Posted by bru, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Nov 7, 2012 at 12:09 am bru is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online
that really steams me ... how can people be so stupid.
but then again while the country may have the brains to reject people trying to buy high office with their own money, california seems to still be star struck and swayed by money to some extent .... and a lot of money was said to have been brought to bear on defeating this proposition, saying it would cost a lot and raise prices.
Posted by C, a member of the Palo Alto High School community, on Nov 7, 2012 at 11:53 am
Because 37 was the reverse of advertising cholesterol free peanut butter. In the case, it was giving a totally-true statement with no meaning in order to gain popularity: in this case, it's giving a somewhat-at-best-true statement with the intention and connotation of being bad.
The exceptions made little to no sense and I think because of the stigma associated to GMO foods even "good GMO" foods would be effected. What about its' effect on golden rice?
Posted by Anon., a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Nov 7, 2012 at 1:40 pm
My opinion is that genetic engineering is great for research. Things like engineering bacteria to produce insulin ... things like that - AWESOME USE OF THE TECHNOLOGY. Or algae to produce biodiesel.
But for changing plants, it perhaps might be useful at some point, but the corporate SOBs have spoiled a possibly good technology by environmental and political abuse.
I do not want to see anymore artificial genes in the environment than there already are, in plants, animals or fish ... ie. salmon.
By the metrics these GMO foods have caused more problems than they have solved. Pests and weeds have adapted to the changes in the plants it meant to protect to the point that more pesticides are needed. A totally boondoggle. Our agriculture industry seems to bear no resemblance at all to the farms we all see on the packages of chemical crap they sell us. And now, like the nuclear industry they have poisoned any trust the public has in them even if they did have something great ... as I believe nuclear is.
Putting this stuff in the environment and letting it escape is bad enough, but they had to then persecute innocent farmers trying to make a living and ruin them. Hooking Indian farmers on a technology that did not work for them and has driven significant numbers to suicide is another shame on American military corporatism.
I want to know and be able to ignore and tell others to ignore these bad products and irresponsible companies, and they know labeling will the death of them so they lie, cheat and try to bully their way into the market instead of doing so by goodwill and brand loyalty had they been good corporate citizens.
Posted by Anon., a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Nov 7, 2012 at 1:45 pm
Golden rice should sink or swim on it's own, it should not be forced on anyone, and should have to survive the public perception without the public being lied to or manipulated ... at least any more than we already are. Hiding it and forcing it on people is not the way to the go, and the Republican solution always seems to assume people are stupid so fool or force them to comply.
Perhaps it holds promise, or perhaps it is another wild goose chase, but if these too big to fail and too much money to convince people corporations realized they had to act responsibly it would be an all around net plus for everyone, even them in the long run ... but they never think about the long run.
Posted by Jack, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Nov 7, 2012 at 2:31 pm
"Golden rice is a variety of Oryza sativa rice produced through genetic engineering to biosynthesize beta-carotene, a precursor of vitamin A, in the edible parts of rice. The research was conducted with the goal of producing a fortified food to be grown and consumed in areas with a shortage of dietary vitamin A, which is estimated to kill 670,000 children under 5 each year." (from Wikipedia).
Posted by Jack, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Nov 7, 2012 at 3:49 pm
>Nothing. What's wrong with labeling them?
If there is nothing unharmful to the consumer's health, why should a needless label be required? If people want to be sure that their food is not GMO, then it is up to those producers (of non-GMO food) to advertize that fact with their own labels.
BTW, most modern foods are genetically modified through selective crop breeding.
Posted by For 37, a resident of the Meadow Park neighborhood, on Nov 7, 2012 at 4:19 pm
GM food labeling is required in many countries. The US is behind the ball on this consumer protection issue, as it has been many times in the past. Remember lead in paint for instance? It was banned in the US DECADES after it was banned in Europe.
There is no evidence whatsoever that our GMO foods are dangerous to anyone..in fact, there is only evidence that they are more resistant to diseases and drought. In other words, they can feed more people.