By: andy_mac_tecoma
29/11/2007
1:18 am Yahoo! Profile:
andy_mac_tecoma Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Bad policy can only means the lack of public representation in the policy
In Victoria 4 days post election and we suddenly have
GM crops being given sanction by the Victorian Government.
The idea that Victorians are satisfied with GM crops must underpin this decision.
The manner in which the Victorian Government came to this assurance
must have come though the view that
The Victorian public is assured and confident in GM crops.
This the assumes that the Victorian Government is acting
With the best intentions towards the electorate and that
The electorate has confidence in GM crops.
To have confidence in GM Crops a person would need to
Have a general understanding of what is the environment,
Community health, biological impacts of Gm crops to society.
In Europe the GM produce is record and many reports
From independent scientific bodies and papers point to serious
concerns on Contamination of existing crops by cross fertilization
and interplay in cell genome which is the base structure cells
in all life both plant and animal.
For the Victorian Government to expect Victorians to
Take GM crops on good faith or weight of selective evidence
in the allowing of GM crops the Government will find those
who they thought were friendly and satisfied with Labor turning swiftly.
The Labor government is not the only key stake holder
in this approval and the motive behind the approval
could lead the electorate to ask some very obvious questions on
The cabinet.
Environmental sustainability in 2008 is getting beyond
the major parties realm of influence Gm Crops look as ugly as a pulp mill and equally unsustainable both politically and socially..
I certainly hope this decision was not a reward for pipelines
and a reward for the car industry bio fuel industry demands
that would be cynically shortsighted and political GM poison . |
|
By: gordon_s1942
29/11/2007
6:58 am Yahoo! Profile:
gordon_s1942 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
We have been consuming genetically modified foods for centuries.
If you dont believe this is possible,look at how animals/plants have been cross bred/pollonated ever since man began to domesticate animals and grow crops to improve the quality/yeild.
I always remember being taught at school of the experiments conducted to prevent 'Rust' from damaging the wheat crops of the early 20th century.
I do not however agree to any modification without exhustive testing and consultation but lets be realistic and be aware we are allways being 'Geneticaly Modified' by Nature every generation. |
|
By: faereal51
29/11/2007
9:34 am Yahoo! Profile:
faereal51 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
I believe that more information about the implications of modifying food crops be available to everyone and that a mandate from informed people would service our continued sustainability. One of the main problems with genetically modifying food crops is that the seed set by the plants is sterile. This means that there can be no further crops unless the seed is bought from the supplier. This sterilty genome is eaten by animals and people and is absorbed into every cell of your body. Because of the gene splicing technique, something has to be removed from the DNA sequence. One needs to ask which gene is sacrificed. This is not natural selection, nor hybridisation as you mention. The difficulty with cross pollinisation of these crops is the effect on the whole cycle, not just crops of the same type. A major problem has surfaced in all countries using GM crops. It is the loss of the honey bee, due to the reasons mentioned earlier about sterility. Another problem is the economic dependence on the supplier. There is a high cost for using the seed, then a cost or tarrif to sell the end product, with no ability to reseed. Lower economic groups and countries become entrenched further into this dependence. Check out what is happening in Canada. Do your research....let people know the truth about this insidious invasion of self sustainability.
di |
|
By: jt110011
29/11/2007
11:24 am Yahoo! Profile:
jt110011 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Most people have little idea of the true ramifications of allowing GM canola to be grown here. The fact of the matter is (as shown by the Canadian experience) that once released it will become part of all canola grown in Australia. There is no way to stop cross pollination, wind and human dispersal of seed into other areas.
So what does that mean? All organically grown canola will no longer be possible, once the genetics of the plants have been polluted, you will never be able to get rid of it from the environment. So essentially those farmers will be no longer able to produce organic canola – surely that will deserve compensation.
So how will it affect you the consumer? Well it means that there will no longer be a guarantee that canola oil used in the food you buy is GM free. That means canola oil, margarine, biscuits, fried food and thousands of other processed food items available will be contaminated. If it has vegetable oil in it then it will most likely have canola oil and GM contaminated canola oil will be all that we will produce from now on if they allow it to be grown in Australia.
The simple fact is that scientists in favour of GM would have us believe that there is no health risks at all, which is simply not the case. To suggest that a technology not much older than 15 years that severely interferes with the building blocks of life (DNA) is well understood and tested is a blatant lie. The truth is that very little testing is done on environmental and health impacts and pretty much all of that is done by the company wanting to release the GM organism.
So what can we do? Write to your State government agriculture department, your state farming association and your favourite food manufacturers who will be exposed to GM canola oil turning up in their products.
Contacts to write to
nsw.agriculture@dpi.nsw.g ov.au
customer.service@dpi.vic. gov.au
emailus@nswfarmers.org.au
I believe that any compa ... |
|
By: jt110011
29/11/2007
11:27 am Yahoo! Profile:
jt110011 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| You obviously have no scientific knowledge of genetics. Cross breeding is exactly that - breeding not modification. GM involves blasting foreign DNA into cells that never contained it. Breeding comes from naturally selected mutation of genes over a massive length of time where nature weeds out the defective mutations. |
|
By: ozblokewa
30/12/2007
9:03 pm Yahoo! Profile:
ozblokewa Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
The only people to benefit from GM food are the shareholders and executives of the company MONSANTO.
GM crops are a health hazard and should be avoided. |
|
By: meonrhw
31/12/2007
6:52 pm Yahoo! Profile:
meonrhw Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| WA is rubbing it's hands with glee over all the extra trade it will pick up as they are not having GM. |
|
By: ozblokewa
31/12/2007
11:07 pm Yahoo! Profile:
ozblokewa Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Here is a Link and it is the tip of the iceberg
http://www.ethicalinvesting.com/monsanto/products. shtml |
|
By: ozblokewa
31/12/2007
11:13 pm Yahoo! Profile:
ozblokewa Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
And another
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/news/monsa nto-pig-patent-111 |
|
By: bubyshka
21/01/2008
7:19 am Yahoo! Profile:
bubyshka Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| well......jt.........derr rrr isn't that a modified gene......crickey? i beleive it should not be modified, and yes monsanto would be only one who would really benefit.......NO we don't need it here in australia.......SAY NO to genetically MODIFIED..... |
|
By: bubyshka
21/01/2008
7:27 am Yahoo! Profile:
bubyshka Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| sorry jt i didn't read the rest of your paragraphs |
|
By: bubyshka
30/01/2008
9:19 am Yahoo! Profile:
bubyshka Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| TROUBLE IS OZ, how do we avoid it if its not on labels. do we know if we are infact already eating gm foods.......to some degree we probably are...i'm not impressed really. but how do we stop this......gm thing from happening. it has been given the go ahead, by the premier. i'd like to know where his brains are!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
By: bubyshka
1/02/2008
6:48 am Yahoo! Profile:
bubyshka Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
New Iraq Law
Outlaws Saving Seeds!
Requires Licenses!
As part of sweeping "economic restructuring" implemented by the Bush Administration in Iraq, Iraqi farmers will no longer be permitted to save their seeds. Instead, they will be forced to buy seeds from US corporations -- which can include seeds the Iraqis themselves developed over hundreds of years. That is because in recent years, transnational corporations have patented and now own many seed varieties originated or developed by indigenous peoples. In a short time, Iraq will be living under the new American credo: Pay Monsanto, or starve.
When the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) celebrated biodiversity on World Food Day on October 16, Iraqi farmers were mourning its loss.
A new report [1] by GRAIN and Focus on the Global South has found that new legislation in Iraq has been carefully put in place by the US that prevents farmers from saving their seeds and effectively hands over the seed market to transnational corporations. This is a disastrous turn of events for Iraqi farmers, biodiversity and the country's food security. While political sovereignty remains an illusion, food sovereignty for the Iraqi people has been made near impossible by these new regulations.
"The US has been imposing patents on life around the world through trade deals. In this case, they invaded the country first, then imposed their patents. This is both immoral and unacceptable", said Shalini Bhutani, one of the report's authors.
The new law in question [2] heralds the entry into Iraqi law of patents on life forms - this first one affecting plants and seeds. This law fits in neatly into the US vision of Iraqi agriculture in the future - that of an industrial agricultural system dependent on large corporations providing inputs and seeds.
n 2002, FAO estimated that 97 percent of Iraqi farmers used saved seed from their own stocks from last year's harvest or purchased from local markets. When the new law - on plant ... |
|
By: bubyshka
1/02/2008
6:48 am Yahoo! Profile:
bubyshka Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Re:New Iraq Law FORBIDS SAVINGS SEEDS! Reply to this message
When the new law - on plant variety protection (PVP) - is put into effect, seed saving will be illegal and the market will only offer proprietary "PVP-protected" planting material "invented" by transnational agribusiness corporations. The new law totally ignores all the contributions Iraqi farmers have made to development of important crops like wheat, barley, date and pulses. Its consequences are the loss of farmers' freedoms and a grave threat to food sovereignty in Iraq. In this way, the US has declared a new war against the Iraqi farmer.
"If the FAO is celebrating 'Biodiversity for Food Security' this year, it needs to demonstrate some real commitment", says Henk Hobbelink of GRAIN, pointing out that the FAO has recently been cosying up with industry and offering support for genetic engineering [3]. "Most importantly, the FAO must recognise that biodiversity-rich farming and industry-led agriculture are worlds apart, and that industrial agriculture is one of the leading causes of the catastrophic decline in agricultural biodiversity that we have witnessed in recent decades. The FAO cannot hope to embrace biodiversity while holding industry's hand", he added.
http://www.iraqcoalition.org/
regulations/20040426_CPAO RD_81_Patents_Law.pdf
http://www.rense.com/general59/newiraqlawoutlaws.h tm |
|
By: bubyshka
1/02/2008
7:02 am Yahoo! Profile:
bubyshka Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Considering pollen crosses the boundaries of paddocks planted with GM crops such as canola, how are we going to help those farmers choosing not to plant GM crops but who get into problems with cross pollination? There are documented incidences of this in the US. |
|
By: bubyshka
1/02/2008
7:03 am Yahoo! Profile:
bubyshka Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| GM crops are not safe, as has been documented in episode of Future Focus titled Patent for a Pig that was screened on SBS on the 1st of May 2007. Most significantly it reports that animals that have been fed GM grain have become infertile. What is to say that human may become infertile by eating the same. |
|
By: bubyshka
1/02/2008
7:04 am Yahoo! Profile:
bubyshka Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Whats the point in being rich when our crops are devastated due to lack of diversity (one bug kills the lot) Where is all the testing that Monsanto have hidden because it didn’t suit them?
Once this is out in the environment it can’t be undone. stupid stupid stupid ......maybe too late even as we post!!!!! |
|
By: bubyshka
1/02/2008
7:06 am Yahoo! Profile:
bubyshka Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Yes this is in the insane category. International markets have clearly indicated their rejection of product with GM content. There is no going back once this genie is out of the bottle.
The attraction here is for a narrow sector of self interest who think they can produce and sell more. Go to any backdoor market in Australia now and one will find drum after drum of canola oil supposedly the product of Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia, all produced with the GM crop being dumped there by US companies unable to find markets anywhere else. They are locked out of Europe and even Aid projects in Africa.
Once this proprietry technology is spread those same people will rue the day they allowed themselves to become captive of crops only responsive to the overpriced chemicals and fertilisers of the likes of Monsanto. Make no mistake about this, this GM seed is the product of some of the most unethical entities in the world, in my opinion. It is being engineered to only respond to proprietry products of these chemical companies. The intent has never been to feed or power the world, but to strategically position themselves in a dependent supply chain for the future.
This is a decision that I think can only be a product of stupidity, or corruption. It reflects a shortsightedness and must be powered by greed. |
|
By: bubyshka
1/02/2008
7:23 am Yahoo! Profile:
bubyshka Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| be nice if this page really opened oz.......Let’s talk, looking at the Economic factors as the motive to introduce these ‘factors unknown’ materials into our food chain and biosphere. Outrageous! Oh yes there was meant to be a context given of Environmental concerns, but not one mention of any of the troubles in other countries and glossing over where it has been accepted to not mention the valid concerns of where some GM companies have tried to introduce dangerous products with little to no concern for anything bar the profits. Shame on you Victoria and NSW Governments, and shame on the farming industry for letting profits get in the way of some form of common sense. |
|
By: bubyshka
2/02/2008
7:25 am Yahoo! Profile:
bubyshka Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| GM crops are not safe, as has been documented in episode of Future Focus titled Patent for a Pig that was screened on SBS on the 1st of May 2007. Most significantly it reports that animals that have been fed GM grain have become infertile. What is to say that human may become infertile by eating the same. |
|
By: jasonstephens76
4/02/2008
4:44 pm Yahoo! Profile:
jasonstephens76 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| It wouldn't be the food, morelikely the breeding. |
|
By: ozblokewa
11/02/2008
10:20 am Yahoo! Profile:
ozblokewa Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| When the Victorian farmers realise that they are paying most of their profits to MONSANTO they will regret ever switching to GM crops but alas it will be too late. |
|
By: ozblokewa
11/02/2008
10:28 am Yahoo! Profile:
ozblokewa Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| jasonstephens76 its the food and has nothing to do with the breeding,American and Canadian farmers who were driven out of business by MONSANTO actually conducted trials where they feed cattle and pigs with GM and non-GM and proved that the GM free livestock suffered none of the problems of infertility,just do a search on the net about MONSANTO and you will find masses of information. |
|
By: bourke1978
2/03/2008
3:33 pm Yahoo! Profile:
bourke1978 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| never herd of gigs crossed whith flowers mad baste4ds |
|
By: bourke1978
2/03/2008
3:35 pm Yahoo! Profile:
bourke1978 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| MONSANTO PURE EVIL' |
|
