Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

cui bono

(19,926 posts)
26. They tried to outlaw that sort of labeling.
Wed Nov 7, 2012, 05:16 PM
Nov 2012

Thankfully it didn't work.

Yeah, I buy organic, or at least no pesticides, when I buy. Try to eat at restaurants that serve organic or close to it whenever possible, but that's difficult. Don't eat much processed/packaged foods, etc, etc, etc...

I have to say I still completely disagree with your reason for voting against this. Just doesn't compute and makes absolutely no sense to me. Because of the way something is said you vote against something you agree with? Something that is beneficial to the general public.

As to GMO benefits... what better and better crops and food products? The reason Monsanto is doing it is greed and control. All the effects are negative and for their own benefit. They are attempting to control ownership of all crops. They are putting local farmers into huge debt that they will never be able to pay off due to forcing proprietary seeds on them. Even those that refuse to go along are screwed because they can't control that the wind blows seeds onto their land and Monsanto goes after them for using their product. It's not only health concerns, it's very real economic concerns.

And what about the butterflies dying due to GMP corn crops?
http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2012/03/researchers-gm-crops-are-killing-monarch-butterflies-after-all

I'm sorry, but until it is proven to have no effects it should be stopped.



Why are you pleased about 37? JDPriestly Nov 2012 #1
because I'm a biologist... mike_c Nov 2012 #4
Interesting... SoapBox Nov 2012 #6
Labeling leads to heightened awareness by consumers Gormy Cuss Nov 2012 #14
it isn't always about money.... mike_c Nov 2012 #18
Looks dorky, but it's the best GMO whistleblower news aggregating site I've seen. proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #37
Here's a terrific overview of the issues for the nonscientist, you'll agree. proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #40
I was referring to the donors, not you. n/t Gormy Cuss Nov 2012 #46
I supported Prop 37 because I wanted labeling of GMOs so the consumer can decide, just like kestrel91316 Nov 2012 #7
I doubt that the issue is going to go away... mike_c Nov 2012 #8
I'm sure you've read more than myself on this, but are you sure? cui bono Nov 2012 #13
it's my profession... mike_c Nov 2012 #16
But even if that is all true, what is the problem with knowing what has been done to your food? cui bono Nov 2012 #21
just as an aside... mike_c Nov 2012 #24
They tried to outlaw that sort of labeling. cui bono Nov 2012 #26
just to be clear.... mike_c Nov 2012 #27
The monarch butterfly thing was thrown in as an additional problem. cui bono Nov 2012 #47
Too much hedging. proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #36
Arpad Pusztai - please google the name and read. proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #35
And what can you tell us about nutritional values and toxicity levels (comparatively) underseasurveyor Nov 2012 #9
that there is no connection between them, per se.... mike_c Nov 2012 #11
That's basic biology/evolution. underseasurveyor Nov 2012 #17
everything is a "chemical...." mike_c Nov 2012 #19
I've been calling you on this Bt toxin thing all week now mike-c Tumbulu Nov 2012 #29
I've been ignoring you all week because this is Luddite hysteria.... mike_c Nov 2012 #38
Sorry mike_c the EPA fouled this one Tumbulu Nov 2012 #43
:-) underseasurveyor Nov 2012 #45
I think I'll trust the research and studies so far. underseasurveyor Nov 2012 #41
answer.... mike_c Nov 2012 #42
Cool underseasurveyor Nov 2012 #44
What's your take for growth of Bt resistant insects? Are there other options for organic producers? pinto Nov 2012 #20
there are emerging signs of resistance in a few species... mike_c Nov 2012 #23
Thanks. The Nature Biotech piece was interesting, as is the refuge approach it mentions. pinto Nov 2012 #25
For historical purposes these big companies Tumbulu Nov 2012 #30
That's interesting. Someone I know who is getting a PhD from a good university JDPriestly Nov 2012 #31
So You Think We Should be Kept Ignorant of What is In Our Food AndyTiedye Nov 2012 #48
37 going "down in flames" is not a good thing. Personally, I WANT to know what is in my "food". LoisB Nov 2012 #2
yeh, i don't understand why more people don't want to know frylock Nov 2012 #3
it made my morning.... mike_c Nov 2012 #5
I'm interested in your take on it but I have to say I really don't like this "ignorance and fear" cui bono Nov 2012 #15
I'm really bummed about Prop 34, but at least 3-strikes was reformed petronius Nov 2012 #10
yeah, that's odd.... mike_c Nov 2012 #12
I think one vote (3 strikes) was a simpler call than the other (DP), a more visceral call. pinto Nov 2012 #22
Well I'm very very disappointed about 37 losing, that's awful. Still I imagine Raine Nov 2012 #28
Best and saddest expert analysis I have encountered on GMOs ever - discovered several days ago. proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #32
Related material here:“No studies to date have experimentally examined the causal relationship btwn" proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #33
Recommended. proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #34
Statement re: AAAS Board Statement Against Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #39
Latest Discussions»Region Forums»California»just about the only bad r...»Reply #26