Here
and
Now

opinions

Why does Europe hate GM food and is it about to change its mind?

13 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2014 AFP

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

13 Comments
Login to comment

The subjects that will be of high controversy are generally those that are too complex for simple rhetoric to address and are thus prone to misguided statements, either pro or anti, that are used by those engaged in the debate as a substitute for informed opinion. There are many such subjects and today GM foods are perhaps at the top of this list. The anti-GM crowd has emotion on its side here, coupled with very little scientific findings to support their cause. To my knowledge, and I'm no GM expert, there is not one peer reviewed study that has found that GM foods are less safe than non-GM foods. The pro-GM people have some science, from my study of the literature its one of the most studied areas in modern agricultural genetics, that show that GM foods are safe. But this alone is not what is motivating the pro-GM folk, its profits. So, the debaters talk past each other. the pro-GM folk will point to studies without reading them, which most if not all show GM food not as being better but rather just not more dangerous than non-GM food, while the anti-GM folk will claim GM foods to be unsafe without any real evidence to support them. So it boils down to emotion vs. profits. From my limited study on literature of this subject what I have seen is that GM foods are good so long as we keep the idea of good confined to creating pestilence resistance crops or hardier crops that can withstand more extreme climates. However, when we measure GM food against the legal reality of agri-business, such as we have seen in the US, there is a down side to GM food. Having a large company being able to successfully sue a small farmer due to air pollination of his crops with trademark owned GM crops, being grown in the next field, is not good for agriculture in the long run. In the name of profits we are surrendering a natural part of plant reproduction to the large agriculture corporation and their army of lawyers. The anti-GM folks need to think about the positives and not over hype the health aspects and the state needs to step in and regulate large agricultural businesses in a way that protects the small time farmer. As is oft the case with complex issues, my opinion on this issue is that its not an either/or debate.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Organic or chemically free food is placed a such a high cost

They're not placed at a high cost, they cost more because the yields per acre are much, much lower than for GM food, and the losses due to disease are much higher.

There's no conspiracy - growers use GM seed because they make more money with GM seed. That's the whole point.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Is GM food safe?

It has not been proven that it is...........................

1 ( +2 / -1 )

It has NOT been warmly embraced by people, but perhaps it has by the government. No one really knows how safe or unsafe GM food is. Basically, the population is now undergoing an involuntary lab 'experiment'.

However, GM food aside, there are many other things to consier about this type of farming. First, the variety is quite narrow. Once the growers find a strain that suits their need, it is the only crop grown. Farmers are being forced to grow the crop or go out of business.

Monsanto is a monster that is getting out of control and they want to expand their contol into Europe was well. I hope that Europe fights it if for no other reason than to see what the differences will be between the people from Europe and countries that consume GM. Perhaps we'll find out in a generation if there are any significant problems.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

No way have the people of the United States "warmly embraced" genetically modified crops. The fact is most GMO food products are not labeled properly and MANY people here in the states want them labeled so they can make their own decision on whether or not to consume them.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Yogi Zuna is right on target-the labeling of GM products is just about non existent in the U.S. and Monsanto's lobbyists are surely paying mucho dineros to keep the consumer in the dark!

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I find the entire GM debate entirely wrong-headed. Even so-called "organic" wheat is so far from what our ancestors ate that it is causing digestive and immunological problems. These changes are a result of farmers "naturally" and "organically" selecting for crops with higher yields. This is why the GM vs "organic" debate is so wrong-headed, it isn't GM-evil vs organic-good, it is simple GM-worse vs organic-bad.

Is there anyone interested in what's actually good for humans? No. And that's the problem with this sort of debate, the factions get polarised and everyone forgets that they're both acting irresponsibly.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"It has NOT been warmly embraced by people, but perhaps it has by the government. No one really knows how safe or unsafe GM food is."

It one of the most studied areas in agricultural genetics...do a citation search if you don't believe me. So far there has been no studies to show that GM food is unsafe.

"Is GM food safe?

It has not been proven that it is..........................."

Never mind the bad logic, the onus is on those that "feel" it is unsafe...study after study prove that it is no less safe than non-GM food.

"labeling of GM products is just about non existent in the U.S. and Monsanto's lobbyists are surely paying mucho dineros to keep the consumer in the dark!"

To me this is the angle that GM opponents should pursue the ability of large agri-companies to squash debate is a problem. The case for better labeling is much easier to make than an emotional appeal to the product being unsafe despite ample evidence that it is no less safe than non-GM food.

"It has NOT been warmly embraced by people, but perhaps it has by the government."

It has been warmly embraced by farmers the world over from Chinese cotton farmers to Canadian rapeseed farmers to European potato farmers.

In many ways there is a parallel in this debate and the anti-vaccination folk.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Yes, and the terminator genes are now spreading to the natural plants as well. meaning that in the short future, we will have to buy our seeds from Monsato and friends, at thousands of times higher costs than natural seeds.

notasap - I understand you're paid pretty well to lobby for the GM food, but you're doing a lame job. Research into all the troubles farmers run with Monsato and its policies..

2 ( +2 / -0 )

With any large scale mono-agriculture there are huge issues. Thankfully Japan still has many small farms.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2013/06/09/monsanto-roundup-herbicide.aspx

Monsanto and others openly admit the toxicity of this stuff and in fact if you are growing GM crops you must leave areas non-GM for the insects/birds etc to live. If anything I would say the US consumer is moving away from GM and asking for all GM/GMO crops to be labeled whereas the Gov/Obama/FDA is very GM.

The State of Vermont enabled GM labeling laws and are now being sued by these large oil-based synthetic drug companies.

http://www.vtrighttoknowgmos.org/

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Here's the argument against GM foods boiled down to a nutshell:

"GM foods have not been proven safe."

So you then ask the obvious question, "Then what would constitute proof that it was safe?"

The response is almost always, "I don't know."

So you ask the follow-up question, "Has anyone become ill or died because they ate GM foods?"

Again, "I don't know."

So there's a lot of fear with nothing to support that fear. People object because they fear the unknown. Even when someone tells them why their fear is unwarranted, they still desperately cling to that fear. It's like trying to argue religion, you're not going to change their belief no matter how much evidence you can provide to support your argument.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

http://www.loe.org/shows/segments.html?programID=13-P13-00049&segmentID=2

A French scientists did a 2yr study on Monsanto's own 90 day study. Possible lawsuit over the retraction of his research also.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0a_koGKMwYM Séralini

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gilles-Eric_Séralini anti-Séralini page

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites