Share

3 thoughts on “More GM Food Cartoons

  1. I have to admit I’m biased against genetically modified products. The pharmaceutical industry’s great GM “success” was the development of synthetic “human” insulin for treatment of diabetes. With its release, the production of animal-based natural insulin was largely curtailed. However, the “human” product causes seizures in some victims… er, patients. Since I am one of those, I feel that the fact that the “side effect” was well known from clinical trials, and had never been associated with the natural product, authorities must have received huge “contributions” to approve such a faulty product.

  2. Seems you have a few misconceptions about GM. Saving seeds for example, farmers have chosen not to do that since the 1930s! (Basic Mendelian genetics) If farmers wanted to they certainly can choose to but seeds to replant, but they want the best so they don’t. Your stance on labelling also does not fit with the science, I’ll link you to a source who can put it better than I can. http://www.aaas.org/news/statement-aaas-board-directors-labeling-genetically-modified-foods. If you are interested to know more I’m happy to help where I can, I’m aware of studies if you want to see them showing environmental and social benifits of GM crops. I am also able to put you in contact with scientists who work in thei field so you can ask as many questions as you like 🙂

  3. Hi, just a quick few things.

    “but I think we should have a choice of what we eat (and that means good labelling)”

    When it comes to labeling, there are considerable reasons to not go the route of mandated labeling for genetically engineered foods. I could go into details on things like, say, the drastic impact on food costs (it’s not as simple as sticking a label on the box) or that the whole “right to know” is really just a call to arms for the people radically opposed to GE, but I think that the best argument against mandated labeling is that the food has been shown to be perfectly safe for human consumption (I can provide scientific references if necessary) and we already have opt-in labels like “Organic” and “Non-GMO” for people who don’t want to eat it. We do not mandate “Non-Kosher”, “Non-Halal”, or “Has Gluten”, so why should we label “Contains GMOs”? Why force a label for a unimportant difference for most people?

    If there is market demand for an opt-in label, then there will be products labeled as such. There already is, so there are labels. Do not care that it won’t harm you? Get a “Non-GMO” product.

    “and GM should not be used as a way of preventing farmers from self-sufficiency (saving seeds).”

    It’s not. Farmers who buy seed don’t save seed, in general. They buy new seed yearly, to continuously benefit from this thing called “Heterosis”. Basically, they get fresh seed every year because it is better. Those that do save purchased seed (and this is not just GM seed, as many, many different kinds of patented seeds are sold), then they are usually in violation of the contract which they signed when they purchased the seed. You probably see Monsanto blasted around for “suing innocent farmers” but the reality is that they are just enforcing their legally binding contracts on their seed and are unfairly singled-out for doing so when other seed companies do it more often than Monsanto.

    Today was your agricultural lesson. Have a nice day!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *