No surprise here

Tempted to post some off topic material in the Building Forums....... Want to talk about football, your neighbor's dog or exchange friendly barbs with other members?? Start your conversations here!!!

Moderators: Sometimewoodworker, MGV12, BKKBILL

No surprise here

Postby BKKBILL » Wed Sep 19, 2012 10:12 pm

What could go wrong???????????

Superweeds pose GM-resistant challenge for farmers


19 September 2012 Last updated at 02:22

Help
US farmers are facing a growing challenge from weeds resistant to chemical sprays, and enduring millions of dollars in losses as a result.
The so-called "superweeds" have arisen because of the success of genetically modified crops, which now account for the vast majority of US corn, soya and cotton.
GM essentially means that crops are protected from one type of chemical weedkiller. But because farmers have become over-reliant on this one product, weeds with natural resistance have spread rapidly and have strangled production on millions of acres.
Scientists say the solution to the widespread resistance problem is a new type of GM that uses a powerful weedkiller that was once part of Agent Orange, the defoliant widely used during the Vietnam war.

Produced by the BBC's Matt McGrath and Franz Strasser.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19594335
It's not who you know, it's whom you know.
User avatar
BKKBILL
 
Posts: 2941
Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 10:05 pm
Location: Mae Taeng, Chiang Mai

Re: No surprise here

Postby MGV12 » Thu Sep 20, 2012 4:58 am

BKKBILL wrote:What could go wrong???????????

Superweeds pose GM-resistant challenge for farmers


19 September 2012 Last updated at 02:22

Help
US farmers are facing a growing challenge from weeds resistant to chemical sprays, and enduring millions of dollars in losses as a result.
The so-called "superweeds" have arisen because of the success of genetically modified crops, which now account for the vast majority of US corn, soya and cotton.
GM essentially means that crops are protected from one type of chemical weedkiller. But because farmers have become over-reliant on this one product, weeds with natural resistance have spread rapidly and have strangled production on millions of acres.
Scientists say the solution to the widespread resistance problem is a new type of GM that uses a powerful weedkiller that was once part of Agent Orange, the defoliant widely used during the Vietnam war.

Produced by the BBC's Matt McGrath and Franz Strasser.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19594335


"After all, it's not rocket science!" ... where you simply cram some incendiary stuff in a tube and set it alight.

Having sold their soul to the devil ... most farmers will be too far down the slippery slope and feel they have no alternative but to accept the highly toxic and even less safe alternatives offered by Dow et al.

Unless those assigned by governments to protect our safety intervene :wink: and lose their kick-back :roll:

Anyways ... why should we worry as apparently there is no convincing nor conclusive proof that any of this stuff is bad for us humans ... except maybe the weak ones!

Aside from extremely hazardous 'cides ... where we really don't know 'what's in it' ... it amuses me when manufacturers state on packaging "Unsuitable for pregnant women, young children, or the elderly" ... so probably not exactly enhancing the health of the rest of us then. People are attracted by advertising that states 'Kills 99.9% of all bacteria' and show little or no concern for why it doesn't kill the other 0.01%. Just as with the weeds ... mutations are all around us and growing stronger by the day ... Nature will always triumph ... 100%.

As stated "What could go wrong???????????"

“Some days I am an optimistic pessimist ... other days I am a pessimistic optimist”
User avatar
MGV12
 
Posts: 5349
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:23 pm
Location: Chiang Mai

Re: No surprise here

Postby Roger Ramjet » Thu Sep 20, 2012 5:48 am

Bill and MGV12,
Here's the original version: http://truth-out.org/news/item/6838:dow ... -heartland
I wonder why Canada and other "civilised" countries have banned 2,4-D use entirely and not the US. Actually, no I don't.
I wonder how much Dow is paying Monsanto, or visa versa?
Now they only have to double dose with Roundup and then hit it with 2,4-D....what could be simpler! Monsanto makes the "resistant" corn seeds, Dow supplies the chemical and "everyone" is happy, rich and poisoned.
Only Dow and Monsanto could come up with this one.
User avatar
Roger Ramjet
 
Posts: 5251
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 12:55 pm

Re: No surprise here

Postby BKKBILL » Thu Sep 20, 2012 9:40 am

Again it’s all about money. Hard for me to understand why farmers can’t see where this is going unless the vast majority of farms are now controlled by corporations or could it be again money. Monsanto’s marketing budget totalled $934 million in 2009.

My neighbour who is a small scale farmer said he now makes a profit annually from his farm by not using chemical fertilizers or sprays. He has relearned safe methods by practising the Kings teachings on sustainable farming and taking organic courses at Mae Jo university here in Chang Mai. These are tailored for farmers.

Now the farmer in the next field burns his crop residue, sprays for bugs, and uses many bags of fertilizer. Looking at both these plots I can’t see any difference but he has just borrowed money to tide himself over until the crops are harvested.

Not scientific but know what produce I would sooner be consuming.
It's not who you know, it's whom you know.
User avatar
BKKBILL
 
Posts: 2941
Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 10:05 pm
Location: Mae Taeng, Chiang Mai

Re: No surprise here

Postby Roger Ramjet » Thu Sep 20, 2012 1:05 pm

Bill,
You're wrong about being controlled by corporations, it's the small scaled farmers in the US that were targeted with everlasting contracts.
A friend of mine owned substantial farming land in southern US and never farmed it once, instead she was paid not to farm it by the government. She explained it to me one time at very great length, but I still couldn't figure it out and still can't.
Sustainable farming is for serfs. Sustainable agriculture is about ecology and rotating crops and has been used for thousands of years.
I have no problem with fertilizing fields or slash and burn techniques that allow the land to lay fallow after. I do have a problem with phenoxy herbicides. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenoxy_herbicide
User avatar
Roger Ramjet
 
Posts: 5251
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 12:55 pm

Re: No surprise here

Postby Roger Ramjet » Thu Sep 20, 2012 1:14 pm

Here's a reference to the US "sustainable" agriculture issue or "paid not to farm". It has changed a lot over the years but nobody can still understand it or explain it.
http://www.npr.org/2012/06/13/154862017 ... ter-to-you
User avatar
Roger Ramjet
 
Posts: 5251
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 12:55 pm

Re: No surprise here

Postby BKKBILL » Thu Sep 20, 2012 3:47 pm

I don’t know whether it’s corporations or small scaled farmers nor does it matter in the US Midwest at the present time Roundup Ready crops which reportedly comprise 94 percent of soybean crops and 70 percent of corn and cotton grown in the U.S. are becoming increasingly dogged by Roundup resistant weeds.

Now Monsanto is working on developing soybeans and cotton that are resistant to the chemical dicamba (http://pmep.cce.cornell.edu/profiles/ex ... a-ext.html ). As said what could go wrong.

Leaving fields dormant really doesn’t have anything to do with my original post although it does no harm and should be good for the land including everything living in it.

Burning of crop residue is not beneficial to good land management. As for the serf comment I was referring to my neighbours who own their land not agricultural labours bound under a feudal system working on his lord's estate.

It really is all about money.
It's not who you know, it's whom you know.
User avatar
BKKBILL
 
Posts: 2941
Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 10:05 pm
Location: Mae Taeng, Chiang Mai

Re: No surprise here

Postby BKKBILL » Thu Sep 20, 2012 7:01 pm

GUESS IT WILL BE BIGGER GUNS NEXT.

Image
It's not who you know, it's whom you know.
User avatar
BKKBILL
 
Posts: 2941
Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 10:05 pm
Location: Mae Taeng, Chiang Mai

Re: No surprise here

Postby Ians » Thu Sep 20, 2012 8:21 pm

Of course all these weed killers are safe, just ask the people who do all the research which just happens to be funded by the weed killer manufacturers.
User avatar
Ians
 
Posts: 924
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 11:38 am
Location: Phitsanulok

Re: No surprise here

Postby MGV12 » Sun Sep 23, 2012 6:18 am

At least in one country they care about what they eat ... and are willing to fight for a cause:

LYON/PARIS, Feb 13 (Reuters) - A French court on Monday declared U.S. biotech giant Monsanto guilty of chemical poisoning of a French farmer, a judgment that could lend weight to other health claims against pesticides.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/1 ... 74326.html

"Seventy-five family farmers, seed businesses, and agricultural organizations originally filed suit in March 2011 in an act of self-protection against what Food Democracy Now!'s founder and executive director Dave Murphy calls "Monsanto's scorched earth legal campaign of threats and intimidation against America’s farmers." In this campaign, Monsanto has threatened and filed suit against farmers for patent infringement when its genetically modified seeds reach unsuspecting farmers' fields."

https://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/07/06-4

"In another massive victory against Monsanto and the spread of genetically modified crops, French Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayraul has announced that the nation will be maintaining a key ban on the only remaining GMO currently allowed in Europe. Known as Monsanto’s GMO maize crops, or MON810 maize, the original ban was brought forth back in March following the French court’s previous annulment on a November ban."

Read more: http://naturalsociety.com/france-mainta ... z27F9vkcDw

“Some days I am an optimistic pessimist ... other days I am a pessimistic optimist”
User avatar
MGV12
 
Posts: 5349
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:23 pm
Location: Chiang Mai

Re: No surprise here

Postby Roger Ramjet » Sun Sep 23, 2012 1:51 pm

Vive la France.
User avatar
Roger Ramjet
 
Posts: 5251
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 12:55 pm

Re: No surprise here

Postby MGV12 » Sat Nov 17, 2012 6:55 am

What's Next in the GMO Battle?

On November 6, after spending $46 million burying California's voters under an avalanche of deception, Monsanto and their buddies in the pesticide and junk food business declared victory. They had defeated the "right to know", and successfully protected their "right" to keep you in the dark about whether your food is genetically engineered.

Jennifer Hatcher, senior vice president of government and public affairs for the anti-labeling Food Marketing Institute, breathed a sigh of relief after Prop 37 narrowly lost, saying: "This gives us hope that you can... defeat a ballot initiative and go directly to the voters." But she also expressed concern: "We hope we don't have too many of them, because you can't keep doing that over and over again."

If Ms. Hatcher wants to keep labeling suppressed, it looks like she may be in for a rough couple of years. Because what Monsanto and its allies hadn't counted on was that despite all their lies and deception, it's actually pretty hard to convince people that they shouldn't be allowed to know what they're eating. And although $46 million managed to put out one fire, it seems to have started about 30 new ones.

Indeed, efforts are already underway to put a similar initiative on the ballot in Washington for the 2013 election (where San Juan County voters chose on November 6 to make growing GMOs illegal in their county). And organizers in 30 other states have also begun building labeling campaigns, under the banner of the Coalition of States for Mandatory GMO labeling.

With 93 percent of the American public supporting the right to know, it looks like it's going to take a lot more than a one deceptive, high-budget ad campaign to keep those pesky labels at bay.

The War Continues

Many people are choosing to boycott companies that continue to use GMOs and that oppose labeling. Kellogg's has been a particularly visible target, since the company strives for a healthy image, and yet contributed $632,000 to the fight against Prop 37. For several months, the company's Facebook page has become something of a marketing embarrassment. It's plastered with comments by angry consumers calling the company out for fighting GMO labeling, and threatening a boycott until the company changes its ways.

Other consumers are choosing to buy products from companies that are going GMO-free. In fact, consumer demand for non-GMO products is rising fast. The non-profit Non-GMO Project, which offers a third party certification program, has now verified 764 products, and had a record-shattering 189 new enrollment inquiries in October.

More and more people are becoming alarmed about the widespread prevalence of GMOs in the food supply, and are taking steps to steer clear. This could create a tremendous market opportunity for companies that seize the day and get certified. Even shoppers who aren't terribly concerned about GMOs may be developing more trust in the products that carry the "Non-GMO Project" certification.

For consumers who want to know what is and is not GMO-free, the Food Revolution Network has compiled a collection of resources that includes the non-GMO shopping guide, and the free iPhone and Android app from True Food Network. A list of which foods are likely to contain GMOs is posted by Institute for Responsible Technology here.

A team of organizations, led by Care2 and the Food Revolution Network, have launched a petition demanding that Congress label GMOs that has already generated nearly 50,000 signatures. And efforts of the JustLabelIt petition to the FDA, which launched a year ago and have generated more than 1.3 million signatures, are being renewed in hopes that the FDA might eventually dig itself out of Monsanto's back pocket.

For the passionate activist, there's always more you can do, like taking advantage of the educational resources offered for free by the Institute for Responsible Technology, and sharing them with friends. Or lobbying your member of Congress, your mayor, your governor, your local media outlets, or your relatives.

Monsanto would probably like us all to sit alone in the dark, munching on bags of genetically engineered popcorn. But the tide of history is turning, and regardless of how much they spend attempting to deceive us, we will prevail.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ocean-rob ... 30129.html

“Some days I am an optimistic pessimist ... other days I am a pessimistic optimist”
User avatar
MGV12
 
Posts: 5349
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:23 pm
Location: Chiang Mai

Re: No surprise here

Postby MGV12 » Sat Jan 12, 2013 7:00 am

http://hawaiigmojustice.org/


“Some days I am an optimistic pessimist ... other days I am a pessimistic optimist”
User avatar
MGV12
 
Posts: 5349
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:23 pm
Location: Chiang Mai

Oh Dear

Postby BKKBILL » Tue Jan 22, 2013 6:17 pm

Is it me or does all this sound like the tobacco boys are on the loose again?

Uncovered, the 'toxic' gene hiding in GM crops: Revelation throws new doubt over safety of foods

EU watchdog reveals approval for GM foods fails to identify poisonous gene.

By SEAN POULTER, CONSUMER AFFAIRS EDITOR
PUBLISHED: 23:20 GMT, 21 January 2013 | UPDATED: 08:02 GMT, 22 January 2013

A virus gene that could be poisonous to humans has been missed when GM food crops have been assessed for safety.

GM crops such as corn and soya, which are being grown around the world for both human and farm animal consumption, include the gene.

A new study by the EU's official food watchdog, the European Food Safety Authority(EFSA), has revealed that the international approval process for GM crops failed to identify the gene.

A new study conducted by the EU has shown that standard tests for GM foods may be missing a potentially poisonous gene for humans
As a result, watchdogs have not investigated its impact on human health and the plants themselves when assessing whether they were safe.

The findings are particularly powerful because the work was carried out by independent experts, rather than GM critics.
It was led by Nancy Podevin, who was employed by EFSA, and Patrick du Jardin, of the Plant Biology Unit at the University of Liege in Belgium.

They discovered that 54 of the 86 GM plants approved for commercial growing and food in the US, including corn and soya, contain the viral gene, which is known as 'Gene VI'.

In this country, these crops are typically fed to farm animals producing meat, milk and eggs.

Significantly, the EFSA researchers concluded that the presence of segments of Gene VI 'might result in unintended phenotypic changes'.

Such changes include the creation of proteins that are toxic to humans. They could also trigger changes in the plants themselves, making them more vulnerable to pests.

Critics say the revelations make clear that the GM approvals process, which has been in place for 20 years, is fatally flawed.

They argue the only correct response is to recall all of the crops and food products involved. Director of the campaigning group, GM Freeze, Pete Riley, said the discovery of the gene, 'totally undermines claims that GM technology is safe, precise and predictable'.

He said: 'This is a clear warning the GM is not sufficiently understood to be considered safe. 'Authorisation for these crops must be suspended immediately, and they should be withdrawn from sale, until a full and extended review of their safety has been carried out.

Typically, GM crops are modified in the laboratory to give them resistance to being sprayed with powerful weed killers such as Monsanto's Round-up.

This means that, in theory, fields can be doused with the chemical, so wiping out the weeds and allowing the food plants to thrive.

It was previously assumed that virus genes are not present in plants once they are grown in the field and reach consumers, however it is now clear that this is not the case

The modification process involves inserting genes into the plants using a technique that allows them to piggyback on viruses that are commonly found in the soil and plants.

It has been assumed that virus genes are not present in the plant once it is grown in the field and reaches consumers, however it is now clear that this is not the case.

A review of the EFSA research in Independent Science News said the presence of the viral gene appears to have been missed by biotech companies, universities and government regulators.

'This situation represents a complete and catastrophic system failure,' it said. 'There are clear indications that this viral gene might not be safe for human consumption. It also may disturb the normal functioning of crops, including their natural pest resistance.

'A reasonable concern is that the protein produced by Gene VI might be a human toxin. This is a question that can only be answered by future experiments.'

Biotech supporters argue that there is no evidence from countries such as the USA that eating GM food causes any harm.

However, the reality is that no health monitoring has taken place to establish this.

The findings will embarrass the government and the food and farming Secretary, Owen Patterson, who has embarked on a pro-GM propaganda exercise designed to win over sceptical consumers.

Mr Patterson recently rejected public concerns as 'humbug' and 'complete nonsense'. Policy director at the Soil Association, Peter Melchett said: 'For years, GM companies have made a deliberate and chilling effort to stop independent scientists from looking at their products.

'This is what happens when there is a complete absence of independent scrutiny of their GM crops.' Biotech firms are represented by the Agricultural Biotechnology Council(ABC).

Its chairman, Dr Julian Little, said the EFSA study was one small part of a strict and complex scrutiny process.

He said: 'Over the past 25 years, the European Commission has funded more than 130 research projects involving 500 independent research groups which have found no higher risks to the environment or food chain from GM crops than from conventional plants and organisms.
'Furthermore, nearly three trillion meals containing GM ingredients have been eaten without a single substantiated case of ill-health. The combination of these two facts can give consumers a huge amount of confidence in the safety of GM crops.'


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2266143/Uncovered-toxic-gene-hiding-GM-crops-Revelation-throws-new-doubt-safety-foods.html#ixzz2IhTKo0Mn 
It's not who you know, it's whom you know.
User avatar
BKKBILL
 
Posts: 2941
Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 10:05 pm
Location: Mae Taeng, Chiang Mai

Re: No surprise here

Postby Ians » Tue Jan 22, 2013 6:44 pm

The forum topic is "No surprise here", --- so are you surprised?
User avatar
Ians
 
Posts: 924
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 11:38 am
Location: Phitsanulok

Next

Return to Friendly Banter

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest