It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
WASHINGTON -- It's pretty rare that members of Congress and all the witnesses they've called will declare out loud that Americans are just too ignorant to be given a piece of information, but that was a key conclusion of a session of the House Agriculture Committee this week.
The issue was genetically modified organisms, or GMOs as they're often known in the food industry. And members of the subcommittee on Horticulture, Research, Biotechnology, and Foreign Agriculture, as well as their four experts, agreed that the genetic engineering of food crops has been a thorough success responsible for feeding the hungry, improving nutrition and reducing the use of pesticides.
People who oppose GMOs or want them labeled so that consumers can know what they're eating are alarmists who thrive on fear and ignorance, the panel agreed. Labeling GMO foods would only stoke those fears, and harm a beneficial thing, so it should not be allowed, the lawmakers and witnesses agreed.
The issue may soon gain fresh relevance on Capitol Hill, where a measure backed by Reps. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.) and G.K. Butterfield (D-N.C.) to stop states from requiring GMO labeling could get marked up as early as September. The bill also would allow genetically engineered food to be labeled "100 percent natural."
originally posted by: roth1
!@#$ Let us have the choice, sure most won't buy it just like organics because it will probably be more expensive.
originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: snarky412
It's true, most people cant even read the labels on packages now.
originally posted by: snarky412
Well TPTB, it's up to the people to decide, fear mongering or not
The government has no place making that decision for us and who the hell do they think they are calling us 'stupid'????
Let's all remember that on Voting day!!!
How much pesticide and / or weed killer gets absorbed into freshly planted GM seeds from residual amounts in the soil from previous treatments ? And how much gets absorbed by plants through roots after new treatments ? And, do end products retain any pesticide or weed killer amounts (other than washable surface amounts) that would be unsafe to humans ? Who determines safe levels if any levels do in fact exist ? And finally, are different amounts absorbed by non-GM originated plants ?
Question Submitted by: xuenchen from chicago, Illinois
Your questions all relate to the safety of pesticide residues that may occur in GM crops. That’s a reasonable concern given the rapid adoption and widespread use of GM crops. Importantly, since crops tolerant to herbicides such as glyphosate are very popular among farmers, spraying of glyphosate could lead to residues of the active ingredient in the forage or grain that is consumed by animals or humans. When farmers spray fields to eliminate weeds that compete with the crop and reduce yield, the vast majority of the glyphosate enters plants through the leaves. Glyphosate is tightly bound to soil, and little or no glyphosate is taken up from the soil, either by newly planted seeds or by existing plants, whether GM or non-GM. One of the reasons that glyphosate is so popular with farmers is that farmers can safely plant other crops after using glyphosate without impacts on the subsequent crop. Over time, soil microorganisms break down any glyphosate residues in the soil.
Any glyphosate residues that remain in the plant decrease over time following application, and are less in grain compared to leaves. Processing of grain for use in food also reduces detectible residues. For example, there is no detectible glyphosate present in the oil fraction in soybean or corn oil.
Finally, since there is the potential for residues of glyphosate to remain in forage and grain used in animal feed and human foods, the levels must be measured across many locations and environments to determine the highest levels that might be present. In the US, the EPA is responsible to examine all uses of pesticides and must examine the residue data and establish safe levels of exposure. All uses must be approved and the combined exposure from all crops must be below the acceptable dose level established by the EPA. This process was described previously in detail on this site. That answer can be found at: (gmoanswers.com...). Other countries follow similar procedures within their regulatory agencies.
Answered by: Marian Bleeke on Thursday, 10/17/2013 7:02 pm
Fate and Metabolism Platform Lead, Monsanto
I joined Monsanto in 1984 after receiving my Ph.D. in Agricultural and Environmental Chemistry from the University of California – Berkeley. I am part of the Regulatory Environmental Sciences Technology Center, and have spent my career on understanding how Monsanto’s agricultural chemical products behave in the environment. We study what happens to our products in plants, animals, soil and water, and determine the potential for environmental and human exposure, in order to ensure that our products can be used safely.
originally posted by: khnum
a reply to: snarky412
What do you expect Islam Siddiqui a former Monsanto lobbyist wrote the USDA food standards,theres also ex Monsanto FDA commissioners and high ranking EPA staff.
originally posted by: defuntion
a reply to: snarky412
Here is an idea that I hope will get picked up and gather steam.
Let's get a bill pushed through that requires all foods that do NOT contain GMOs to require a label that states "NO GMOs"....
Or, maybe the producers of natural foods will decide to do this on their own....
Silly yes, but just might work..
Polyethoxylated tallow amine (POEA) is a surfactant that enhances the activity of herbicides such as glyphosate. The role of a surfactant in a herbicide product is to improve wettability of the hydrophobic surface of plants for maximum coverage and aid penetration through the plant surface