|
[ Genetically Engineered Foods Archive ] [ Main Archives Page ] [ Glossary/Index ] [ FAQ ] [ Recommended Books ] [ Bulletin Board ] |
Search this site! | |
from http://healthy.net/asp/templates/news.asp?Id=4953
White House Opposes Biotech Labels
TORONTO (AP) - The Bush administration opposes the labeling of genetically engineered food, Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson told the world's premier biotechnology industry gathering.
``Mandatory labeling will only frighten consumers,'' he said during a breakfast speech Monday at the BIO 2002 conference. ``Labeling implies that biotechnology products are unsafe.''
Labeling food produced through genetic engineering is a touchy subject for the U.S. biotech industry, both at home and abroad. Domestically, the industry worries that labels would sour consumer demand.
Abroad, however, 19 countries require labeling and the European Union has since 1998 banned the sale of any new engineered products. The ban has angered U.S. exporters and hampered the growth of European agricultural biotech firms. The EU is expected to consider lifting the ban later this year, but may require labeling.
Some 70 percent of the world's biotech food is grown in the United States. Soy and corn genetically engineered to be pest- or herbicide-resistant are used in a wide variety of foods and drinks. The Food and Drug Administration says the ingredients are just as safe as those produced by conventional methods.
U.S. officials have said the labeling could cost U.S. companies $4 billion a year.
Thompson said biotechnology can lead to safer food that are better for the environment because of improved crop yields, among other benefits.
Critics complain that not enough testing has been done to determine the long-term health effects of splicing the genes of two species together to create food.
``The science is so immature, we don't know what we are doing,'' Canadian genetics professor David Suzuki said at an anti-biotech rally in a Toronto park on Sunday. If you took Bono out of U2 and stuck him in the Toronto Symphony and said make music, noise would come out but you have no way of knowing what it would sound like.''
Thompson on Monday also called on drug makers to lower their costs and promised to overhaul the approval process of the FDA.
``We are creating an FDA where risk management is the rule and not the exception,'' he said. ``You will not recognize the FDA a year from now.''
He said the FDA currently treats all applications the same, whether its for cosmetics or lifesaving drugs.
While the FDA is streamlining its application process, Thompson called on drug makers to lower the cost of their products.
``They're looked at as part of the problem instead of part of the solution,'' he told a news conference. Some drugs sold in the United States sell for 40 percent less in other countries, including Canada, Thompson noted.
If drug companies don't heed the call to lower their prices, public and regulatory pressure could ultimately lead to price controls, he said.
Thompson also said that the impact on his department of President Bush's proposal to create a Department of Homeland Security have not yet been detailed. Bush proposed to move 300 workers, mostly involved with bioterrorism research, and $4 billion from Thompson's agency to the new department.
Thompson also said a permanent FDA chief could be nominated ``within a few weeks.'' The post has been vacant since Bush's inauguration.
In Reply to: Article - White House Opposes Biotech Labels posted by thessa on June 28, 2002 at 04:58:59:
I really don't understand why genetically engineered food could be bad. Aren't you still getting the same nutrition from the food that you would anyway? Does the gene splicing change the nutrition of the food?
In Reply to: Re: Article - Question re Bio Engineered Food posted by Donna E. on June 28, 2002 at 11:49:28:
No, but it does change whether or not your body recognizes what is coming into it as "food."
At a certain level of digestion, (I believe it is the molecular level) the body extracts
certain molecules as the building blocks for rebuilding, repair, etc. What if it doesn't
recognize those molecules anymore? Or go up a level. Will this GE stuff even be recognized
as food or is is simply another invader? Food as a virus.
Garbage In - Garbage Out.
Or maybe just bodily damage.
This stuff isn't tested, and there's the rub. Some lab slapped this stuff together hot to
make a profit. No testing. No lablelling that it is a bioengineered product because
"it might sour the public" (Now there's an understatement!) and finally, frustrated because
as an export product, it has failed. Europe wants nice big labels, and labels guarantee
GE "foods" will do poorly in the marketplace. No one knows what the long-term (or short-term)
results of eating this "stuff" is.
Here's a thought: If the food is "more resistant" to pests (meaning it kills the pest) what is it
doing to you?
In Reply to: Re: Article - Question about Bio Engineered Food posted by Gregory on June 28, 2002 at 13:45:26:
"Here's a thought: If the food is "more resistant" to pests (meaning it kills the pest) what is it
I actually thought about that, but left it out of my post. It brought Walt's words to mind "..no respectible bacteria, mold, insect or pest would eat it...". Maybe that's the answer right there.
In Reply to: Article - White House Opposes Biotech Labels posted by thessa on June 28, 2002 at 04:58:59:
having been attacked by genetically engineered tomatoes I
VF
In Reply to: Re: Article - Question re Bio Engineered Food posted by Donna E. on June 28, 2002 at 11:49:28:
to corn. I prefer to avoid wheat. If those guys start splicing corn genes into all sorts of stuff, or wheat genes...you won't know what you're buying even if it appears to be a "whole food"!
Sensitive people are going to be in trouble with this. It's bad enough for them that they start to react to all sorts of thing that are "real" but when you start making frankenstein vegetables, how will they stand a chance to isolate what is bothering them?
This stuff really burns me up.
In Reply to: Re: Article - Question about Bio Engineered Food posted by Gregory on June 28, 2002 at 13:45:26:
Gregory.
Spouse and I had a discussion about the labelling aspect of this...he predicts that the producers of NON GE foods will label THEIR products, and of course charge a premium for their superior, labelled product...I'll pay!
~~~8>
In Reply to: Re: Article - Question about Bio Engineered Food posted by labrat on June 28, 2002 at 22:21:17:
But I am afraid that this will be prohibited. "They" will find a way to make it illegal.
In Reply to: Re: Article - Question about Bio Engineered Food posted by Gregory on June 28, 2002 at 13:45:26:
I remember reading about some GM food that made some people sick. It was later determined that the food contained an unknown amino acid that was responsible for the problems, and that is the very reason why it wasn't caught during testing -- it was UNKNOWN prior to that, so noone was looking for it.
In Reply to: Re: Article - Question re Bio Engineered Food posted by Donna E. on June 28, 2002 at 11:49:28:
"Aren't you still getting the same nutrition from the food that you would anyway?"
Not necessarily. But you would always know.
"Does the gene splicing change the nutrition of the food?"
Sometimes it does. And something always has to change; otherwise, what's the purpose for the GE?
Unexpected changes can be caused in an organism when you modify even one gene. Here's a quote from Wise Traditions published by Weston Price Foundation:
"When tomatoes were engineered for increased carotene production, some plant did make carotene, but often in places where they wouldn't normally produce much of the substance -- for instance, in the seeds, the seed leaves, and the area where the tomatoe breaks off the stem. In addition, the plants produced more and different kinds of carotenes than expected. More surprisingly still, the plants were dwarfed. The more caroten a plant produced, the smaller it was. Because a substance that normally stimulates growth in plants (giberillin A) was reduce thirty-fold, the scientists assumed that the carotene increase interfered with giberillin production".
As my ex-boss likes to say, you don't know what you don't know. When a particular food you're eating is GMed, how can you now be sure that it's supplying you with some new toxic substance that your body hasn't evolved to deal with. Or what nutrient is lacking or reduced in this "improved" food?
In Reply to: Re: Article - Question re Bio Engineered Food posted by R. on June 30, 2002 at 02:44:34:
I meant to say "But you would NOT always know."
In Reply to: Re: Article - White House Opposes Biotech Labels posted by Vince F on June 28, 2002 at 14:28:00:
Vince, you could actually make a difference in this for all of us. If you can prove that you feel bad after eating a GM food, tomatoes in this example, then you can sue the store that sold them to you without telling you what they were. If not the store, then may be a producer of the food. Or both. At least what can happen from this, aside from making you some good money, is forcing the government to mandate labeling. Please consider this seriously!
In Reply to: Article - White House Opposes Biotech Labels posted by thessa on June 28, 2002 at 04:58:59:
I see that my job is not done, so I have decided to reincarnate quickly and continue fighting the evil creature.
In Reply to: Re: Article - White House Opposes Biotech Labels posted by Timothy McVeigh on June 30, 2002 at 02:54:11:
Hey Timmy
Hows life treatin' ya these days? lol
In Reply to: Re: Article - White House Opposes Biotech Labels posted by Timothy McVeigh on June 30, 2002 at 02:54:11:
Ah timmy baby, where ya been. I missed ya. you been hangin' out with them tramps again ay. Well, all's forgiven, come back to mama. Alls well, that ends well, Timmy me darlin'.
In Reply to: Re: Article - White House Opposes Biotech Labels posted by Twisted Sister on June 30, 2002 at 07:38:03:
Will be back reeeal soon, sis. Need to straighten out those bastards once and for all. Can't stand seeing them oppressing my people!
In Reply to: Re: Article - White House Opposes Biotech Labels posted by S.E. on June 30, 2002 at 03:04:24:
Not too bad, not too bad. Been getting a fair share of those muslim virgins, if you know what I mean.
In Reply to: Article - White House Opposes Biotech Labels posted by thessa on June 28, 2002 at 04:58:59:
Thanks, again, thessa!
Isn't it interesting that Bush thinks we should play God with our foods but not with our stem cells? Could it have something to do with lobbying money?
Namaste`
Walt
Lightwalking,
Gregory
Follow Ups:
Re: Article - Question about Bio Engineered Food
Posted by Donna E. on June 28, 2002 at 14:08:10:
doing to you?"
Follow Ups:
Re: Article - White House Opposes Biotech Labels
Posted by Vince F on June 28, 2002 at 14:28:00:
think twice about eating Any. I use how I feel after eating
something as to wether I will again. I seem to be more
sensitive than most but that is fine with me. If they don't
lable things then looking at them may be a guide. It the
food looks Too good it may be an indication.
Follow Ups:
My spouse has severe food allergies...
Posted by labrat on June 28, 2002 at 22:17:49:
~~~8>
Follow Ups:
Re: Article - Question about Bio Engineered Food
Posted by labrat on June 28, 2002 at 22:21:17:
Follow Ups:
That would be an excellent solution
Posted by R. on June 30, 2002 at 02:17:31:
Follow Ups:
Re: Article - Question about Bio Engineered Food
Posted by R. on June 30, 2002 at 02:21:34:
Follow Ups:
Re: Article - Question re Bio Engineered Food
Posted by R. on June 30, 2002 at 02:44:34:
Follow Ups:
Correction
Posted by R. on June 30, 2002 at 02:45:58:
Follow Ups:
Re: Article - White House Opposes Biotech Labels
Posted by R. on June 30, 2002 at 02:50:39:
Follow Ups:
Re: Article - White House Opposes Biotech Labels
Posted by Timothy McVeigh on June 30, 2002 at 02:54:11:
Follow Ups:
Re: Article - White House Opposes Biotech Labels
Posted by S.E. on June 30, 2002 at 03:04:24:
Follow Ups:
Re: Article - White House Opposes Biotech Labels
Posted by Twisted Sister on June 30, 2002 at 07:38:03:
Follow Ups:
Re: Article - White House Opposes Biotech Labels
Posted by Timothy McVeigh on June 30, 2002 at 18:45:48:
Follow Ups:
Re: Article - White House Opposes Biotech Labels
Posted by Timothy McVeigh on June 30, 2002 at 18:46:33:
Follow Ups:
Article - White House Opposes Biotech Labels (Archive in gengineered foods.)
Posted by Walt Stoll on July 01, 2002 at 06:10:59:
Follow Ups:
[ Genetically Engineered Foods Archive ]
[ Main Archives Page ]
[ Glossary/Index ]
[ FAQ ]
[ Recommended Books ]
[ Bulletin Board ]
Search this site!