Wikileak: US Trade War on Europe Over GM Crops

This in out and out criminal IMO. It's bad enough that people will not stand up against legislation that legalizes what very well may be their poisoning through the food supply but now our federal government wants to play school yard bully to other countries who are unwilling to accept food sources whose modifications have not been thoroughly tested (assuming there is testing at all) and expect other sovereigns to offer their populations to serve as guinea pigs when the potential fallout could burden their medical infrastructure... even from a more cynical perspective of considering the political effect that the decision to allow GMOs might have when the diseases and disorders- that seem likely results for this- begin to exact a toll on social programs and stretch health care beyond its capacity to provide basic services.

More federal efforts to go to bat for corporations against the public interest... all for the purpose of nothing more noble than fucking profits.

Fascist criminals.

 

The United States government bullying other countries to do it our way, say it isn't so. Corporate America using the government to insure their profits, can't be happening.

I haven't done alot of studying on genetically engineered plants but what little I've done had led me to believe the whole idea was to produce higher yields and make plants more disease resistant.

So why doesn't it surprise me to find that's not the case, and let me guess, Monsanto makes all the chemicals that make these plants thrive.

Maybe Monsanto should start modifying the hemp plant, maybe then the US would let farmers start growing it again, but wait, that couldn't happen because it would upset the oil industry and the lumber industry; and how many others?

If I wasn't living it I'd think I was reading an Orwell Novel.

 

that's not actually true, except in the case of mega-crops such as corn and soybeans

anyone can still become an organic farmer if they choose, use heirloom seeds, harvest their own seeds

and we can choose to avoid products from the former, and purchase products from the latter

i should add that i am not in favor of monopolists or foreign intervention re crops [banana republic?], i am just commenting on the ability to eat normal food

 

It feels like some EU governments are reluctant to free-up the trade in GMO's.
But EU farmers would love to snap it up but can't necessarily.

"In fact, the pro-biotech side in France -- including within the farm
union -- have told us retaliation is the only way to begin to begin
to turn this issue in France."

http://www.google.co.uk/#sclient=ps...v1&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fp=fb65bc885a9abf7

http://www.who.int/inf-pr-2001/en/pr2001-33.html

In this section you can find EFSA's main scientific outputs including scientific opinions. The different document types can be produced by the Scientific Committee, Scientific Panels, their working groups, EFSA Networks, EFSA Expert Groups, or EFSA scientific staff. You can also find reports produced for EFSA by external parties under specific EFSA procedures.
Scientific DocumentsResults 1 - 10 of 127
Scientific Opinion on applications (EFSA-GMO-RX-40-3-2[8-1a/20-1a], EFSA-GMO-RX-40-3-2[8-1b/20-1b]) for renewal of authorisation for the continued marketing of (1) food containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean 40-3-2; (2) feed containing, consisting of, or produced from soybean 40-3-2; (3) other products containing or consisting of soybean 40-3-2 with the exception of cultivation, all under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Monsanto

Opinion of the Scientific Committee/Scientific Panel - Published: 1 December 2010
Outcome of the public consultation on the draft Scientific Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) on the guidance document on the environmental risk assessment of genetically modified plants

Scientific Report of EFSA - Published: 12 November 2010
Scientific Opinion on the assessment of potential impacts of genetically modified plants on non-target organisms

Opinion of the Scientific Committee/Scientific Panel - Published: 12 November 2010
Outcome of the public consultation on the draft Scientific Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) on the assessment of potential impacts of genetically modified plants on non-target organisms

Scientific Report of EFSA - Published: 12 November 2010
Guidance on the environmental risk assessment of genetically modified plants

Guidance of the Scientific Committee/Scientific Panel - Published: 12 November 2010
Scientific Opinion on application (EFSA-GMO-CZ-2008-62) for the placing on the market of insect resistant and herbicide tolerant genetically modified maize MON 89034 x 1507 x MON 88017 x 59122 and all sub-combinations of the individual events as present in its segregating progeny, for food and feed uses, import and processing under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Dow AgroSciences and Monsanto

Opinion of the Scientific Committee/Scientific Panel - Published: 27 September 2010
Scientific Opinion on an application (EFSA-GMO-NL-2009-65) for the placing on the market of insect resistant and herbicide tolerant genetically modified maize MON 89034 × 1507 × NK603 and all sub-combinations of the individual events as present in its segregating progeny, for food and feed uses, import and processing under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Dow AgroSciences and Monsanto

Opinion of the Scientific Committee/Scientific Panel - Published: 27 September 2010
Defining Environment Risk Assessment Criteria for Genetically Modified Insects to be placed on the EU Market - External report

External Scientific Report - Published: 15 September 2010
Defining environmental risk assessment criteria for genetically modified fishes to be placed on the EU market - External report

External Scientific Report - Published: 30 July 2010
Scientific Opinion on the assessment of allergenicity of GM plants and microorganisms and derived food and feed

It goes on...and on...and on. As you know.

 

http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showpost.php?p=6681877&postcount=42

 

Corporations grow money. Food production is geared toward this end at every level. Mono culture while ostensibly increasing yields, seeks to monopolize markets and as such does not really contribute to "free trade". I think the US position on this "trade" matter is of highly dubious standards.

The growing scientific evidence is that genetically engineered mono cultures are making the entire food production chain vulnerable to catastrophic disruption
because when you start manipulating a plants genetic structure you are circumventing evolutionary response. Genetic diversity insures sustainable production because the species has the genetic tools to respond to environmental changes. The potential for massive disruption was vividly demonstrated by the potato blight in Ireland which caused such widespread starvation. Irish farmers planted a single variety of potato and a single plant pathogen killed them all. This scientific evidence of the big picture potentials is currently being ignored by the very people who are espousing an adherence to "science based" decisions.

 

Are you suggesting all the EU and WHO sientists are: "corporate scientists!" ?

They look at those issues too.

 

What do you mean? What happens if I say "yes"?

Do I think GMO crops will kill me or make me sick?
Well, from I have read, probably not.
If you think I am wrong or being unfair/lying about the things I'm responding to you with, fair enough.

Edit: Ok, I read you addition to your post.

 

There are social issues. There are economic issues. There are environmental issues (that scientists refuse to acknowledge or test).


...are you adding: "having the world's food supply dependent upon one company..."?

I thought you meant the "economic issues" and "environmental issues" regarding GMO crops in certain markets.
I know there are those studies.
I'm not sure anybody has bothered to do any research into one company.

Why would they NEVER be able to grow their own seed crops?

 

they can't from many if not most monsanto seeds, they are hybrids that won't work right the second go-round

however there is nothing to stop them from using regular seeds for most food crops

as regards monocultures and gmo corn and soybean, surely everyone knows that most of that corn and soy product is non-food, right?

we'll have a plastic shortage, an oil famine, a candy crisis

[no, i don't consider candy to be food]

actually, the one food sector that would be hard-hit would be meat and dairy, as ranchers are feeding that crap to their livestock

which is why american milk tastes like shit, among other things . . .

 

You know this is no brainer.


Right now we have a cancer plague going on.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/19/opinion/19iht-edservan.1.16308287.html

Right now we have an autism epidemic
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6844737/ns/health-mental_health/

And you know what is causing these health problems??

Stupid people eating bad food and not living in harmony with nature. Humanbeings always think we know better than mother nature and guess what ??? We always loose.

But all this works into the entire "model of business."

First they will give us cheap mass produced food

Second, in 20 years when 75% of the population is sick from this stuff, they will sell us the medicines to prolong our lives.

Gentically modified food is just another con job.

 

Ofcourse you would.

As far as I am aware it is not ALL bees, it is a certain type of bee.
Which crop is using more pesticide?

It's strange, you have gone from not knowing of ANY scientific studies, to coming to the conclusion all studies point to GM crops.

If you know this is true. You must have studies on it.

Genetically modified crops (GMO)
Some genetically modified (GM) crops produce the natural insecticide Bt toxin, which was hypothesised to affect bees. In the scant literature on the topic, there exists no evidence of any negative effects on honey bee populations,[86] and while research on GM crops is still ongoing, new results continue to suggest GM crops have no negative effect on bee populations.[7][87] Further, CCD cases are known in areas of Europe and Canada where Bt crops are not grown.[88]

I'm not suggesting GM crops have no effect. But you can't just blame one factor because it is convenient. There are far more studies relating to declines in certain species than ever before. If you are looking harder, the more you will find. It still remains a mystery, though.

 

I did not say while farmers are choosing to use Monsanto seeds.
I asked why would they NEVER be able to be self-suffient.
They still have a choice.
Hundreds of thousands of farmers choose to not use Monsanto seeds.

 

i think at this time that farmers who grew soy and corn would have a pretty difficult time of it

to be fair, i wonder if many of the farmers who grow the mega-crops own their operations, or are merely cargill sharecroppers . . .

 

Why?

2005

Ninety-eight percent of U.S. farms are family farms.
The remaining 2 percent are nonfamily farms, which produce 14 percent of total agricultural output.
Two features of family farms stand out.
First, small family farms make up 91 percent of all U.S. farms. Second, large-scale family farms account for 59 percent of all production.
Nevertheless, small farms make significant contributions to the production of specific commodities.
Small farms account for 63 percent of the value of production for hay, 58 percent for tobacco, 39 percent for cash grains (including soybeans), 37 percent for dairy products, and 33 percent for beef.​

http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/EIB12/EIB12c.pdf

http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/Biotechnology/​