[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: Moratorium Called on Genetically Modified Foods



gator wrote:
> 
> In article <321984C4.61B9@cimatron.co.il>
> joshua@cimatron.co.il writes:
> >If their developments prove to be a boon, Monsanto and other agribusinesses
> >can spread their research costs over a much larger profit base. If it's a
> >bomb, a lot more people will suffer.
> 
> absolutely correct.  which is why companies like monsanto will test a
> potential new product to death to make sure that it is safe. cause if
> it isn't, they are going to lose a whole lot of money.   now, using your
> arguements, if these businesses are so profit seeking, why would they
> do something stupid which might bankrupt the company?  don't you think
> that all companies learned something from other companies that have
> made the mistake of introducing something into the market before it
> was fully tested?

Have you ever heard of Thalidomide? Or Aspartame? That's right - if you'll recall, early 
releases of aspartame to the market contained no warning to phenylketoneurics that it 
was harmful - yet it was released.

Ever heard of DDT and its related compounds - which are STILL being developed and 
high-pressure marketed, both in the US and to more ignorant consumers in developing 
countries, after decades of cumulative evidence about their dangers?

Have you checked the recalls on late-model autos lately? The pressure to innovate and 
get to market quickly has caught up with the Japanese and Germans, who also are forced 
to do recalls and retrofits. But, by your logic, the makers have already road-tested the 
bejezus out of them - so why worry?

Did your wife use Norplant for contraception? Or the Pill? Does she have breast implants 
of perfectly safe silicon? When and how did the problems and side effects of these 
treatments come to light - and how have the corporations responsible treated those who 
have suffered?

Do you smoke? Have you followed the tobacco industry's legal and marketing machinations 
decades after the harmfulness of their product has been proved?

Are you old enough to recall the quaint, ignorant advice to American citizens about 
nuclear fallout early in the atomic age?

This is the NINEteen-nineties, not the Eighteen-nineties. Several generations of 
innovation have passed clumsily over our heads. More than several times, the soothing 
assurances of the boys in the lab have blown up in all of our faces. Your naivete is 
impressive.

Again: if it really is so safe, why are Monsanto and others trying to twist consumers' 
arms to get them to eat this stuff? Why not go ahead with labelling, and put the money 
spent lobbying Congress into an ad campaign that has people clamoring for the fruit of 
the future?

The answer is that even Monsanto (or at least, its lawyers) know that they DON'T know 
it's safe, and could blow up in their (and our) collective faces.

 
> >Of course, if agribiz has its way, we won't know what we are eating, and
> >potential problems caused by consuming their products will be virtually
> >impossible to trace to their source.
> 
> well, i don't know about that.  there is a common belief (i will leave it
> up to all of you to determine for yourself if it is true) that a
> educated consumer is the best type of customer.  as for tracking,
> with the implementation of mega-reg and the requirement of haccp
> (here in the u.s., that is), this should be a much easier process.

I think you misunderstand: Monsanto and other companies do NOT want 'mega reg' of this 
technology - or any 'reg'. They want bushels of genetically altered tomatoes to be mixed 
indistinguishably from other tomatoes, with no labelling requirement. It will be 
impossible to conduct a retrospective study and ask someone, 'Did you consume Monsanto 
tomatoes, and if so, how much?'.

An educated consumer IS the best type of customer - but the agritech companies are 
lobbying to keep consumers in the dark! That's exactly the point.

Joshua



Follow-Ups: References: