- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Labelling
- From: Adrian Valls <email@example.com>
- Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 12:00:05 +0200
- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Resent-From: email@example.com
A question...for anyone actually
Rick Roush wrote:
> Again, the one
> exception I would make is for Bt cotton. Cotton seed oil has no DNA or
> protein (something I have said here several times without challenge),
> whatever the source, GE or not GE (so there is no legitimate human health
I wonder if the molecular composition of GE and non GE cotton seed oil is
really identical. I don't mean "substantially equivalent" here. Long term
toxicity could result with small changes in chemical composition
notwithstanding the lack of DNA in the oil. Labelling in this case would help
trace the offending product and take it off the shelves.
> I cannot in good conscience support
> labelling of cotton seed oil if an outcome is increased risks to farm
> workers and their families.
On one side I can understand your point of view, but people still have the
right to know, (one of the most important things of being human is the
excersise of free will) and the industry should make that extra effort to set
up the methods for segregating transgenic products. After all, they (along
with some governments) were the ones that got into this in the first place,
and they have to reap the consequences. Their managers weren't very efficient.
They seem to have forgotten that when you combine a violation of fundamental
human rights with something as intimate as eating, they are going to get one
hell of a reaction, they've just created the scenario of their worst
The only way they are going to get out of this is to listen to the public they
are so desperate to woo, give them what they want, not what they don't want.
And to really think seriously 50 to 100 years ahead imagining what sort of
world they will be leaving their descendants. Small apparently insignificant
changes now in the ecology can evolve into major catastofies in a few decades.
Just as the variation of a couple of seconds on a navigator's flight plan on
takeoff will turn into a 400 mile deviation after several hours of flight.
Result: No airport and no fuel!
This is why in the different international meetings and conventions for
creating legislation, it is absolutely necessary that laws are passed making
companies accountable for any damage to the environment, human health, and to
farmers who want to be able to grow non GE crops in peace without worries of
losing their organic certification.
If a good strong legislation is passed, we will start to see an immediate
slowdown of releases of GE organisms into the environment and a huge rise in
long term research as no company worth it's name will want to be faced with
possible lawsuits, very expensive compensations and impossible-to-accomplish
cleanup schemes (GE organism recovery from the environment) a few years down
the road. They would not only have to "look under every leaf", but to look
"into" every leaf, into every suspicious cell - a mission impossible and a
great incentive to find a new line of business. (hint,hint).
- From: Rick Roush <firstname.lastname@example.org>