Genetically modified foods at the Food Coop
There was a discussion at the last General Meeting about removing genetically modified (GM) foods from the shelves of the Coop. The general sense was that such foods such be removed, with objections coming mainly from the General Coordinators.
In case you haven't noticed. we've been labeling about a dozen of these foods now for at least three years. Among them are Cheerios, Kix, Crispix, Grapenuts, Heinz ketchup, Hellman's mayonnaise and V8 vegetable juice. Our committee has already found similarly priced alternatives for most these yet they remain on the shelves despite a stated policy of the Coop that they should be removed.
What to do?
Do folks favor their removal? If so, why. If not, why not.
By the way, the Coop already has a large (30 member) committee (the Safe Foods Committee) dedicated to educating the general public about the dangers of GM foods. In a recent activity, about 20 SFC members went to Albany to support legislation that would require labelling of GM seeds so that farmers would know what they are planting. Most developed countries such as the EU and Japan already require manufacturers to label GM foods as such. The result is almost zero sales of GM foods in these countries (a huge loss of US soy and corn exports to these countries).
I'd appreciate your feedback.
In case you haven't noticed. we've been labeling about a dozen of these foods now for at least three years. Among them are Cheerios, Kix, Crispix, Grapenuts, Heinz ketchup, Hellman's mayonnaise and V8 vegetable juice. Our committee has already found similarly priced alternatives for most these yet they remain on the shelves despite a stated policy of the Coop that they should be removed.
What to do?
Do folks favor their removal? If so, why. If not, why not.
By the way, the Coop already has a large (30 member) committee (the Safe Foods Committee) dedicated to educating the general public about the dangers of GM foods. In a recent activity, about 20 SFC members went to Albany to support legislation that would require labelling of GM seeds so that farmers would know what they are planting. Most developed countries such as the EU and Japan already require manufacturers to label GM foods as such. The result is almost zero sales of GM foods in these countries (a huge loss of US soy and corn exports to these countries).
I'd appreciate your feedback.
Comments
-
What are the dangers of GM foods? Any links to research studies?
Thanks in advance... -
I'm flattered that you value my opinion, but isn't this coop business? Just form another committee, that should take care of it.
But seriously. The labels are fine, but if most people like buying that stuff, let them - they're adults. -
Jack Krohn wrote: What are the dangers of GM foods? Any links to research studies?
The industry has refused to fund any meaningful studies. The few that have been attempted have been squashed or vilified. Typical is what happened to Arpad Puzsai in the UK several years ago. A noted and experienced researcher with dozens of published studies to his credit, he conducted a study were rats were fed potatoes genetically altered to express a trait that killed insect pests. After several weeks the rats were euthanized and biopsed. Much to Puzsai's shock, the rats had developed numerous lesions and evidence of organ damage.
Thanks in advance...
Finding this too frightening to wait for peer review, he went on the Britiish equivalent of 60 Minutes and discussed his findings. The industry immediately demanded his firing, which of course happened the next day. He has since been ostracized from the research community and forced into retirement.
Now, what was your question about any research on GM foods?
Anyways, in case you're interested, here's a link you might find helpful.
http://www.seedsofdeception.com/Public/AboutGeneticallyModifiedFoods/index.cfm -
Well, since you personally seem to have made up your mind, and your appropriate coop committees appear to have spoken, I'm still not certain what you are asking of us.
If you want this message board to decide what the coop should do regarding the GM foods on your shelves, why not set up a poll? -
Drano wrote: Well, since you personally seem to have made up your mind, and your appropriate coop committees appear to have spoken, I'm still not certain what you are asking of us.
Because I'm curious about what people think about GM foods, not just Food Coop members, although that's the primary concern and a lot of Food Coop members read this forum so it's a logic way to reach them.
If you want this message board to decide what the coop should do regarding the GM foods on your shelves, why not set up a poll?
I presume you eat food occasionally? -
I wish this country would just label food the way they do in the EU. I don't have the time to be a co-op member, and honestly I'm too lazy to do a bunch of research to figure out which brand of peanut butter is more healthy than another (as a for instance). but I would prefer to avoid GM food if possible. maybe I should just move.
-
"Because I'm curious about what people think about GM foods, not just Food Coop members, although that's the primary concern and a lot of Food Coop members read this forum so it's a logic way to reach them.
I presume you eat food occasionally?"
Well, Greg, to be honest, I'm thinking you're a member of this Safe Foods Committee and you have come here to "educate" us under the guise of asking for our opinions. It's a free board pretty much, and you have the right, but I find the tactic a little irritating.
I think the coop probably has a way to reach its members other than the DH/DS message boards - don't you have meetings, flyers, bulletin boards and perhaps even a message board of your own? If you don't, you ought.
I don't really care what the coop has on its shelves, and I have a hard time believing you much care for my input, but just in case: Put it to a vote by your membership, and implement their wishes. -
I love this Drano guy.
-
greg wrote: The industry has refused to fund any meaningful studies. The few that have been attempted have been squashed or vilified. Typical is what happened to Arpad Puzsai in the UK several years ago. A noted and experienced researcher with dozens of published studies to his credit, he conducted a study were rats were fed potatoes genetically altered to express a trait that killed insect pests. After several weeks the rats were euthanized and biopsed. Much to Puzsai's shock, the rats had developed numerous lesions and evidence of organ damage.
That is such bullshit. If Mr. Puzsai were any sort of scientist, he would know that the publishing a peer-reviewed paper is what establishes one's work as valid science. Going on television before even submitting a manuscript is pure sensationalism and is not science. What were the controls for his "study"? What was the dose of potatoes to which the rats were exposed? Was there a dose-response relationship?
Finding this too frightening to wait for peer review, he went on the Britiish equivalent of 60 Minutes and discussed his findings. The industry immediately demanded his firing, which of course happened the next day. He has since been ostracized from the research community and forced into retirement.
What you have cited is not evidence of any value. If there were any merit to Mr. Puzsai's work, he would have submitted it for publication.
Also, it seems odd that he would be ostracized from the research community, when it's the GM industry that he supposedly pissed off. What would the research community have against him, unless it's because of his bad science and his publicity-seeking tactics. -
greg wrote: The industry has refused to fund any meaningful studies.
Why should the industry fund the studies? Particularly if the studies are, as you seem to think, doomed to show that their products are dangerous. Or are the only studies you find meaningful the ones that show that GM foods are bad?
I'm not a food coop member either, and I can only just get it together to eat vegetables and not subsist on bagels and french fries, so I'm not worrying about this issue yet. There are so many other things that could kill me. -
I agree that this is kind of a lead-balloon topic. There has indeed been positive research on GM food safety (a big UK study a few years ago) but it's such a religious issue and so tied up with larger concerns (globalization, the environment, fear of technology) that I've rarely seen a truly intelligent discussion on either side.
This particular train is steaming full-speed ahead at the Co-op, which is putting a lot of member labor into education and lobbying on the topic. And that's OK: the Co-op has so many new members they need something to keep them busy other than slicing cheese. But I'm not sure what it has to do with living in Prospect Heights.
All I can add is that an enormous amount of the cotton worn today, worldwide, comes from GM plants (which has actually rsulted in a measurable drop in the use of pesticides). So under no circumstances eat your t-shirts! -
Carnivore wrote: [quote=greg]The industry has refused to fund any meaningful studies. The few that have been attempted have been squashed or vilified. Typical is what happened to Arpad Puzsai in the UK several years ago. A noted and experienced researcher with dozens of published studies to his credit, he conducted a study were rats were fed potatoes genetically altered to express a trait that killed insect pests. After several weeks the rats were euthanized and biopsed. Much to Puzsai's shock, the rats had developed numerous lesions and evidence of organ damage.
That is such bullshit. If Mr. Puzsai were any sort of scientist, he would know that the publishing a peer-reviewed paper is what establishes one's work as valid science. Going on television before even submitting a manuscript is pure sensationalism and is not science. What were the controls for his "study"? What was the dose of potatoes to which the rats were exposed? Was there a dose-response relationship?
Finding this too frightening to wait for peer review, he went on the Britiish equivalent of 60 Minutes and discussed his findings. The industry immediately demanded his firing, which of course happened the next day. He has since been ostracized from the research community and forced into retirement.
What you have cited is not evidence of any value. If there were any merit to Mr. Puzsai's work, he would have submitted it for publication.
Also, it seems odd that he would be ostracized from the research community, when it's the GM industry that he supposedly pissed off. What would the research community have against him, unless it's because of his bad science and his publicity-seeking tactics.
Puszai was one of the earliest reseachers into genetic engineering. He worked for the Rowett Instiutute, a goverment affiliated group who also brought us Dolly the cloned sheep. He had numerous articles over the years peer-reviewed and published and had been awarded numerous grants by numerous large foundations.
His immediate problem was that he was worried about the safety of GM foods and probably feeling a little guilty about what he may have unleashed upon an unsuspecting planet.
When his research results came out so shockingly negative, he was well aware it would takes months if not years to have them validated, and then probably killed by industry controlled agencies.
So he did what you too might well have done: he went public.
If you want some real nurdy good science stuff, please consider going to:
http://www.seedsofdeception.com/Public/AboutGeneticallyModifiedFoods/index.cfm
Thanks for your consideration. -
Drano wrote: "Because I'm curious about what people think about GM foods, not just Food Coop members, although that's the primary concern and a lot of Food Coop members read this forum so it's a logic way to reach them.
Food Coop politics are murky and wierd. In fact getting a vote of the membership is extremely hard to do. Even any polls must be approved by the General Coordinators. Similarly, no fora exist that I'm aware of the website or elsewhere.
I presume you eat food occasionally?"
Well, Greg, to be honest, I'm thinking you're a member of this Safe Foods Committee and you have come here to "educate" us under the guise of asking for our opinions. It's a free board pretty much, and you have the right, but I find the tactic a little irritating.
I think the coop probably has a way to reach its members other than the DH/DS message boards - don't you have meetings, flyers, bulletin boards and perhaps even a message board of your own? If you don't, you ought.
I don't really care what the coop has on its shelves, and I have a hard time believing you much care for my input, but just in case: Put it to a vote by your membership, and implement their wishes.
Such is "democracy" at the Food Coop. -
rogersma wrote: I agree that this is kind of a lead-balloon topic. There has indeed been positive research on GM food safety (a big UK study a few years ago) but it's such a religious issue and so tied up with larger concerns (globalization, the environment, fear of technology) that I've rarely seen a truly intelligent discussion on either side.
Again, I would refer you to:
This particular train is steaming full-speed ahead at the Co-op, which is putting a lot of member labor into education and lobbying on the topic. And that's OK: the Co-op has so many new members they need something to keep them busy other than slicing cheese. But I'm not sure what it has to do with living in Prospect Heights.
All I can add is that an enormous amount of the cotton worn today, worldwide, comes from GM plants (which has actually rsulted in a measurable drop in the use of pesticides). So under no circumstances eat your t-shirts!
http://www.seedsofdeception.com/Public/AboutGeneticallyModifiedFoods/index.cfm
The whole GM cotton thing is hugely controversial. The website above refers to a CD that documents the massive failure of GM cotton in India where it lead to farmer suicides and the torching of Monsanto seed agents. None of this was reported in the US of course.
As for the claim that GM cotton reduces pesticide use, cotton is unfortunately a plant that pests love to eat. Its continued propagation has caused more deaths and conflict that its probably worth (King Cotton=US slavey=Civil War, etc.). Perhaps it's time we gave the planet and ourselves a rest and wore clothes made from something else! -
I recently read that Europe has been unable to find any scientific justification for continuing to ban GM foods, and is taking steps to liberalize their trade. In order to appease its populace, who are mostly anti-GM, they're still probably going to maintain the labeling, but GM foods offer tremendous advantages and ultimately they can't be kept back forever. In truth, the most legitimate concerns are environmental, not health-related. Crops might interbreed, wipe out other species, and wreak other eco-havoc. But you're not going to get cancer by eating wheat that is cold-resistant, etc.
-
EmilyM wrote: [quote=greg]The industry has refused to fund any meaningful studies.
Why should the industry fund the studies? Particularly if the studies are, as you seem to think, doomed to show that their products are dangerous. Or are the only studies you find meaningful the ones that show that GM foods are bad?
I'm not a food coop member either, and I can only just get it together to eat vegetables and not subsist on bagels and french fries, so I'm not worrying about this issue yet. There are so many other things that could kill me.
Let's be real: who funds studies? To be peer-review quality, a study costs lots of money. Thanks to our anti-government sentiments, government agencies have seen their budget cut to the bone and we are now largely reliant on self-regulation by the industry.
So, if the studies show anti-GM results, the industry won't fund them and the government can't.
Simple math: you die of food poisoning, sooner or later, and the corporations get rich. -
escap wrote: I recently read that Europe has been unable to find any scientific justification for continuing to ban GM foods, and is taking steps to liberalize their trade. In order to appease its populace, who are mostly anti-GM, they're still probably going to maintain the labeling, but GM foods offer tremendous advantages and ultimately they can't be kept back forever. In truth, the most legitimate concerns are environmental, not health-related. Crops might interbreed, wipe out other species, and wreak other eco-havoc. But you're not going to get cancer by eating wheat that is cold-resistant, etc.
I would again refer you to the website:
http://www.seedsofdeception.com/Public/AboutGeneticallyModifiedFoods/index.cfm
There has been plenty of research suggesting that GM food is dangerous.
Personally I feel the GM food is issue is about where global warming was 10 years ago. Back then, the industry was able to suppress the truth by spewing out a lot of disinformation and propping a few hold out scientists.
Now the results are in and no reputable scientist can refute what they say. We've just lost ten years of valuable time in getting some action started.
If you doubt this, check out the new film released yesterday AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH. -
Here's a quote from a study funded by the British Medical Association, following a comprehensive study. This is actually an anti-GMO group that in fact calls for a moratorium on GM foods out of an abundance of caution, so they are not a corporate conspirator. However, this is a quote from their findings:
"The Royal Society review concluded that the risks to human health associated with the use of specific viral DNA sequences in GM plants are negligible, and while calling for caution in the introduction of potential allergens into food crops, stressed the absence of evidence that commercially available GM foods cause clinical allergic manifestations. The BMA shares the view that that there is no robust evidence to prove that GM foods are unsafe but we endorse the call for further research and surveillance to provide convincing evidence of safety and benefit." -
I would again refer you to the website:
Wow, referring me to a polemic website with a political agenda--there's a basis for sound reasoning. I can refer you about 1,000 websites in the next two minutes that show "proof" that aliens are among us and that a vast govt conspiracy is the only reason we're unaware.
http://www.seedsofdeception.co...../index.cfm
Perhaps if you got your news from corporate news sources like Reuters, the AP, the NYT, the WSJ, the Washington Post, or other such evil industry conspirators, you might have a more balanced viewpoint. But no, then you'd be "brainwashed". -
greg wrote: Puszai was one of the earliest reseachers into genetic engineering. He worked for the Rowett Instiutute, a goverment affiliated group who also brought us Dolly the cloned sheep. He had numerous articles over the years peer-reviewed and published and had been awarded numerous grants by numerous large foundations.
His previous work is irrelevant with respect to the validity of this study. If the results were so compelling that he was ethically obligated to go public, he would have had no difficulty getting this published. Why was no manuscript submitted? He could have at least submitted a "brief communication" (as is often done) to be followed by a validation study/paper later. If he is as well-published as you say, he would be aware of the process of scientific communication. Medical and biological journals are not "industry controlled agencies" and so would have no incentive to "kill" his study. Unless you think that anyone who isn't already convinced that GM foods are harmful is "brainwashed" by the industry...
His immediate problem was that he was worried about the safety of GM foods and probably feeling a little guilty about what he may have unleashed upon an unsuspecting planet.
When his research results came out so shockingly negative, he was well aware it would takes months if not years to have them validated, and then probably killed by industry controlled agencies.
So he did what you too might well have done: he went public. -
As a member of the Food Co-Op, I for one am glad that there are choices of products and brands. I like that GM products are labeled so that I'm educated, but I also like that the Co-Op's assortment isn't edited based on a small committee's strict ideas of what organic, vegetarian, whole-grained foods we should eat. The relatively recent additions of meats and beer is a good example of the fact that the Co-Op carries products that some members might consider offensive, yet others like to be able to purchase.
-
Sorry about the cross-post, but since Greg started 2 threads on the same topic and keeps pimping the same website on both, I think it's important that I also say this here:
greg wrote: http://www.seedsofdeception.com/Public/AboutGeneticallyModifiedFoods/index.cfm
It's interesting that all of the footnotes citing studies on that website actually refer to pages from the book "seeds of deception." That is intellectually dishonest. If the studies exist, the footnotes should reference the studies themselves, so that anyone interested can read them (if they in fact exist) and evaluate their validity. That is science. A book with an agenda is not scientific evidence. Empiric studies are evidence. If they exist, cite them.
Thanks for your consideraton. -
greg wrote: As for the claim that GM cotton reduces pesticide use, cotton is unfortunately a plant that pests love to eat. Its continued propagation has caused more deaths and conflict that its probably worth (King Cotton=US slavey=Civil War, etc.). Perhaps it's time we gave the planet and ourselves a rest and wore clothes made from something else!
I got a feeling we're talking about hemp here. -
greg wrote: Personally I feel the GM food is issue is about where global warming was 10 years ago. Back then, the industry was able to suppress the truth by spewing out a lot of disinformation and propping a few hold out scientists.
That is a poor analogy. 10 years ago, there was little doubt within the scientific community about the truth of global warming, but politicians ignored it, promoting the few holdouts that disagreed. I think the anti-GM folks are the ones in the scientific minority this time, promoting a few scientists that disagree with the vast majority who don't object to GM foods.
Now the results are in and no reputable scientist can refute what they say. We've just lost ten years of valuable time in getting some action started.
If you doubt this, check out the new film released yesterday AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH.
I'm not saying you should have to eat GM foods, and I agree that mandatory labeling is a good idea, but your arguments have been pretty weak. -
Drano wrote: [quote=greg]As for the claim that GM cotton reduces pesticide use, cotton is unfortunately a plant that pests love to eat. Its continued propagation has caused more deaths and conflict that its probably worth (King Cotton=US slavey=Civil War, etc.). Perhaps it's time we gave the planet and ourselves a rest and wore clothes made from something else!
I got a feeling we're talking about hemp here.
Hemp you smoke, clothes you wear.
I know it's confusing, but........ -
Subject: Oh, well that settles the whole issue for me!
It seems fairly obvious that this man was afraid to have his peers conduct similar experiments.
By your logic, the mystery of cold fusion has already been solved. Remember that episode in scientific history?greg wrote: [quote=Jack Krohn]What are the dangers of GM foods? Any links to research studies?
The industry has refused to fund any meaningful studies. The few that have been attempted have been squashed or vilified. Typical is what happened to Arpad Puzsai in the UK several years ago. A noted and experienced researcher with dozens of published studies to his credit, he conducted a study were rats were fed potatoes genetically altered to express a trait that killed insect pests. After several weeks the rats were euthanized and biopsed. Much to Puzsai's shock, the rats had developed numerous lesions and evidence of organ damage.
Thanks in advance...
Finding this too frightening to wait for peer review, he went on the Britiish equivalent of 60 Minutes and discussed his findings. The industry immediately demanded his firing, which of course happened the next day. He has since been ostracized from the research community and forced into retirement.
Now, what was your question about any research on GM foods?
Anyways, in case you're interested, here's a link you might find helpful.
http://www.seedsofdeception.com/Public/AboutGeneticallyModifiedFoods/index.cfm -
escap wrote:
OK, then try these websites:I would again refer you to the website:
Wow, referring me to a polemic website with a political agenda--there's a basis for sound reasoning. I can refer you about 1,000 websites in the next two minutes that show "proof" that aliens are among us and that a vast govt conspiracy is the only reason we're unaware.
http://www.seedsofdeception.co...../index.cfm
Perhaps if you got your news from corporate news sources like Reuters, the AP, the NYT, the WSJ, the Washington Post, or other such evil industry conspirators, you might have a more balanced viewpoint. But no, then you'd be "brainwashed".
http://www.organicconsumers.org/gelink.html
http://www.gefoodalert.org/index.cfm
http://www.foe.org/camps/comm/safefood/gefood/index.html
I believe you'll find none of these websites represent "fringe" groups. All are established and have been around for years and years.
The days are long gone when we could rely on just reading one or two papers or just watch the network news to find out what's going on.
These sources are great for finding out what we're being told by the "man" but if that's your only source, well then, God help you. -
Subject: Re: Oh, well that settles the whole issue for me!
elitt wrote: It seems fairly obvious that this man was afraid to have his peers conduct similar experiments.
Don't forget human cloning!
By your logic, the mystery of cold fusion has already been solved. Remember that episode in scientific history? -
organicconsumers.org wrote: 5/22 - Mad Biotech Scientists Continue Reckless Experiments with Human Gene-Spliced Rice
Hah! That doesn't sound biased at all.
-
JessicaSophia wrote: As a member of the Food Co-Op, I for one am glad that there are choices of products and brands. I like that GM products are labeled so that I'm educated, but I also like that the Co-Op's assortment isn't edited based on a small committee's strict ideas of what organic, vegetarian, whole-grained foods we should eat. The relatively recent additions of meats and beer is a good example of the fact that the Co-Op carries products that some members might consider offensive, yet others like to be able to purchase.
In May of 2000, at a General Meeting of the entire Food Coop, 101 members attending voted for labeling of GM foods and also that GM foods be removed once a comparably priced equivalent was found that was non GMO. One person voted against this measure.
I'd hardly call that a "small committee's strict ideas".
If it's bad for you or the planet, then it shouldn't be on the shelves. That's why all of our meats are free-range.
As for beer, if y'all want to kill a few thousand brain cells in a time-honored manner and no one else gets hurt, who's to care.
Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
- 40K All Categories
- 27.1K Neighborhoods
- 5.1K Crown Heights/Prospect Lefferts Gardens
- 7.1K Prospect Heights
- 2.3K Fort Greene, Clinton Hill, Bed-Stuy
- 8K Park Slope
- 549 Williamsburg, Greenpoint, Bushwick
- 442 Flatbush/Midwood/Ditmas Park
- 657 BoCoCa (Boerum Hill, Cobble Hill, Carroll Gardens)
- 151 Red Hook
- 104 Gowanus
- 304 Bay Ridge/Bensonhurst
- 130 Coney Island, Brighton Beach, Sheepshead Bay
- 270 Brooklyn Heights, DUMBO and Downtown
- 598 Windsor Terrace / Kensington
- 673 Greenwood Heights and Sunset Park
- 749 Brooklyn and Beyond
- 6.3K Stuff
- 86 Brooklyn Back When
- 1.2K Brooklyn Pets
- 257 Brooklyn Kids
- 241 Brooklyn Eats
- 51 Brooklyn Booze
- 3.6K The Lounge / Random Stuff
- 611 Brooklyn Politics
- 122 Brooklyn Sports and Fitness
- 111 Brooklyn Photos
- 339 Site Issues
- 8 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
- 6.2K Listings
- 1.1K APARTMENTS and REAL ESTATE
- 1.3K Sales Openings Events
- 2.3K The Classifieds