Friday, December 17, 1999, you wrote:
JBG> ...I proposed an alternative approach to GMO labeling
JBG> ...The approach I suggested is to require that "Materials Safety"
JBG> style data sheets be publically accessible for all food products
JBG> with GM ingredients.... accessible via the web... grocery stores
JBG> could provide in store web searching of the GM data sheets.
JBG> Do SANET list readers have any comments on this concept ?
As a matter of fact, yes.
1).- Excellent concept, very advanced - what should be done.
2).- Never happen within the current context.
Why:
a).- It's too logical. If logic prevailed, there would be no GMOs.
What prevails are economic interests, and on that front, gmo
proponents don't want *any* kind of labeling. They just want to
sell the stuff. And you want "epidemiological type studies of
the impact of GMOs on human health" (not what you said, but what
else are the "Materials Safety" style data sheet going to consist
of), right there in the supermarket, which are all going to be web
enabled. Ideal solution in a far from ideal world. And by the
time we get to that point, the battle will have been won - except
it's going to won at the gut level.
b).- It's too costly. Proponents would rather irredeemably degrade the
environment and human health (there are other suns with planets
out there, anyway).
On the other hand, they *will* give up without a fight at
whatever point they discover that instead of laughing all the way
to the bank with all that money made peddling proprietary
organisms, they are going to lose their shirts (ask Monsanto)
because decent folk take offense at such gross insensitivity -
the very idea is an insult to all us organisms that were
biologically evolved over millenniums.
c).- It presupposes an intelligent presence on the part of all those
involved that would have to approve this. Being reasonable will be
necessary in order to document a strong foundation that justifies
taking a strong stance - reasonably good research must be done.
But in the end, only a stubborn, mean and dirty no - as stubborn,
mean and dirty as the whole idea of GMOs is stupid, will get the
job done.
JBG> My question/comment was the last of the afternoon... perhaps this is
JBG> why the panel of "experts" did not have any comment.
Are you kidding? Do you really think the lack of response was due to
it being the last question? You mean you think they were exhausted by
then?
This is a war. An economic war, and a war of credibility.
That's how it is, Joel. So get some good research done on this.
Problem is, that takes time, and meanwhile they'll be out pushing the
stuff while they can.
True or false? (Rhetorical question).
Douglas Hinds
*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
JBG> Hello to all...
JBG> During the question and answer session following a symposium in Boston
JBG> about a month ago discussing the labeling of GMOs, I proposed an
JBG> alternative approach to GMO labeling that I suggested might be
JBG> more acceptible to industry yet of value to future studies monitoring GM
JBG> proliferation in the food stream and epidemiological type studies of the
JBG> impact of GMOs on human health. The approach I suggested is to require
JBG> that "Materials Safety" style data sheets be publically accessible for all
JBG> food products with GM ingredients. These data sheets would be accessible
JBG> via the web... grocery stores could provide in store web searching of the
JBG> GM data sheets.
JBG> My question/comment was the last of the afternoon... perhaps this is
JBG> why the panel of "experts" did not have any comment.
JBG> Do SANET list readers have any comments on this concept ?
JBG> Joel Gruver
JBG> Center for Agriculture, Food and Environment
JBG> Tufts University
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail