Lawsuit challenges Vermont's GMO labeling law

originally posted by: Margana

originally posted by: thekaboose
I know Im asking for trouble when I post this. I know that what I say next might seem like an attack on people but when people say GM is terrible and how it should be banned (some may say world wide). First thing Look up the following man:

Norman Borlaug


Then also think to yourself: Its easy to cry outrage when you have a full stomach

NOW for the other side of the argument;

They should lable them, nuff said. People will still buy their products. Small margin will look at it and go "oh hell no" then a smaller margin of that margin will end up going back to GM because its cheaper

Read what I said to charles1952:

1) GMO is toxic ((read the two articles I posted, one about rats & the other about cell research)

2) GMO is not the only way to feed the masses, Hydroponics/Aquanponics is the way to go (just like i said to charles1952)

The combination of Aquaponics and Hydroponic is a lovely thought being introduced across the world. But in this cut throat time we live in do you really think that 3rd world countries could afford the setup? Theres a difference between someone growing at home with a cheap system and one supplying for a country of people who are starving.

And yes, some GMO products having shown bad results in medical study. Much like some drugs being recalled due to unforeseen results of taking them. 7 billion strong population on this planet growing every day, I really dont mean to sound harsh but, if you were starving. Little to no food to feed your family, praying something would come along and low and behold someone shows up with GMO food. Would you rather starve to death?

Or you know that the government is setting up Aquaponic & Hydroponic farms but it would take months to produce and even then the chances of food reaching your village was sparse or you could eat GMO food and not starve to death, what would you do?

Like I said, it is easy to dictate what should happen and how people should eat when you yourself can have a full meal every day.

Plus at the end of my original post I did say "but they should label it" so I was agreeing.

also @MagicWand67 please dont get me wrong, I try not to eat food like that, but when I am broke and its cheap and the choice is as follows:

1. I eat this cr*p and my kids have the good food and have a full meal
2. I dont eat this cr*p and the split of food is too small for my wife and kids meaning we all go hungry

All I am saying is that sometimes we have to take the bullet

a reply to: thekaboose

I understand your point from a personal perspective. It's better to die from cancer in 5 or 10 years than it is to starve to death today. But I don't know where you get the idea that GMO's are feeding the poor in other parts of the World.

GMO's are most often found in processed foods and grocery store products. The really poor places with people dying of malnutrition and starvation don't even have grocery stores. They probably don't even have clean drinking water.

Please show me an example of GMO's feeding the poor. In fact, I recall reading a story about poor countries rejecting the GMO's because, in the end, it would only make them a slave to the chemical corporations. Instead they chose to preserve their natural varieties and avoid the high cost of farming using pesticides and terminator seeds.

Starving Nations Reject US Food Donation

More and more countries are banning GMO food. The least we can do is label it. This list below is from 2011. Some countries who did allow GMO's are now regretting it and rethinking whether they made the right choice or not.

Countries that have banned GMO's

India also has widespread GM cotton use. Also mentioned above, the widespread planting of Monsanto's GM cotton has led to tragedy throughout India. The Indian government even banned conventional seeds from many government seed banks in an attempt to please Monsanto (in return, the country was given International Monetary Fund loans to help its economy) and slow the nation's poverty rates. An estimated 1,000 farmers commit suicide each month in the country as a result of the crop failure and debt caused by planting the GM seeds. Farmers were convinced to spend what was often 1,000 times the cost of conventional seed on the "magic seeds" after listening to Monsanto's promises of increased yields and resistence to pests. Despite the promises, the crops were often destroyed by bollworms. In addition, the farmers weren't warned that the crops would require twice as much water as conventional cotton, leading to many crops drying up and dying. The "terminator" seeds also must be purchased again every year. For farmers used to saving seed from year to year, this was often a final financial blow that led to insurmountable debt.

originally posted by: charles1952
a reply to: Margana

I feel like being a contrarian. The responses in this thread show why the lawsuit (to set aside the mandatory labelling act) should prevail.

Certainly, consumers should have information about what they're eating, but what will they be getting with a GMO label? The responses say it's terrible, and we hate it. There are campaigners world-wide who will mount protests and picket, and issue fear-mongering press releases.

We know that is likely, look at Alar and DDT.

And all of these attacks based on what evidence? The French study has been shown to be a hoax. The scientific community hasn't come out against GMO. (Some have, but there's even less of a consensus here than there is for Global Warming or whatever it's called.)

What does this labeling do? What will be achieved if we ban GMO foods? For one, millions will die because of vitamin deficiency, that's why Golden Rice is being hailed as a great hope in Asia. Secondly, since GMO methods produce more food than other types, many will die because of lack of food.

It just hit me. Some environmentalists have called humanity a cancer on the earth and that the population must be decreased. Is this a way to cause more deaths while not directly killing anyone? I don't know.

Also banning GMO hurts a few large corporations like Monsanto. I know, I know, it used to be all the rage to hate large corporations, but we should really check Obama's list to find out whether Monsanto is on his hate list, or on his list of large corporations he loves and will bail out because they support him.

Finally, it will provide consumers with misleading information. Labeling something as GMO should have the same scientific value as saying that the food was produced in a Southern State (None that has been shown to be true)

Oh, Erin Brokovich? Several studies have shown that she was making up cancer numbers and that the area around the town had no more cancers than other places without gas wells. Same thing with Carson's bogus claims in Silent Spring. And the gigantic mouse tumors? After looking at the reports, scientists concluded that dosages of that size of just about anything, would kill the mice, or deform them.

WOW.

Do you actually believe what you just wrote?!?!?! I mean seriously, do you?

"MILLIONS" will die from starvation and vitamin deficiency????

We GIVE AWAY millions and milions of TONS of food every year to countries in need. Just go to any restaurant and watch how much food people THROW AWAY!!

Trust me, no one is going to starve if we ban GMO. When food becomes scarce or prices rise significantly, people will wise-up and stop being so wasteful and gluttonous.

I think of my grandfather who lived through two world wars; he never cooked too much, never wasted a thing and was healthy, active, strong and lived to almost 90.

I love how people and industry seem to think we need these lavishly stocked stores and massive amounts of excess, and yet look at our population. We're the unhealthiest we've ever been!

originally posted by: charles1952
a reply to: Margana

I feel like being a contrarian. The responses in this thread show why the lawsuit (to set aside the mandatory labelling act) should prevail.

Certainly, consumers should have information about what they're eating, but what will they be getting with a GMO label? The responses say it's terrible, and we hate it. There are campaigners world-wide who will mount protests and picket, and issue fear-mongering press releases.

We know that is likely, look at Alar and DDT.

And all of these attacks based on what evidence? The French study has been shown to be a hoax. The scientific community hasn't come out against GMO. (Some have, but there's even less of a consensus here than there is for Global Warming or whatever it's called.)

What does this labeling do? What will be achieved if we ban GMO foods? For one, millions will die because of vitamin deficiency, that's why Golden Rice is being hailed as a great hope in Asia. Secondly, since GMO methods produce more food than other types, many will die because of lack of food.

It just hit me. Some environmentalists have called humanity a cancer on the earth and that the population must be decreased. Is this a way to cause more deaths while not directly killing anyone? I don't know.

Also banning GMO hurts a few large corporations like Monsanto. I know, I know, it used to be all the rage to hate large corporations, but we should really check Obama's list to find out whether Monsanto is on his hate list, or on his list of large corporations he loves and will bail out because they support him.

Finally, it will provide consumers with misleading information. Labeling something as GMO should have the same scientific value as saying that the food was produced in a Southern State (None that has been shown to be true)

Oh, Erin Brokovich? Several studies have shown that she was making up cancer numbers and that the area around the town had no more cancers than other places without gas wells. Same thing with Carson's bogus claims in Silent Spring. And the gigantic mouse tumors? After looking at the reports, scientists concluded that dosages of that size of just about anything, would kill the mice, or deform them.

1. Millions will die because of vitamin deficiency? Where? In North America where labelling of GMOs is being debated? GMO rice is the one of the ONLY GMOs to be bred for any extra vitamins content. Most GMOs having nothing to do with vitamin content whatsoever. And again, this debate is taking place in America. The only really active GMOs are: Canola, cottonseed, corn, soy, sugar beets used to make white sugar. That's it in the United States mostly. ALL of these things are just used as ingredients in processed foods, junk foods, and snack foods. It is absolutely not "feeding the hungry", it is saving food manufacturers money - that is IT! Why do you think the grocers association etc. etc. is involved? Wake up and smell the junk food!

2. Lack of food, "Many will die because of lack of food." Again, really, in the States, many will die because of lack of junk food ingredients?

3. "GMO produces more food." It has been proven to be quite the opposite in many, many cases. Everyone is so concerned about scientific evidence, then I ask you WHERE is the evidence that it produces more food? And where is the evidence that it's safe? Oh, right, I almost forgot: there isn't any!

originally posted by: thekaboose

originally posted by: Margana

originally posted by: thekaboose
I know Im asking for trouble when I post this. I know that what I say next might seem like an attack on people but when people say GM is terrible and how it should be banned (some may say world wide). First thing Look up the following man:

Norman Borlaug


Then also think to yourself: Its easy to cry outrage when you have a full stomach

NOW for the other side of the argument;

They should lable them, nuff said. People will still buy their products. Small margin will look at it and go "oh hell no" then a smaller margin of that margin will end up going back to GM because its cheaper

Read what I said to charles1952:

1) GMO is toxic ((read the two articles I posted, one about rats & the other about cell research)

2) GMO is not the only way to feed the masses, Hydroponics/Aquanponics is the way to go (just like i said to charles1952)

The combination of Aquaponics and Hydroponic is a lovely thought being introduced across the world. But in this cut throat time we live in do you really think that 3rd world countries could afford the setup? Theres a difference between someone growing at home with a cheap system and one supplying for a country of people who are starving.

And yes, some GMO products having shown bad results in medical study. Much like some drugs being recalled due to unforeseen results of taking them. 7 billion strong population on this planet growing every day, I really dont mean to sound harsh but, if you were starving. Little to no food to feed your family, praying something would come along and low and behold someone shows up with GMO food. Would you rather starve to death?

Or you know that the government is setting up Aquaponic & Hydroponic farms but it would take months to produce and even then the chances of food reaching your village was sparse or you could eat GMO food and not starve to death, what would you do?

Like I said, it is easy to dictate what should happen and how people should eat when you yourself can have a full meal every day.

Plus at the end of my original post I did say "but they should label it" so I was agreeing.

also @MagicWand67 please dont get me wrong, I try not to eat food like that, but when I am broke and its cheap and the choice is as follows:

1. I eat this cr*p and my kids have the good food and have a full meal
2. I dont eat this cr*p and the split of food is too small for my wife and kids meaning we all go hungry

All I am saying is that sometimes we have to take the bullet

Again, GMOs are not feeding the hungry of the world. It's a nice concept that has been put forth as the reason for the existence of GMOs. But it is NOT happening. Over half of GMO crops do NOT produce the paltry 30 to 40% more yield they are advertised to produce. And I say again: there really are NOT a lot of things GMOs are used for except junk food. The only successfully grown and harvested GMOs are corn, soy, canola, cottonseed and white sugar. Tell me where you can buy GMO corn on the cob? Nowhere, that's where - it's grown to become food ingredients. That's IT!

originally posted by: thekaboose

The combination of Aquaponics and Hydroponic is a lovely thought being introduced across the world. But in this cut throat time we live in do you really think that 3rd world countries could afford the setup? Theres a difference between someone growing at home with a cheap system and one supplying for a country of people who are starving.

If we actually helped out 3rd world countries (after all the only reason they are like that is because no body helps them) and made Aquaponic/Hydroponic for them & helped them run it, then guess what, no one would be starving. Also, food should be free!!!!

And yes, some GMO products having shown bad results in medical study. Much like some drugs being recalled due to unforeseen results of taking them. 7 billion strong population on this planet growing every day, I really dont mean to sound harsh but, if you were starving. Little to no food to feed your family, praying something would come along and low and behold someone shows up with GMO food. Would you rather starve to death?

Personally, I can not work because of my illnesses & have hardly any food to eat so I'm pretty darn near starvation but I still would NOT want to eat GMO if given the opportunity to have a plentiful food source. Nutrient content isn't the only important thing about food. Food contamination has always had a different face, unfortunately people are afraid to recognize an inborn problem beyond something simple such as pesticides or heavy metals. We take in these modified amino acid chains that operate outside what our evolutionary biology is used to dealing with. Hence issues about GMO modifying mitochondrial DNA being a concern and a lack of long term generational studies on the effects it could have on a species. ((see the article Margana posted about the cell study))

Or you know that the government is setting up Aquaponic & Hydroponic farms but it would take months to produce and even then the chances of food reaching your village was sparse or you could eat GMO food and not starve to death, what would you do?

Well if it is done properly, small villages would have a small farm & bigger cities would have bigger farms, the technology is scalable down to sizes for individual families. Again, I would travel to get my food, even if it was by foot because again I would NOT eat GMO and would rather DIE.

Like I said, it is easy to dictate what should happen and how people should eat when you yourself can have a full meal every day.

Yes it is easy for you to say that GMO should be fed to everyone because you have lots of food. I, on the other hand, want proper food, not chemically altered. I could eat GMO & risk passing it onto my children who may not suffer the same food shortage as I do or I can eat properly now, even though I don't have much. Who are we to damn future generations.

Plus at the end of my original post I did say "but they should label it" so I was agreeing.

also @MagicWand67 please dont get me wrong, I try not to eat food like that, but when I am broke and its cheap and the choice is as follows:

1. I eat this cr*p and my kids have the good food and have a full meal
2. I dont eat this cr*p and the split of food is too small for my wife and kids meaning we all go hungry

All I am saying is that sometimes we have to take the bullet

Just because you want to chance it by eating GMO foods & letting your children eat GMO foods, doesn't mean that the rest of the world must also eat GMO. There are other alternatives that can feed EVERYONE globally, it's just a matter of implementing it & helping others to make sure they have access to the safe food. It can be done, the gov is just to selfish to do it.

p.s

I know Margana & she is in the same boat as me about having little food & she still says "hell NO to GMO" and would rather die than eat poison.

edit on 20-6-2014 by knoledgeispower because: code error