Bill, I don't doubt anything you've written below. However, I was merely asking what was the evidence that the GM food recently offered to starving Africans by the UN and the aid agencies was dangerous in some way.
Keith At 12:14 19/09/02 -0400, you wrote: > Keith, US laws are probusiness and becoming more so as I write. When >I lived in Palestine, one of things I did was run a faith-based pharmacy >to supply our fixed and mobile clinics. ships elsewhere. For a >while a country could not get US bilateral aid without agreeing to buy US >tobacco since Americans were starting to wise up. We is bad dudes! Here >is an interesting link: Africa received shipments of >Metrecal, another weight- reduction aid, and WMR shipped >laxatives to Pakistan and Honduras where a major medical >problem was diarrhea. > >http://www.publiceye.org/research/Group_Watch/Entries-132.htm Bill ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Bill, >> >> At 12:41 18/09/02 -0400, you wrote: >> (KH) >><<<< >> . . . some African politicians have been frightened enough to >> prevent GM >> grain being imported by the aid agencies in order to cope with >> wide-scale >> starvation among their people -- even though, within the stomach, >> the >> variant genes within GM food are broken down and digested as >> thoroughly as >> all the others and are of absolutely no danger. >>>>>> >> (WBW) >><<<< >> Isn't it interesting that the food that was offered was genetically >> altered >> and was not saleable in the US? >>>>>> >> >> I was not aware of this and, in fact, doubt it greatly. Are you >> suggesting >> that the UN and the big aid agencies were proposing to supply GM >> food that >> was somehow dangerous or sub-standard? There are, in fact, different >> rules >> in different countries as to what GM foods are saleable or not -- >> but in >> order to prevent it being planted in the first place and its >> environmental >> effects rather than any danger when eaten (though many opponents of >> GM >> foods believe this -- as though it falls into the same category as >> pesticide-treated food). I suggest that your "evidence" is due to >> disparities between legislation in different countries for different >> foods. >> >> Keith >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> -------------- >> >> Keith Hudson,6 Upper Camden Place, Bath BA1 5HX, England >> Tel:01225 312622/444881; Fax:01225 447727; E-mail: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> ________________________________________________________________________ >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- Keith Hudson,6 Upper Camden Place, Bath BA1 5HX, England Tel:01225 312622/444881; Fax:01225 447727; E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ________________________________________________________________________
