Speed up roll-out of GM crops, says Downing Street

page: 1
3

log in

join

posted on Dec, 11 2012 @ 03:16 AM
link   

Downing Street said it was working behind the scenes to encourage European Commission officials to make it easier for farmers to grow GM crops. The news came after Owen Paterson, the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs secretary, said in an interview with The Daily Telegraph that GM food should be grown and sold widely in Britain.


Does the government know best when it comes to gm foods. They say they are relying on the science, but when have governments relied on the advice of scientists before to make policy ( I'm thinking drug policy).

I was also under the impression the EU was against GM crops yet the uk government is keen to speed up the process of legislation for the use of these crops in the UK.

www.telegraph.co.uk...
edit on 11-12-2012 by woodwardjnr because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 11 2012 @ 03:25 AM
link   
You're right that France came out with a report saying that GM corn was a big mistake. But if I may post an update from another thread?


I assume you remember the threads which mentioned, directly or indirectly, France's ban on GE corn. It was based on a study that we on ATS assumed was incontovertible proof of the dangers of such things. Here's an update.
www.france24.com...

AFP - The EU's food safety agency definitively rejected Wednesday a bombshell French report linking genetically modified corn to cancer, saying it failed to meet "acceptable scientific standards."

"Serious defects in the design and methodology of a paper by Seralini et al. mean it does not meet acceptable scientific standards," the European Food Safety Authority said in a statement.

"Consequently it is not possible to draw valid conclusions about the occurrence of tumours in the rats tested," the agency said.

EFSA, which reviews the use and authorisation of GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms), added that it "finds there is no need to re-examine its previous safety evaluations of NK603," the genetically modified maize developed by US agribusiness giant Monsanto.

That same conclusion had been reached in separate and independent assessments of Gilles-Eric Seralini's work carried out in six European Union nations, the agency added.
I found it very telling that when Seralini was asked to provide more information on which he based his study, his response was:
But the scientist responded that he would not give EFSA additional information until it first detailed the basis of its own assessment.

"It is absolutely scandalous that (EFSA) keeps secret the information on which they based their evaluation" of NK603 and the pesticide, he said at the time.

"In any event, we will not give them anything. We will put the information in the public domain when they do."
His position is that it is scandalous not to provide information, at the same time that he is not providing information? A strange way for any scientist to behave.
You can see the whole thread here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Dec, 11 2012 @ 03:31 AM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 


It is a difficult one. I don't know how I really feel about gm crops. I fear they could mess with the natural order of things and more importantly, the seeds become patented by companies like Monsanto. So you can only use their brand. I believe there are much better ways to solving the food crisis than letting it come under the control of mega corporations.



posted on Dec, 11 2012 @ 03:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by woodwardjnr

It is a difficult one. I don't know how I really feel about gm crops. I fear they could mess with the natural order of things and more importantly, the seeds become patented by companies like Monsanto. So you can only use their brand. I believe there are much better ways to solving the food crisis than letting it come under the control of mega corporations.


..not to mention that it has adverse effects on your health. And "adverse" is probably the kindest word I could have possibly used. GMOs are profit-driven science at its worst. We need to fight them tooth and nail until we're victorious. The health of humanity depends on it. And yes, I'm aware of how dramatic that sounds



posted on Dec, 11 2012 @ 04:37 AM
link   
reply to post by bacci0909
 


Dramatic or not, that is the very issue. Why should we eat genetically altered food. And as OP said, since when have the government ever listened to scientists, unless of course it fits with their agenda. Telling that in the same week they say about nothing wrong with GMO, and no shout down from above. Yet Dave, wont even consider a royal commission on something that grows naturally and faster than any GMO product and can be used in a multitude of uses, food being one of them.



posted on Dec, 11 2012 @ 04:55 PM
link   
How convenient that this comes at the end of a year in which so many crops have been ruined by the endless rain.


I read the item about this in the Telegraph and I am still trying to get my head around how stupid Owen Paterson must have thought people were when he came out with this astonishing statement..


The Environment Secretary also said that consumers were already unwittingly eating GM food on a regular basis, so concerns about human health are misplaced.


www.telegraph.co.uk...

I am just wondering whether that gem of twisted logic was deliberate or not.

Didn't think it would be long before they started pushing this crap at us again. So, we get them whether we want them or not, of course - too many backhanders and payoffs at stake to listen to the voters eh?



peace
J





new topics

top topics
 
3

log in

join