Home Page Link AgBioWorld Home Page
About AgBioWorld Donations Ag-Biotech News Declaration Supporting Agricultural Biotechnology Ag-biotech Info Experts on Agricultural Biotechnology Contact Links Subscribe to AgBioView Home Page

AgBioView Archives

A daily collection of news and commentaries on
ag-biotech.


Subscribe AgBioView Subscribe

Search AgBioWorld Search

AgBioView Archives

Subscribe

 


SEARCH:     

Date:

May 29, 2000

Subject:

Organic labels, quacks, Greenpeace colonialism, Irish teens

 

As a recent survey reveals, organic labels would mislead consumers. Submit
your comments to the USDA today and demand that the organic rule be amended
to include specific language on the USDA proposed seal to inform consumers
that organic certification is based only on production methods and conveys
no assurance of food safety, nutrition or other quality.

According to a survey released Monday by the National Center for Public
Policy Research, two thirds of consumers would interpret a product labelled
"USDA Certified Organic" to be safer, better, and healthier for consumers
than non-organic foods. This despite the fact that no research has
established such. (the survey can be obtained at
http://www.nationalcenter.org/PROrganicFood500.html)

Even U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Dan Glickman stated that the USDA
organic certification does not mean food labeled organic is "superior,
safer or more healthy than conventional food." In a recent interview on ABC
News' 20/20, Organic Trade Association director Katherine DiMatteo
reiterated that organic products are not safer or more nutritious than
other foods, noting, "Organic agriculture is not particularly a food safety
claim. That's not what our standards are about."

It is imperative that we all submit a comment to the USDA making it clear
that the label should state clearly that it is only a marketing tool, not a
nutrition or food safety claim.

The best place to submit comments to the USDA rulemaking is through
Junkscience.com's "ORGANIC" IS JUST MARKETING SWEEPSTAKES.

You can win $1,000.00 just for submitting your comments. Go to

http://www.junkscience.com/contest.htm.

Alex A. Avery
Director of Research and Education
Center for Global Food Issues
Hudson Institute
P.O. Box 202
Churchville, VA 24421
(540) 337-6354
fax: (540) 337-8593
email: aavery@rica.net

www.cgfi.com
________________________________________________

Date: May 26 2000 15:49:28 EDT
From: "Frances B. Smith"
Subject: The green man

For your information-- The New Scientist editorializes about Prince
Charles' speech.

http://www.newscientist.com/editorial/
Frances B. Smith
Executive Director
Consumer Alert
Phone: 202-467-5809
Fax::202-467-5814
www.consumeralert.org
___________________________________________________

Date: May 26 2000 19:59:23 EDT
From: "Heine J. Deelstra"
Subject: Organic foods: Will Certification Protect Consumers?

Dear listmembers,

Health claims of organic food proponents are treated on this site
http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/organic.html
as ordinary Qauckery.

With kind regards,

Heine J. Deelstra

Also, Take a look at http://www.oneworld.org/penguin/genetics/home.html.

I am rendered speechless by such a disgusting, 'manipulative' site. Heine
J. Deelstra
______________________________________________________________

Date: May 27 2000 01:16:42 EDT
From: "Tony Trewavas"
Subject: greenpeace colonialism

Youth Charity sees benefits of biotech. ((Greenpeace as a neocolonialist
power and an agent of Western cultural domination. My title. Comments are
added at the end A.J.Trewavas))

In the debate over genetic modification many NGO's oppose the technology
and its use. However there are others who believe it could truly benefit
the world. One such group is WORLDwrite a youth education charity which
aims to dispel what is sees as the many
myths surrounding development issues in order to promote international
understanding and global citizenship among young people.
WORLDwrite believe that Western misgivings about development especially in
terms of science and technology play a huge role in holding back the
progress of countries that desperately want to move
forward.

The charities forthright commitment to supporting people's aspirations in
the developing world has forced it to against the grain compared with many
NGO's and AID agencies. The charity was for example refused grant support
for a project which involved refurbishing and sending computers to
villages in Ghana as requested by Ghanaian partners on the basis that
computers were'inappropriate' for a country with no running water. School
students on a return from one Ghana exchange explained that their peers
wanted tractors and
fertilisers not machetes, hoes and low yields. They were admonished by
NGO's in the press who said tractors and fertilisers were completely
inappropriate technology for the developing world.

Equality of opportunity.

WORLDwrite took a group on a planning visit to India in 1999 and spent
time in the Punjab, the home of the green revolution. Participants met
with farmers, scientists and experts to discuss the pros and cons of
GMO's. They found the majority of attitudes towards the use of GMOs in
agriculture were very different to the views expressed apparently on
behalf of Indian farmers in the West.
The sentiment towards GM crops was very positive because of the benefits
it promised. For most people having seen the massive increase in
productivity following the green revolution and the wealth and stability
it brought, the idea of a GM revolution was seen as an obvious way
forward, provided small farmers unable to use it could be compensated in
some way. The group also learned that t the stories of farmers committing
suicide and burning crops were mainly hype. Participants were unanimous in
the view that Indian farmers should have the same opportunity to develop
biotechnology, and use it in agriculture if they so wished, as those in
the west and that it would be devastating if research and development
which could reap so many benefits and would be welcomed by many were
prevented by Western anti-GM movements.

Imposition of ideologies.

The group says that primitivism ((the kind expressed by Prince Charles)),
indigenism and environmentalism are Western ideologies born of
disenchantment with Western society. These ideas do not come from the
developing world but are most certainly imposed on them. They are ideas,
which can have devastating consequences, shaping the way forward for the
developing world, restricting it potential and are the modern form of
domination. This year the charity is planning it's most ambitious project
to date. The millennium relay will link groups from Britain, the USA,
Ghana, India, Ireland, Brazil and Germany and carry the baton for
development across the globe. The charity is run on a shoestring with no
paid staff and relies on constant fund raising for its projects. This is
in contrast to other groups who have large amounts of funding and who seek
to restrict the use of technology in the developing world. As Director
Ceri Dingle commented " We hope individuals organisations and businesses,
who want young people to open their eyes to the enormous possibilities
scientific and social advance offers everyone, will step forward and
assist young people in their efforts to reverse a trend which puts
development in danger.

Contact Ceri Dingle
WORLDwrite , Millfields Lodge, Millfields Road, London E5 OAR.
telelphone/fax 44802 985 5435. email
{ HYPERLINK mailto:worldwrite@easynet.co.uk }worldwrite@easynet.co.uk

((Comments by Tony Trewavas. The comments chime very much with me. The
full explanation for the colonialist character to Greenpeace philosophy is
to be found in Patrick Moore's article with the infiltration by
ecomarxists and other authoritarian forces. Environmentalism is a Western
cultural construction, which
devolves from, views of man as originally sinful and therefore destructive
of the world in which he lives. It is quite obvious that no such
dimension enters others cultures and the attempt by green organisations to
impose their views of technology and the limited and blinkered view of the
world they possess, result largely from an inadequate and uncritical
education. Nothing more than new forms of exploitation and
neo-colonialism; western arrogance in full flight. The aim is of course
to keep underdeveloped societies, underdeveloped and under the control of
groups like Greenpeace and to conform to their way of thinking; the
attitude of the colonialist through the ages. Make no mistake, as I wrote
in my advice to US scientists,
Greenpeace has become an authoritarian organisation, it brooks no other
point of view. Only it's own view is right, no uncertainty and certainly
nothing like democratic involvement and reasoned discussion. No
recognition of pluralism or the rights of others which are to be trampled
to maintain the God of nature. Get
the words right to describe this behaviour; Green colonialists sound about
right to me.))



Anthony Trewavas FRS
Institute of Cell and Molecular Biology
Mayfield Road
University of Edinburgh
Edinburgh EH9 3JH
Scotland
Phone 44 (0)1316505328
Fax 44 (0)1316505392
email Trewavas@ed.ac.uk
web site http://www.ed.ac.uk/~gidi/main.html
To view the web site simply click on the address
____________________________________________________________

Date: May 27 2000 06:48:10 EDT
From: "Wandrey, Greg"
Subject: RE: Report and Question

This is in response to a question posed on this website regarding the
number of new corn hybrids that Pioneer Hi-Bred has made available to
customers for the 2000 planting season.

Pioneer's overall focus is to provide the greatest value to each customer.
Paramount in providing this value is offering choices. If our customer
sees value in products with biotech traits, we can provide them. If he or
she sees value in products with conventional traits, we can provide those
as well. The products we have offered our customers in recent years is a
reflection of market demand and providing the widest range of choices for
growers.

In 2000, Pioneer offered 221 corn hybrids for sale in North America. Of
those, 36 were advanced to the corn product line in the fall of 1999 for
the 2000 planting season which calculates to 16.3%. The corn hybrids
commercialized during the last several years generate a high percentage of
Pioneer's corn sales because of their improved performance compared to
hybrids released four or five years ago. With the introduction of new
biotech traits and other value-added traits, the demand for new products
has increased in recent years. Pioneer's product development program,
with its advances in research and its ability to quickly produce new
products through its worldwide production facilities, has been able to
meet these customer
demands.

In soybeans for 2000, Pioneer offered 97 varieties. Of those, 23 are new
for 2000 which calculates to 23.7%.

Greg Wandrey
Biotechnology Policy Manager
Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc.
__________________________________________

Date: May 28 2000 12:40:11 EDT
From: oipst1@pilot.msu.edu (by way of C. S. Prakash)
Subject: Pro-GM views from Ireland

Please see:

www.ireland.com/newspaper/front/2000/0526/fro3.htm

which indicates solid support for biotechnology among Irish
teenagers and is further evidence to me that the "Frankenfood"
concept is begin to "wither on the vine".

Regards,
Colm Lawler,
Michigan State University