This time I'm an Environmentalist!

[RobBob]

While I like to debunk poorly-reasoned "environmentalism" when I see it (because it is when people derive satisfaction simply from being politically correct without using their brains), I would like to point out some of the world's biggest corporate thugs and bunglers:

 

article on Monsanto suing non-rBST dairy

 

The idiots at Monsanto single-handedly bungled the image of gm grains in the UK, galvanizing Europe against it---regardless of whether you care about gm grains, it was a marketing disaster of Titanic proportion. Then they sold so much gm seed into the US grain system that it is nearly impossible for our grain storage infrastructure to isolate non-gm grain at a reasonable cost (Monsanto's intent, probably).

 

Now they are suing a dairy who is trying to differentiate its product in the marketplace. They are also suing farmers who store seed, in order to protect their patents, making examples out of them through huge fines. These guys are the people we should all be after---they are assholes.

[iain]

[Fence_Sitter]

something a little closer to home is th fish farms in the sound... can anyone else expalin how i caught an atlantic salmon in the sound?

[RobBob]

Are you sure, or is that a fish story ? Most escapees from salmon farms do not survive the wild. IMO, the whole farmed salmon vs wild salmon argument is so deeply politicized, it's hard to get a straight answer about it. Traditional fishermen don't like the fact that Chilean salmon has invaded their market---that's predictable (it's also expanded their market). Also, people in the US view coastal waters as a public resource, and don't want to see private enterprise there---also predictable. What's disingenuous is cooking up bad science to support your argument, which I believe both sides in the salmon fight have done.

 

And actually, the gm grain issue is just as close-to-home, FS, affecting most of what you probably eat!

[Jim]

The escapee problem is true. A couple of years ago there was a large Atlantic Salmon escape from pens in Puget Sound. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife actually gave dispensation to anglers to go catch as many as they could, no limits and no license needed.

It was for a limited time. The other problems that have come up is the waste products in confined areas from floating net pens. There's been some recent court decisions in BC forcing fish farms to keep areas fallow for longer periods to allow the seabed to recover. Also been problems of increased sea lice infections of native strains in areas where there are floating net pens. And one other item - Atlantic Salmon have been found migrating with native salmon during spawning runs in BC. No spawning has been documented but they are using available resources and the trend is disconcerting.

 

And yes, use of a public resouce for private profit should be a concern. Sounds familar, eh?

[RobBob]

There you have it. We have trolled out old Jim to present the environmentalist science, and the wild-catch fishermen side with them of course.

 

Any Chilean salmon producers out there to trot out their science? In the scheme of things, only a very small amount of salmon is farmed in the coastal waters of the US...somewhat more in Canada (particularly NB)...but still largely a Chile/Norway/Iceland/Orkney/Scotland industry.

[Jim]

Just addressing another misconception. You're welcome.

[RobBob]

Thanks for your editorial comments. I'm more interested in Monsanto, and how to reverse this untraceable gm mess that it has made in our food system. And how to de-nut it from picking on the little guys.

[Jim]

It is a good question. Monsanto is interested in one thing, their bottom line. And like some of the other big names they are pushing the issue on the EU (and us) but don't want to label their product to give the consumer the ultimate choice. Seems like if you're a free market person (which relies on a free flow of goods, services, and information) then labeling should not be a problem.

[RobBob]

In addition to that, there is a strong movement toward traceability in food (back to individual farms and even animals). But the large bulk of our grains move through a single grain-handling and distribution system that cannot separate gm and non-gm corn and soybeans. Monsanto knew this, and knew that once gm grains reached a signicant percentage in the system, the 'horse was out of the barn.'

 

To further confuse the issue, other parts of the world claim to not use gm grains, but black-market seed penetrates into the market and contaminates supply.

 

I personally don't mind eating meat from animals fed gm corn and soy. But I resent the Hell out of one company botching our single grain system in world trade. It is almost infeasible to run a large food or feed operation without purposely or accidently putting gm grain through it.

[chelle]

We saw a pretty good Frontline program on GM foods in my nutrition class during winter quarter. Gives some of the history and lays out the debate of how the whole mess got started. GM is in a lot more places than you realize because of the labeling (lack of that is). Most corn, soy and some potatoes are GM. My impression about the US food market is that unless you buy certified organic food you can assume there is some level of GM in what you are eating. You can probably find it at the public library if you're interested.

 

The producers (Monsantos and the like) argue that it is safe. Has caused no health problems that they know of. They fail to admit that there is no mechanism for tracking digestive or allergic illnesses that may be caused by GM foods and gathering data about GM effects on people's health.

 

Personally I can only eat organic bananas because the regular ones make my mouth itch and upset my stomach. In the Frontline program they talked about how they'd been working on modifying them and I think we're the guinea pigs on whether it's a good thing...

[j_b]

true enough. in some ways, we have been guinea pigs for a while now (antibiotics and hormones in meat, and whatever else we don't really know about). personally i buy as much organic stuff as i can, both for health and to hurt them where it counts. i feel the cost is worth it.

[Kiwi]

Man, that is a stupid lawsuit! Suing a dairy farm because they sell to customers who wouldn't buy Monsanto milk anyways. That's like an pesticide firms suing organic veggie growers for loss of business.

[Fence_Sitter]

yeah guy... i still have the head in my freezer... getting a digi camera soon and i will send to you... if you know what to look for, it is really obvious that this is an atlantic salmon... pisses me off...

[j_b]

GM Food for Thought

 

"Unless you've gone exclusively organic, the odds are you've eaten potatoes that are registered pesticides. Monsanto's New Leaf Superior potato is engineered to produce the insecticide Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt). Bt kills the Colorado potato beetle but it is also in every one of the New Leaf Superior's cells. Thus, it is legally registered with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a pesticide, not a food...and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) cannot regulate the New Leaf Superior potato because the FDA does not have the authority to regulate pesticides."

[Fairweather]

ehmmic said:

We saw a pretty good Frontline program on GM foods in my nutrition class during winter quarter. Gives some of the history and lays out the debate of how the whole mess got started. GM is in a lot more places than you realize because of the labeling (lack of that is). Most corn, soy and some potatoes are GM. My impression about the US food market is that unless you buy certified organic food you can assume there is some level of GM in what you are eating. You can probably find it at the public library if you're interested.

 

The producers (Monsantos and the like) argue that it is safe. Has caused no health problems that they know of. They fail to admit that there is no mechanism for tracking digestive or allergic illnesses that may be caused by GM foods and gathering data about GM effects on people's health.

 

Personally I can only eat organic bananas because the regular ones make my mouth itch and upset my stomach. In the Frontline program they talked about how they'd been working on modifying them and I think we're the guinea pigs on whether it's a good thing...

 

E,

 

I have a copy (VHS) of this video and would be happy to loan it out or .....opycay tiay for you.

 

The premise of the program was decidedly neutral, and while I think the benefits of GM food production and associated increased yields far outweighs the risks, I can certainly sympathize with those who are concerned. Unfortunately, many of the groups opposed to GM foods can't get beyond their own hysteria and present solid science to back their claims. (I say this with the understanding that the onus of "proof" is not necessarily theirs.)

 

As for the fuss about Bt; I may be wrong, but I believe this pesticide is legally sprayed on "organically grown" labeled produce. (I'll check it out.)

 

Personally, I am more concerned about the presence of growth hormones in meat/milk than GM foods.

[RobBob]

Fairweather,

 

I agree with you, I personally don't mind eating gm grain products but we buy organic milk to avoid the BST.

 

[chelle]

Fairweather - I've seen the video. Agreed it was balanced and nuetral in it's opinion and thought provoking. I don't mind them spraying BT on my food, it is a natural toxin that can be washed off, much better than harsh chemicals that ruin groundwater. However, I do object very strongly to them inserting the BT gene into my corn, potatoes or any other food to control the pest. I think it is pretty dangerouse to start f'ing with the gene pool that has developed over so many millions of years. The scientists are playing god IMO, and much of their tinkering wouldn't be "necessary" if the corporate farmers who rape and pillage the environment in the name of efficiecy and profit didn't fuck it up so badly in the first place.

[RobBob]

I think it is pretty dangerouse to start f'ing with the gene pool that has developed over so many millions of years. The scientists are playing god IMO,

 

C'mon, that's the kind of broad-brush pap that doesn't make any sense...

 

We started "f'ing with the gene pool" thousands of years ago when we started breeding animals (Mendel only figured out what we were doing, and really put it to work. He considered himself an environmentalist and nature-lover.)

 

Humans have been messing with genes, transplanting strains of things around the world (the Europeans owe us for saving their wine industry more than 100 years ago!), etc. long before now. I think it just comes down to a failure to communicate with consumers, give them choices, and not box ourselves into a "can't go back" situation, as Monsanto has done with bt and roundup-ready seeds.

[iain]

there's a big difference between nudging trends in evolution and treating chromosomes as a pile of legos robbob

[RobBob]

yeah, but it's a relative, continuous (albeit logrythmic) curve rather than clear, discrete levels where you can draw easy lines, don't you agree? I just wish there was understanding and debate about where to draw that line, rather than all-or-nothing attitudes bereft of knowledge.

[iain]

sure, and I would say genetically-modified poplar stands, for instance, are a great idea. I was disappointed to see the ELF decided to vandalize the Oregon State farms in Corvallis. There is a clear need for a timber replacement, and this is the lesser of two evils in my opinion, and a good use of GM knowledge.

[Kiwi]

RobBob said:

Humans have been messing with genes, transplanting strains of things around the world (the Europeans owe us for saving their wine industry more than 100 years ago!), etc. long before now.

True, but I think the big issue for most poeple are transgenic genes. There's a big difference between taking genes from one variety of corn to another, and implanting genes from bacteria to produce an insecticide.