the millions of other parts of Earth biosphere – bacteria and any microorganisms, fungi, trees, plants, and water, air, and animals including humans.

Throughout millions of years of our planet’s history no so much damage was created to our planet and to humans as in the last 100 years, and it becomes worse each next decade in the geometrical progression, owing to “bright” and greedy man’s in biotechnology.

If labeling of our food and clothes as “GMO” or “Contains GMO”, or “10% GMO” – exists today, on every single chocolate bar sold daily because it contains soy – we could VOTE against such product by never buying it. Once never sold, it would be out of production.
All GMO food produced by now has to become the ONLY food for its producers-geniuses and its advocates who will become guinea pigs for GMO.

We have already a multitude of data now that are alarming about evil things are going on in human health, which could not be associated with anything but man-made food messed up with chemicals, hormones, antibiotics, artificially developed substances allowed to be called “food”, and with the most dangerous – GMO foods.

Acting now and voting now for a must GMO labels will save our grandchildren lives if we start it immediately with no delay. If it’s said GMO papaya, we won’t buy it, but if it’s said Hawaiian papaya – they do not know much about it. The true FREEDOM is the freedom to choose what to eat, not just freedom to talk about not being able to find a “human” food with ease!

– Commented by a nutrition counselor.

By: anya333 Thu, 15 Apr 2010 14:51:12 +0000 Did you decide not to print my commentary? I am disappointed.

By: anya333 Thu, 15 Apr 2010 05:31:43 +0000 First of all, please check the information & studies in this website: boutGeneticallyModifiedFoods/index.cfm

You think Roundup is used less in GM crops??? Guess again — GM crops are made to withstand higher doses of Roundup & live… Read this article about what it does:
Monsanto’s Roundup Residues in GM Food Cause Cell Damage es/archive/2009/04/07/monsantos-roundup- px
And there’s:

“Genetically engineered crops designed to be resistant to weed killers are sprouting so-called superweeds that cannot be killed with traditional herbicides.

The soybean, cotton and corn crops, sold under the brand name Roundup Ready, are the world’s largest group of genetically altered crops. In fact, the altered soybeans now make up more than three-quarters of all soybeans grown in the United States. The Roundup Ready gene is also part of 65 percent of the cotton and 10 percent of the corn grown in the United States.

While farmers like the modified crops because Roundup herbicide can be sprayed directly onto the fields, killing weeds without harming crops, the widespread popularity of the crops is rendering the herbicide ineffective against some weeds.

Crop scientists say that the crops’ prevalence has greatly increased the use of Roundup herbicide. As a result, the rare weeds that survive the herbicide will ultimately flourish in the “survival of the fittest” environment. Herbicide-resistant weeds have already popped up in Delaware, Maryland, California, Tennessee, Ohio and Indiana.” see: es/archive/2003/01/29/gmo-crops-part-fou r.aspx

And one of the articles in Reuters is an Excellent article…Indicates Much more research needs to be done…Too many preliminary studies on GMO crops showing red flags. Quotes from the article: C2AJ20100413?rpc=60

“Andrew Kimbrell, executive director of the Center for Food Safety, which filed
the sugarbeet lawsuit, said the court actions should be a “wakeup call”for the U.S. government.”They
will not be allowed to ignore the biological pollution and economic impacts of gene-altered crops. The courts have made it clear that USDA’s
job is to protect America’s farmers and consumers, not the interests of Monsanto,” he said. A November 2008
report by the Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of the U.S. Congress, cited several problems. Among the shortcomings
mentioned in the report is a lack of a coordinated program to determine whether the “spread of genetic traits is causing undesirable effects on the environment, non-GE segments of agriculture, or food safety.”
“…In January, shares in Monsanto fell more than 3 percent amid a rush of hedging activity during a morning trading session after a report by European scientists in the International Journal of Biological Sciences found signs of toxicity in the livers and kidneys of rats fed the company’s biotech corn.”

“Concerns about genetically altered crops and the lack of broad testing hit a boiling point last year. In February 2009, 26 leading academic entomologists — scientists specializing in insects — issued a public statement to the Environmental Protection Agency complaining that they were restricted from doing independent research by technology agreements Monsanto and other companies attach to every bag of biotech seed they sell. The agreements disallow any research that is not first approved by the companies.
“”No truly independent research can be legally conducted on many critical questions regarding the technology,” the scientists said in their statement.

University of Minnesota entomologist Ken Ostlie, who co-authored the statement, said some of the concerns involve corn engineered to resist corn rootworm pests. Biotech corn crops in Minnesota, Iowa, and parts of Wisconsin and South Dakota harvested last fall showed damage and disease, and some fear the biotech corn could sicken livestock.

“We don’t know if something is going on with the plant and the technology or with the insect. We just know things didn’t work the way they were supposed to,” said Ostlie. “It would be nice to have independently verifiable information going into EPA’s decision-making beyond just what the company provides.”

And I wish labels listed the GM food…AND — I wish we could see pictures in the supermarkets, of where the cows & chickens are raised — because I don’t want to buy a dairy brand where the cows have a terrible life and are fed God-knows-what chemicals to make them produce more milk than is natural & antibiotics & growth hormones… or the chickens are crammed into little cages, given injections of growth hormones, beaks & wing tips cut off…I don’t want to eat that brand of eggs.

By: Bart77 Wed, 14 Apr 2010 08:03:36 +0000 @AlpineIncline: Probably genetically modified crops are not causing cancer. But as a consumer I want to have the choice to eat it or not. To produce healthier food there are often other possibilities than pesticides/herbicides or genetically modified crops. And as a farmer I never would make a deal with a company like Monsanto..

By: AlpineIncline Tue, 13 Apr 2010 18:38:05 +0000 @Truth-is-Enough: Your comment makes no sense. Human beings have been modifying what they eat since the beginning of agriculture; splicing genes into food crops is nothing new and is part of the foundation of civilization. Better crops are absolutely necessary for feeding the world’s growing population and genetically modified crops will be a large part of that. There is no link between genetically modified foods and cancer; in fact many of them require less pesticides/herbicides than traditional crops so they may in fact be “healthier” and better for the environment.

Your complaint is based solely on aesthetics and is likely a knee-jerk reaction to the influence that large companies like Monsanto hold over what you eat. If this upsets you then please find a more logical and productive way to show it.

By: Truth-is-Enough Tue, 13 Apr 2010 16:25:52 +0000 cancer is growing and people know nothing of what they eat. WHY NOT COMSUMERES ARE INFORMED AND ALL PRODUCTS LABELLED !? Who can answer.