Genetic Engineering does indeed have problems

Chris J. Durden drdn at
Wed Feb 23 23:08:25 EST 2000

At 09:46  22/02/00 +0000, you wrote:
>Chris J. Durden wrote:
>> GM/GE products are different from traditionally selected foods because
>> they are patentable life forms!
>Chris, that seems to be an economic designation that does not tell us
whether or not 
>the newest GE/GM crops now in production would be more likely to fail 
>special food safety tests as compared to traditionally selected foods.
- - - - 
  You are correct. However we have the right to be informed of the
different economic designation! I am suspicious that we are denied that right.
- - - -
>Similarly, even though some GMO food crops now on the market like Bt corn
>have been federally registered as pesticides with the EPA, that scary
>designation does not tell us whether or not Bt corn
>would be more likely to fail special food safety tests
>as compared to traditionally selected hybrid corn.
- - - -
  That is not the question. I do not wish to eat BT corn, nor do a lot of
other people. I want full disclosure on the packaging! I do not want to eat
it by accident. I do not eat MSG, BHT, BHA either, knowingly, which means I
read minute labelling and eat far less of these additives than most
consumers. I think I feel healthier because of this. This is my right to
make these choices.
- - - -
>> I am willing to take my chances with non patented food but I would like
>> some safety tests done first on food that is different enough to be
>> patentable.
>When you say "different enough" this doesn't explain what's biologically
>different about the GMO food crops now in production that would make them
>inherently more likely to fail special food safety tests as compared to
>traditionally selected food crops.
- - - -
  They are different enough to have been afforded legal protection! It is
up to those who developed them to explain the biological differences and
convince us they are worth eating. Have food safety tests been done?
- - - -
>The reason this distinction is important is that we must consider just what
>special "food safety tests" might be conducted. If there is no inherent
>difference between GMO foods and traditionally selected ones, alot 
>of traditionally selected food crops that we have safely eaten for years 
>might fail those special safety tests with the same frequency as the GMO
>foods now in production if they were tested side by side. 
- - - -
 Fine, let them fail. We do not need to knowingly eat cycad seeds, or
aflatoxin tainted peanuts or corn grown or stored at high temperature, or
the wrong kind of chich peas or lentils, or rare lamb brains (they are
delicious). Tests provide us with information on which to make our
decisions, as smokers and non-smokers do. Concealing the nature of new
foods helps no-one in the long run!

Let's just label products and get back to talking LEPS!

......Chris Durden

>Paul Cherubini

More information about the Leps-l mailing list