- This topic has 1 reply, 8 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Things have been rather quiet on this forum recently so I thought I’d stir the pot. There have been previous posts here, highly heated, on GMOs – this editorial just appeared in the Washington Post, and it may be interesting to this forum’s readers. (and remember, don’t shoot the messenger).
PEHBy Fred Hiatt February 8 at 8:12 PM
Sophisticated readers know a science denier when they see one: the libertarian irresponsibly attacking vaccine safety, the oil-state senator mocking climate theory, the southern Bible-thumper denying the fossil in front of his nose.But the biggest gap between public opinion and scientific consensus in the United States is not in the realm of vaccines, global warming or evolution but regarding the safety of genetically modified (GM) foods. And the science deniers on this topic are more likely to be Democratic than Republican, with college-educated Americans almost evenly split.
According to a survey conducted by the Pew Research Center in association with the American Association for the Advancement of Science, 88 percent of scientists believe GM foods are safe to eat, compared with only 37 percent of the public — a gap of 51 percentage points.
An equally overwhelming majority of scientists (87 percent) believe that climate change is mostly caused by human activity, and 50 percent of the public agrees — a gap of 37 percentage points. Fully 98 percent of scientists believe that humans have evolved over time, and 65 percent of the public agrees — a gap of 33 points.
The Pew/AAAS report does not attempt to explain why so many Americans reject the scientific consensus on GM foods. It notes that educated Americans are less skeptical of the science than the public at large, but not by that much: 49 percent of people with college degrees believe eating GM foods is safe, while 47 percent believe it isn’t.The report also doesn’t delve into political differences on these issues, but Lee Rainie, Pew’s director of Internet, science, and technology, shared some background. On climate change, the political breakdown is what you might expect: Republicans believe by 53 to 43 percent that the evidence is real, whereas Democrats are convinced 87 to 10 percent.
On vaccine policy, there was no difference between parties when Pew asked in 2009: 68 percent thought vaccination should be mandatory, while 30 percent thought parents should decide. Since then, Rainie said, the share of Republicans favoring parental choice rose by eight points, while the share of Democrats favoring parental choice declined by five.
And on genetically modified foods?
“Declared Republicans were more likely than declared Democrats to say GM foods are generally safe – 44% vs. 34%,” Rainie said in an e-mail. “But when you add those leaning towards each party to the mix, the differences between them become statistically insignificant. There are no differences on this issue among people who describe themselves as conservative, moderate, or liberal.”
Could it be that in this one case the public is right and the scientists are wrong? I’d say, only if you believe Gregor Mendel was risking our health when he began playing around with pea shoots in the 1850s. A more sober analysis, from the World Resources Institute last June, granted that “genetic modifications using genes from diverse species pose a greater risk of producing unexpected effects than conventional crossbreeding,” which “justifies mandatory safety studies.”
But WRI concluded that “there is no evidence that GM crops have actually harmed human health” and that “food safety does not justify rejecting genetic modification outright.”
The anti-GM movement seems to be fueled by a combination of anti-corporate suspicion, small-farm nostalgia and anxiety about unfamiliar technologies. It raises questions of environmental safety and corporate control as well as food safety. Some would argue that, unlike climate-change denialism or vaccine resistance, it’s harmless even if baseless — who cares if Manischewitz now feels compelled to offer a line of GM-free kosher foods?Unfortunately, this form of denialism also has victims, and they’re not the folks who may choose to pay a few cents more for GM-free matzo. As the WRI paper points out, farmers need to close a 69 percent gap between the crops they produced in 2006 and the food the world will need, given population growth, by 2050.
Though far from the only solution to this challenge, genetic modification can provide seeds that are more resistant to pests, drought or disease and that produce greater yields with less water or in poorer soil. They could be, in other words, one signficant component to avoiding mass hunger over the next generation. Unfortunately, resistance in rich, consuming nations discourages innovation and makes it more difficult for farmers in poor countries to adopt useful new technologies.
It’s no less an affront than ever that the U.S. Senate has installed as chairman of its environment committee a man who believes that global warming is “the greatest hoax,” or that a senator who is also a medical doctor would stoke unwarranted fears about vaccine safety. But the Pew survey suggests we might want to check our Whole Foods grocery carts before dialing up the outrage too high.
I don’t care what anyone says, this crap is bad. At some point in time, everyone said smoking was ok and it was such a norm. Then drugs are approved by the FDA and years later we find out that they cause all sorts of problems. There are tons of toxins that are in foods that the FDA allows for Americans that European countries will not allow. I work with folks with primarily stage four cancer and gmos have been linked to hematologic cancers in particular. There is also a recent study correlating gmo foods with autism. I hope people will wake up to this. When I move to CR, I will have an organic garden cultivated from non gmo seeds.
Why do you think that would be? Once I move there, I’ll be retired and will have all the time in the world to work on a garden and art.
[quote=”costaricafinca”]You will find that it is very difficult and time consuming to maintain an organic garden here.[/quote]
There are [i]sooo [/i]many insects who have nothing to do but to set out to destroy a garden. There are many of us in a similar position to yourself who have tried it…and are still trying to do it 8) plus not all soil and conditions are suitable for growing vegetables.
[quote=”lillianwickram”]I don’t care what anyone says, this crap is bad. At some point in time, everyone said smoking was ok and it was such a norm. Then drugs are approved by the FDA and years later we find out that they cause all sorts of problems. There are tons of toxins that are in foods that the FDA allows for Americans that European countries will not allow. I work with folks with primarily stage four cancer and gmos have been linked to hematologic cancers in particular. There is also a recent study correlating gmo foods with autism. I hope people will wake up to this. When I move to CR, I will have an organic garden cultivated from non gmo seeds.[/quote]
Yes, this crap is bad! Every illness I had went away when I stopped eating grains and GMO’s. You can do organic here in Cr. I use bat gauno for fertilizer and neem oil for insect control. I have bananas, pineaplle, limon, avacodo, beans, onions, garlic, basil, parsley, kale, beets.
I never said it is impossible, but requires more work.
We grow mangoes, bananas, nancie, jacote, cashews, avocados, lemons, oranges, papayas, guanabana various passion fruit, 3 varieties of pineapples, coconuts, basil, oregano and even our own neem trees …:wink:… but many of the veggies that one may have enjoyed in North America will not fare so well.:cry: growing in the actual ground, and not in a pot, hopefully away from the reach of insects such as the cutter ants that will reduce your crop to ‘nothing’ overnight.Thanks, Pharg, for stirring the pot. We now do, in the lab, what nature has done since Earth began and what human selection has done for thousands of years – we modify the genetic makeup of plants and animals. How else did the wolf become the Golden Retriever. Faster is better and the lab is best because starvation is something to be avoided.
That’s right Doug. When facts aren’t on your side, always, always resort to hysteria and name calling.
[quote=”sweikert925″]Everything you have ever consumed (aside from pure H2O) has been modified from what nature had in mind. [/quote]
To pick a nit, pure H2O has also been modified “from nature”, depending on how far back you are willing go in time (i.e., more than 6,000 years :twisted:). All atoms [eventually molecules] ultimately came from stellar explosions.
I’ll accept that all GMOs are hazardous when I see independent research reporting such. [not precluding that there may be a bummer somewhere among them]. Monsanto assurances and blog anecdotes don’t do it for me as proofs of unequivocal harm and badness.. I am much more concerned about C.R. pesticides use and their effects on liver function and hormonal systems, especially in kids.
PEHChoose organic, support organic. Funny in the USA they charge farmers to certify their crops as organic, subsidize the rest.genetic modification, inserting pesticide into the genetic make up is different than what Dr. Welsh for example did with grapes. by the time they provide you with scientific proof, you’ll be poisened. Want a list of the stuff that the scientific method gave the thumbs up to? Watch forks offer knives or http://www.thefutureoffood.com otherwise eat as you wish, it’s a free country 🙂
[quote=”Lotus123″]Choose organic, support organic. Funny in the USA they charge farmers to certify their crops as organic[/quote]
In the U.S. the term “organic” is NOT defined by law or by regulations that the FDA enforces. You can grow your carrots in bat pee in the U.S. and call them organic if you wish. As you say, it’s a free country [though some would dispute that].
To a chemist, ‘organic’ means a generally complex molecule based on one or more carbon atoms. So, if your fruit contains formaldehyde, dioxin, benzene, or Roundup, it’s still technically “organic”. Chew well before swallowing.Have to love that farmers here in CR shout that their food is organic but don’t have to prove that they raise crops without manufactured fertilizers, pesticides or herbicides. Love mushrooms? The best medium for them is cow manure. Yum. Besides, isn’t all food “organic”? We aren’t eating chunks of granite, are we?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
