Re: [Sndbox] Maybe this will start something for Tim

[Tim Harder]

And what facts do you have to back up that
claim?


On Tuesday, September 23, 2003, at 05:47 PM, Laurie wrote:

I don't know..I think all the things we feed to our
livestock to make the meat leaner and more
tender...and to make our crops grow prettier and less
buggy...all leads us to having cancer later on...
Laurie
--- Tim Harder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


I personally don't think that genetically modified
food  poses a danger
to humans.
There is absolutely *NO* evidence that it does.  One
of the main crops
that have
been totally transformed for the good are soybeans.
They now have
soybeans
that you can plant (drill) right into the ground and
then be sprayed
for weeds
*after* they have come up.  The soybeans are immune
to the spray that
kills all
other vegetation.  This means that the farmer has
way less tilling to
do to the
field which saves money, fuel, and erosion, which is
good for the
environment.
The fact that Greenpeace is behind this scare tactic
should tell you
something.
People have been manipulating the genetics of crops
for centuries....
They
are just getting really good at it now with the
advent of cellular
biology.
As far as "do countries have the right to keep these
crops from their
shelves"
without violating the WTO....  I have no idear.
That is a different
kettle of fish.


On Tuesday, September 23, 2003, at 04:21 PM, Charles
wrote:
Hot-Button Issue: Genetically Modified Foods

Can a WTO member nation ban the import of
genetically modified foods,
or does such a prohibition amount to an illegal
barrier to free trade?
Seattle will host the showdown.

by Jen Soriano
Nov. 24, 1999




<image.tiff>
Do countries have the right to keep genetically
modified foods off of
their supermarket shelves? The issue has sparked
popular protests and
diplomatic fireworks in recent months -- and is
emerging as a key
issue for the World Trade Organization's Seattle
summit.
Genetically engineered crops can produce higher
yields, create their
own natural pesticides and result in more
nourishing food -- but
critics say they also have the potential to cause
vast damage to the
environment and human health. The issue strikes a
visceral chord:
European Greenpeace activists have taken to
hacking down swaths of
genetically modified corn and soybeans, a French
farm activist and
friends in rubber fish masks began a series of
rallies outside
Washington supermarkets this week, and more
mainstream groups have
launched protests in Britain and elsewhere.

For the trade bureaucrats, the question is
whether, under existing WTO
agreements, countries can keep genetically
modified products off the
market in response to their citizens' concerns
about ecological safety
and public health, or whether doing so would
constitute an illegal
barrier to free trade. The stakes are high: Some
80 million acres of
genetically modified crops were planted around the
world last year,
including at least half of the soybean acreage and
one third of the
corn crop in the US. The biotechnology industry
has invested billions
in developing such organisms.

The trade conflict sprouted in late June, when the
European Union
effectively banned the approval of all new
genetically modified
organisms. Shortly thereafter, a Brazilian judge
suspended imports of
US produce giant Monsanto's genetically engineered
soybeans until a
complete ecological impact study is completed.

In response, the US is proposing a
reinterpretation of existing WTO
rules. In essence, it wants any country seeking to
ban genetically
altered products to come up with concrete
scientific evidence of their
harmfulness, not simply outraged public opinion.
"We cannot let others
hide behind unfounded, unwarranted scientific
claims to block commerce
in agriculture," said Secretary of Agriculture Dan
Glickman.
But critics retort that limiting the traffic in
genetically altered
foods is warranted precisely because so many
scientific questions
remain unanswered. Preliminary research by Cornell
University
scientists has shown that pollen from genetically
modified crops can
potentially harm insects like the monarch
butterfly. Other researchers
have identified a risk of herbicide-resistant
genes "migrating" into
nearby weeds, possibly resulting in a new strain
of poison-proof
"superweeds." Many environmental scientists say
more research is
required to assess the seriousness of these
problems.
The question of whether genetically modified foods
are directly
hazardous to human health is at this point largely
hypothetical,
though consumer advocates say that's because it
could take years for
such health problems to emerge. Advocates and some
scientists agree
that the primary potential hazard of genetically
altered foods lies in
the possible transfer of antibiotic-resistant
genes to bacteria in
people's organs, a process which could lead to the
growth of
antibiotic-resistant disease strains. Also of
concern is the potential
for new toxins and allergens to be produced by
foreign proteins in
genetically modified foods.

The widespread sentiment that genetically modified
foods were being
shoved down people's throats without regard to
these environmental and
health concerns led to a popular backlash against
"frankenfoods" in
Europe this year. That, in turn, sparked consumer
protests in Japan,
Australia, New Zealand, and other countries. The
protesters have been
heard: Britain now requires all shops and
restaurants to notify
customers about genetically modified ingredients
in their food. In
September, Japanese importers announced they would
switch to supplying
only non-genetically modified crops to domestic
food manufacturers.
And in the most drastic precautionary move to
date, EU commissioners
have halted approvals of new genetically altered
organisms for at
least the next two years, or until stricter risk
assessment rules come
into place.

If the WTO adopts the rule-changes the US is
pushing, then the US will
be able to challenge the EU ban. If the WTO's
ruling in another case

=== message truncated ===>
________________________________
Changes to your subscription (unsubs, nomail,
digest) can be made by going to
http://sandboxmail.net/mailman/listinfo/sndbox_sandboxmail.net



=====
I wanted a perfect ending... Now, I've learned, the hard way, that 
some poems don't rhyme, and some stories don't have a clear beginning, 
middle, and end. Life is about not knowing, having to change, taking 
the moment, and making the best of it, without knowing what's going to 
happen next. Delicious ambiguity.
--Gilda Radner

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
________________________________

Changes to your subscription (unsubs, nomail, digest) can be made by 
going to > http://sandboxmail.net/mailman/listinfo/sndbox_sandboxmail.net



________________________________

Changes to your subscription (unsubs, nomail, digest) can be made by going to http://sandboxmail.net/mailman/listinfo/sndbox_sandboxmail.net