GM Foods

Greenpeace, the environmental group, has shown up in the Gulf and convinced the Gulf News to run an editorial disguised as an article.

In the article, the following phrases are used as statements of fact, not opinion:

The UAE lacks "proper labelling [sic] laws". Sorry, but it is not that easy. By what standard are the current laws improper? Because Greenpeace doesn't like them?

The UAE "has the highest incidence of genetically engineered (GE) contaminated food" (emphasis added). This is using loaded language completely inappropriate to a news article. Calling GM a contamination is begging the question. You haven't proven that it is bad. Would you call the milk that is sold in the stores "contaminated" by Vitamin D?

"The first GM crop was engineered in 1996 in the United States". No, this is just flat out wrong. It is so wrong that it demonstrates either stunning ignorance or a willingness to deceive. Humans have been genetically modifying plants for thousands of years through cross-breeding and domestication. It is only that we have begun doing it scientifically in the last few years.

This is whole story is anti-scientific scaremongering at its worst. The whole point is to make you afraid.

I hate argument by asseveration. If your position is so obviously right, how hard is it to produce some proof? Here let me show you how easy it is: "No major health hazards have come to light since GM food was introduced 13 years ago, and close to 150 studies are published to attest their safety". [citation]. If Greenpeace or the Gulf News has some proof, present it. Otherwise take your scary stories that aren't fit to frighten children and go.

[Update] Keefieboy, who disagrees with my view of GM foods, agrees with my general impression of the article. Go read his take here.


Anonymous said...

It's not only about GreenPeaces standards, if you research a bit, you will see that Many health minded educated people want the same. It IS about health hazards, it is about the lack of nutrients and the FACT that an ear of corn may have the DNA of a fish, which is not only an ethical issue but more importantly, a dietary one too.

Having the foods labled gm/gmo/ge, not only is it simple, but an intellectual given since that label enables the public to protect their own health since the UAE, the USA and the FDA won't, it is our right and to be honest, our responsibilty, considering those in power won't, wouldn't you agree?

If someone has an allergy to fish, as in fact, many do, and that person eats veggies that have all sorts of seafood DNA's worked into it, then in fact, THAT is a health issue, because the person afflicted with such 'allergies' would, of course, have an allergic or could have an allergic response, a PHYSIOLOGICAL FACT, one must agree. And unfortunately, if the food consummed is NOT labled, then the possible cause of the allergy may not present itself as such immediately or even in, say, 15 years, because who would associate that.

For ex:a vegetarian that eats knowledgeably, but has unspecified allergies, or ailments, health issues and such, only to find out that when they go on a completely organic vegetable diet they are fine and then when reverting back to conventionally grown veggies, they have those health issues again. Well, that is an unequivocal result of foreign substances in Healthy foods, that werern't labled.

For vegans, well, they have a right to know that they are essentially eating what was once part of animal flesh, because if given the opportunity to chose, you would agree, that they would not. The have such strong feelings about eating ANY part of anything that could swim, walk or fly....that once breathed, using lungs, to live. (saying that veggies are alive would be petty....and those guys are breatharians and they are...well, they are 'special' lol).

So, just thought you might like another calm point of view.

Brn said...

thanks for the comment holistic girl,

I don't have any problem with labeling foods so that consumers can make rational decisions for themselves. Though as I said, 100% of our food is genetically modified from its "natural" state. You made a rational argument for that, which if Greenpeace had done, I wouldn't have a problem.

Also, they don't want consumers to be given a choice, they want GM foods banned.