Recently in the Denver Post - Vincent Carroll wrote an opinion piece about GMOs. I really feel the need to rebut his piece because he is simply wrong about GMOs, people that oppose them and many other things in his article. There is so much wrong with the article it is hard to know where to start. I think facts are a good place to start: http://earthopensource.org/files/pdfs/GMO_Myths_and_Truths/GMO_Myths_and_Truths_1.3.pdf.
Believe me, I am no fan of Whole Foods. They are obnoxiously expensive and for all the tough talk, they have not actually done much to push the food industry in the right direction. The labeling thing could turn into something but right now it's just a way to evade negative press from the eco/green movement and left leaning politicians who care about food issues. Targeting 2018 to get the system up and running is just a joke. For too long they were in cahoots with agribusiness and pioneered the misleading "natural" label. For those of you who are not aware, Whole Foods is creating a program where all foods in the store will be labeled including any GMO. They have set a target date of 2018 to have the system operational.
But enough about Whole Foods. I am pro-science and most people I know who are anti-GMO are also pro-science. We want long-term independent studies to be done and documented and published in major scientific journals. (Before these foods get into the food supply.) The United States government and the major players in agribusiness (Monsanto and Con-Agra) have stymied all attempts to produce actual studies. The FDA has done absolutely nothing to produce any credible evidence that GMO crops are safe for human consumption. The head of the FDA is a former Monsanto employee for goodness sakes. If that doesn't sound an alarm then you are part of the problem. Even in Europe, where they smartly banned GMO's to start, have not been able to perform long-term studies because of pressure from the United States. It is a travesty.
Calling people who want food to be tested correctly worrywarts is the worst kind of yellow journalism and Mr. Carroll should be ashamed of himself. Name-calling, that's the best argument he can come up with?
Locavorism is about much more than simply reducing energy costs in food production. The American movement spearheaded by Alice Waters in the Bay Area is inspired by the International Slow Food Movement whose philosophies revolve around re-establishing our connection to our food. It's a push against packaging, processing, excessive handling and manipulation of food products. It is attempting to embrace what is best about cooking and sharing food with friends and family. Cooking civilized humanity. Food is more than just fuel. It is life and a connection to place and history.
To make fun of something, you need to understand it first, and Mr. Carroll obviously does not understand Locavorism or the Slow Food Movement.
These are just the big points he touchers on, and of course since he is pro-"cutting-edge plant science" he leaves out a lot of issues that GMOs raise.
Most important is the effort to patent food by agribusiness. This is a horrible idea. It is antithetical to the concept of the public good. People must be able to control their food. Monsanto is attempting to gain control of the entire world food market and it is frankly just dangerous for everyone, literally everyone on Earth.
Seed sharing and storing for future use is a time honored tradition in farming. The patent process is destroying this because Monsanto believes people should pay for planting seeds each year (which of course makes sense from their limited financial perspective). However, instead of working with farmers to continue one of the most basic practices of farming, agribusiness is using lawsuits to threaten one of the most basic pillars of farming.
Another time honored tradition in farming is that you are responsible for your crops and the damage they cause. If your crops cross-pollinate with another farmer's crops traditionally you were responsible for that and were the one who needed to take action to prevent that from happening. This caused farmers to be very conservative in how, where, and what they planted. Monsanto has turned this tradition on its head and has sued many farmers because the GMO seed got into their farm. The courts have stupidly upheld Monsanto's position and those farmers have been forced out of business or forced to pay gigantic fees. This is just another tactic to intimidate farmers and force them to use the GMO seed.
Companies protest regulation, law, and oversight when they have something to hide. Bio-tech has fought labeling, poured millions of dollars into lobbying, has pushed for legislation that makes it illegal to photograph farming processes, and basically has done everything possible to hide information from the public. It is exactly the same thing that Big Tobacco did for years before this country got wise to the con. This is not the track record of companies with our best interest in mind.
It is a myth that we will not be able to feed the world's population unless we have bio-engineered food. Up to 50% of food waste occurs during the harvest, packing and shipping process. The United States wastes more food than many countries consume in a year. Also, there is no need for a global food market whereby only a handful of producing countries "feed the world". It is much better to help every locality develop the resources they have and to engage in sustainable farming practices. Choking the supply is the wrong approach from a bio-diversity perspective, from a public health perspective, from a local empowerment perspective, and from a value perspective.
Never in the history of the planet has decreased bio-diversity been a positive. GMO crops decrease bio-diversity.
Right now there is a crisis in the world bee population. A part of that crisis is the rising use of pesticides. It is slowly being proven that chemical residues from the over-use of pesticides is a major component of the bee population destruction. GMOs encourage pesticide use. First off, they are designed to be used with Roundup - the major product from Monsanto. Second, the weeds that Roundup is designed to kill quickly become immune to the Roundup which requires more virulent strains. The process spirals out of control but is centered on the idea that pesticides must be used. Additionally, glyphosates (the main active agent in Roundup) have not had nearly enough testing and once again the FDA has rubber-stamped the agribusiness "tests".
We need to figure out ways to decrease the use of pesticides, not increase use, not only for the bees but also for the overall health of the public.
Please google this: indian farmer suicide monsanto
It is a sad story. It is amazing that as society has made so many improvements, people (because companies are run by people) repeat the mistakes of the past. Once it was thought cruel and unjust to essentially enslave people through the process that Monsanto has used with the farmers around the globe. Companies in the 1800s would rent the workers living space, sell them food, etc and everything was carefully priced so that the workers were always in debt therefore forcing them to continue working. What is it about the pursuit of money that breeds such immoral behavior? Hugh Grant, Monsanto CEO, is most likely a very nice, moral person. He has friends, he has a family that he cares about. And yet, as the leader of a giant corporation that makes billions of dollars, he is able to ignore the effects of the decisions he makes relating to the products of his company and the business practices his company engages in. I'm sure he would say something like, "I have a duty to the share holders to increase profits..." And somehow magically that absolves him of all sin in his mind. There is a disconnect that I just don't understand. It is truly cognitive dissonance in action.
So I will get down from my high horse now. This is something that is important to me. I love food and I wish that everyone else could experience high quality food in the same way.
No comments:
Post a Comment