Monsanto

[hemet dennis]

The way food is handled, processed, and shipped the lawyers will have every food labeled "may contain GMO products". Just to keep from getting sued. So I don't see how it will give many much of an informed choice.

 

[Peaches Lee]

The problem with the GMO studies is that, who is funding them? And, are they paying them enough money to not find problems?

GMO should be labeled. People should have a right to know exactly what they are eating.

 

[oldrooster]

The problem with the GMO studies is that, who is funding them? And, are they paying them enough money to not find problems?

GMO should be labeled. People should have a right to know exactly what they are eating.

the opposite could be true also, at one time saccharine was tested and labeled as a possible cancer causing agent. It tuns out in order to consume the amount tjat caused the cancer in the studies one had to consume something to the effect of 27 or 28 2 liter bottles of soda A DAY with it as for a sustained period of time to cause cancer. in recent years the warning labels have been removed for obvious reasons....

 

[duckinnut]

I think the GMO thing will be like organic supporters. It definitely isn't normal but does it really cause problems? Every study says no. People still still say otherwise based on one reason or another. That being said I think it's cool if GMO gets labeled. Let people buy what they want to buy.

I think it would be fair to say the majority of food grown in all likelihood is GMO so wouldn't it be easier to label the non-GMO? Just saying. Sort of like the organic label. Which would lead to GMO/Organic and non- GMO/Organic

 

[hemet dennis]

So anyone know what the law that was signed says ?

It's not about labeling.

 

[Bear Foot Farm]

Quote:
Quote:
http://kfolta.blogspot.com/2013/03/d...posing-it.html

 

[oldrooster]

Quote:

Quote:
Sec. 733. In the event that a determination of non-regulated status made pursuant to section 411 of the Plant Protection Act is or has been invalidated or vacated, the Secretary of Agriculture shall, notwithstanding any other provision of law, upon request by a farmer, grower, farm operator, or producer, immediately grant temporary permit(s) or temporary deregulation in part, subject to necessary and appropriate conditions consistent with section 411(a) or 412(c) of the Plant Protection Act, which interim conditions shall authorize the movement, introduction, continued cultivation, commercialization and other specifically enumerated activities and requirements, including measures designed to mitigate or minimize potential adverse environmental effects, if any, relevant to the Secretary’s evaluation of the petition for non-regulated status, while ensuring that growers or other users are able to move, plant, cultivate, introduce into commerce and carry out other authorized activities in a timely manner: Provided,

That all such conditions shall be applicable only for the interim period necessary for the Secretary to complete any required analyses or consultations related to the petition for non-regulated status:

Provided further, That nothing in this section shall be construed as limiting the Secretary’s authority under section 411, 412 and 414 of the Plant Protection Act.

http://kfolta.blogspot.com/2013/03/d...posing-it.html



it's probbably like the health care law we need to pass it before we know what's in it....

 

[duckinnut]

So anyone know what the law that was signed says ?

It's not about labeling.

True, but the linked article does bring labeling to mind. To me it is another bout of "crony capitalism".

 

[Matthew3590]

The problem with that bill is it allows a farmer to plant a crop while it is being tested to see if it is harmful. If it turns out that plant is harmful the farmer still has the right to harvest and sell his crop since they were planted before they were found to be deadly.

 

[Bear Foot Farm]

Quote: No it doesn't, since it couldn't be grown and sold in the first place unless it had ALREADY been approved.

All this does is allow farmers to harvest and sell their previously approved crops until any court cases are FINALLY settled, rather than forcing them to lose everything based on a lower courts decisions, or the mere filing of a lawsuit.

It has NOTHING to do with the "safety" of the crops, since if it were PROVEN beyond doubt to be "unsafe", the Govt could still halt the sales.

Don't buy into the anti Monsanto hype.
Read the actual laws first