Shifting The Burden Of Proof Changes Nothing In The GM Debate
Keith Farnish | 22.08.2008 10:09 | Analysis | Bio-technology | Ecology | Globalisation | World
Imagine the scene: you walk into a bar and someone immediately faces you up, brandishing their fists, red with pent-up aggression clearly eager to send you on to the floor or worse. He screams into your face, spittle flecks flying across your nose and lips, “Prove to me that you deserve not to be punched repeatedly in the face!”
Doesn’t sound very reasonable, does it? Especially considering that you have never met the person and, to your knowledge, haven’t done anything except mind your own business and just get on with the job of living for most of your life. Yet, here is a situation where the aggressor is asking you to explain to them why they should not hit you. Surely, in all that is logical and moral, it should be the aggressor explaining the reasons for wanting to hit you.
And yet, the aggressor seemingly now has the moral upper hand as far as the UK Government are concerned. In an interview with the Sunday Telegraph [
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/theroyalfamily/2571514/Prince-Charles-wrong-on-GM-says-minister.html], Environment Minister Phil Woolas made the following extraordinary response to Prince Charles regarding the use of genetically modified crops:
“It’s easy for those of us with plentiful food supplies to ignore the issue, but we have a responsibility to use science to help the less well off where we can. I’m asking to see the evidence. If it has been a disaster, then please provide the evidence.”
Prince Charles, for his part had stated that the current use of genetically modified crops had been an environmental disaster which, if you have any concern for the irreversible genetic changes seeping into wild plant varieties or the green deserts that accompany the large scale planting of GMOs, or even the completely unknown congenital effects of inserting alien genes into a natural organism, you couldn’t reasonably argue with. In fact Prince Charles is being extremely far-sighted: he knows the power that corporations have over governments, a power that is far in excess of any power previously known since the dawn of humanity, so is right to predict a future in which any pretence of environmental concern by the greenwashing business lobby will be completely washed away by their irrepressible hunger for more and more money.
The logical about face by the UK government does not reflect genuine concern for world hunger; *it reflects a massive business opportunity for the GMO companies in finally getting the big break they have lobbied for over the last 20 years*. As with the Canadian and Russian submarines currently cruising the widening Arctic waters to protect their potential oil and gas reserves, the GMO corporations are cruising the government lobbies of the world as the people of the world become ever more addicted to a meat rich diet that requires an inordinate amount of grain to sustain, an oil rich life that is cutting into global food supplies and a changing climate that is catching farmers around the world by surprise.
All of these changes have been initiated by corporations and their slavishly obedient government servants. The slavishly obedient government servants only have to change the way we think about evidence, and the GM experiment will finally be rolled out to the farms of the world. An unstoppable, irreversible cancer that was allowed to happen all because we trusted politicians.
And yet, the aggressor seemingly now has the moral upper hand as far as the UK Government are concerned. In an interview with the Sunday Telegraph [
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/theroyalfamily/2571514/Prince-Charles-wrong-on-GM-says-minister.html], Environment Minister Phil Woolas made the following extraordinary response to Prince Charles regarding the use of genetically modified crops: “It’s easy for those of us with plentiful food supplies to ignore the issue, but we have a responsibility to use science to help the less well off where we can. I’m asking to see the evidence. If it has been a disaster, then please provide the evidence.”
Prince Charles, for his part had stated that the current use of genetically modified crops had been an environmental disaster which, if you have any concern for the irreversible genetic changes seeping into wild plant varieties or the green deserts that accompany the large scale planting of GMOs, or even the completely unknown congenital effects of inserting alien genes into a natural organism, you couldn’t reasonably argue with. In fact Prince Charles is being extremely far-sighted: he knows the power that corporations have over governments, a power that is far in excess of any power previously known since the dawn of humanity, so is right to predict a future in which any pretence of environmental concern by the greenwashing business lobby will be completely washed away by their irrepressible hunger for more and more money.
The logical about face by the UK government does not reflect genuine concern for world hunger; *it reflects a massive business opportunity for the GMO companies in finally getting the big break they have lobbied for over the last 20 years*. As with the Canadian and Russian submarines currently cruising the widening Arctic waters to protect their potential oil and gas reserves, the GMO corporations are cruising the government lobbies of the world as the people of the world become ever more addicted to a meat rich diet that requires an inordinate amount of grain to sustain, an oil rich life that is cutting into global food supplies and a changing climate that is catching farmers around the world by surprise.
All of these changes have been initiated by corporations and their slavishly obedient government servants. The slavishly obedient government servants only have to change the way we think about evidence, and the GM experiment will finally be rolled out to the farms of the world. An unstoppable, irreversible cancer that was allowed to happen all because we trusted politicians.
Keith Farnish
Homepage:
http://www.unsuitablog.com
Comments
Hide the following 4 comments
There is evidence that GM is harmful
22.08.2008 10:29
I have several short points:
GM foods are not ordinary foods and are therefore inherently different to what we have been eating for millions of years as a species. They are created in laboratories using genes which are synthetic versions of the originals.
GM foods are not safe and have been proven not to be so for by independent research scientists at the Institute of Science in Society. See url
These scientists are not in the pay of Government or organisations who are interested in a profit sector which leaves the control of food, the ecology in the hands of lab technicians.
GM companies are not being ensured for this experimentation on the environment, organic farming or on human health via their GM foods because no one is prepared to underwrite the risks.
Organic farming is small scale and is a real opportunity for all to take away the control of what they eat rather than being told what to eat by Government.
I for one do not want to experiment with human health and am also not prepared to underwrite the risks taken by companies with track records like that of Monsanto. The European Union must take action to protect the citizen from the harmful impacts of a technology sector that is ripe for abuse and monopolisation of our food chain.
food lover - b
Plenty of evidence of harm
22.08.2008 12:01
Here's plenty of evidence of harm already done by GM crops and GM foods:
In summary...
* Genetically Modified plants contaminate conventionally grown and organic plants and honey.
* Crops which have been Genetically Modified to resist herbicides encourage the use of larger quantities of herbicide, with the effect that both weeds and beneficial plants are killed indiscriminately. These herbicides are harmful to both the environment and to humans.
* Crops which have been Genetically Modified to contain their own insecticide, such as Bt, cause insects to become resistant to the insecticide.
* Genetically Modified plants may crossbreed with wild species to produce "superweeds", which cannot be eliminated using standard herbicides.
* The use of Genetically Modified seed encourages dependence by the farmers on a single seed supplier and may involve the purchase of both the seed and herbicide from one supplier. Seed companies impose 'licensing agreements' for the seed which forbid the farmer from replanting seed from one year to the next.
* Toxic compounds such as glyphosate (RoundUp) and Bromoxynil are used on Genetically Modified crops. The US Environmental Protection Agency has approved the use of Bromoxynil despite acknowledging "...serious concerns about developmental risks to infants and children."
* The nature of genetic modification and long term effects are not well understood as these products have not been properly tested before being released into the environment. For example, in the USA, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) approved the use of all currently approved Genetically Modified crops based on data supplied by the manufacturers.
* Genetic material inserted into plants can transfer to animals and humans in the intestinal wall
* Crops which have been Genetically Modified to resist insects kill not just the "target insect" (such as the borer or weevil) but beneficial insects (such as the Monarch butterfly). They also threaten the habitats of other animals, such as birds.
* Crops which have been Genetically Modified to produce pharmaceuticals can contaminate the food supply.
no to gm, yes to organic
Sound's like the Minister needs a lesson
22.08.2008 13:18
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_principle
GM usurps God!!!!
22.08.2008 20:02
losing money due to secondary pests that have emerged after growing Bt cotton
for seven years in the country. These pests have increased so much that farmers
were spraying their crops up to 20 times during a growing season [8].
Read the rest of this article here
The horsemen are galloping.
Satan