Thursday, December 16, 1999, 9:11:13 PM, you wrote:
w> I wonder if the USDA and/or companies could be sued for the fact
w> that they knowingly and willingly have introduced seeds that will
w> inevitably affect productionsystems that explicitly stated, (even
w> legally bound at least in the EU not to use these seeds) without
w> taking any measures to protect these other systems or to make sure
w> that these will not be affected. wytze de lange
In order to be sure of collecting damages and / or create enough of a
threat of collecting damages to impede further progress on the part of
the GMO movement, it would be necessary to prove that allowing the
release of GMO seed to the environment was an irresponsible act that
occurred in fragrant violation of existing laws and that this caused
foreseeable and quantifiable damages to the parties instituting the
Since there is not enough data in at this point to assure
accomplishing this, the thing to do is to make sure that as many as
possible statements and initiatives of unconformity are registered in
the appropriate forums, so that these become part of public record.
This will set the stage for a later and hopefully successful effort to
stop the menace posed by GMOs to the environment and human health.
It won't be the effect on the organic market & / or existing organic
standards that will make a decisive difference. The greater public
good is the overriding factor. What's happening is barbaric but the
fact is, it's become the norm in the U.S. and (even if we all know
why) this never the less serves the purpose of the special interests
that managed to perpetrate this crime against humanity.
I'm not very familiar with the U.S. legislation regulating this area
but both the EPA and FDA are involved I believe (the USDA is by nature
production oriented and should not expected to change their focus or
priorities); and it's important that the release of GMO's without long
term studies first showing no now unforeseen negative results, be
called into question in the strongest terms possible, publicly; in
terms of the existing body of law and in terms of the possibly
negative indications provided by the scarce body scientific literature
available. If needed, stronger regulations should lobbied for.
Damage has already been done and more will be. Europe is holding a
much firmer ground and has taken the lead in that regard. Following
that lead means that more people must be informed, more studies must
be funded, more legal recourses must be instituted, and there are
plenty people with money working *against* this on the opposing front.
Perhaps the strongest factor would be simply to *not* buy any GMO
garbage. (I certainly don't). But no one tactic is going to turn the
tide and even what you suggest *could* prove to be another thorn in
the side of the GMO movement, although there are stronger hands to
play if enough people will take the time and move on it.
To Unsubscribe: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
To Subscribe to Digest: Email email@example.com with the command
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at: