Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

livingontheland - Re: [Livingontheland] GENETICALLY ENGINEERED SUGAR TO HIT STORES IN 2008

livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Healthy soil and sustainable growing

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Tradingpost" <tradingpost@lobo.net>
  • To: livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [Livingontheland] GENETICALLY ENGINEERED SUGAR TO HIT STORES IN 2008
  • Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2008 10:33:18 -0600


Obviously refined sugar is not absolutely pure C12 H22 O11 or whatever. 100%
purity is impossible. And the beet waste fed to animals certainly carries the
messed up genetics. Follow the money.

paul, tradingpost@lobo.net

"The ignorance of mainstream America only makes it easier for the well
informed to rise above the masses and make some serious changes for the
better. "
-- Mike Adams

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
>
>On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 10:26 PM, Pumpkin Lady
><pumpkingal@clearwire.net>wrote:
>
>> Yes, I'm very late. I saved it and only just got back to it.
>>
>> Liz wrote:
>> >
>> > A relative of mine, who has a degree in agriculture, argues that
>> > refined sugar is nothing more than crystals of C12 H22 O11 , and is
>> > demanding that I explain how GMO seeds could affect that.
>> I don't know how the beets are genetically modified, but with corn the
>> corn itself produces BT...it's an intrinsic part of the product. My
>> concern would be that if the beets are modified, that since no testing
>> is required to prove that they don't have anything identifiably in them,
>> if they DO, then if there ARE problems they won't be known for a while,
>> and probably any problems will be buried in "well sugar isn't good for
>> you anyway" phoo phoo, rather than laid at the feet of monsanto. Maybe
>> the refining process WOULD take out anything nasty, but I'd feel better
>> if they did some tests at an independent lab or something. Also, I don't
>> know how sugar is tested for purity, but I know darn well (having temped
>> as a lab tech on quality assurance) that you CAN skew results to get a
>> passing grade on sub standard stuff if that's what the company wants to
>do.
>>
>> Part of the problem is that all food has an allowable percentage of
>> "other" in it. Chocolate has an allowable percentage of bug parts.
>> "organic" products can still have a percentage of things in them that
>> aren't "organic" (like soy lecithin that's not organic in organic
>> chocolate). If sugar has an allowable "other" then it's quite possible
>> that even if it is tested, the GMO additive would be allowed to go
>> through under the "other " clause. Then too, even if they test...if
>> they are not testing FOR a particular thing, then it's unlikely to be
>> detected, now isn't it?
>>
>> > He's probably right about that, and I've gone on at length about
>> > cross-contamination of other related beet varieties, as well as swiss
>> > chard. And the medical consequences of glycosate in our drinking
>> > water, and other peripheral dangers. And the fact that byproducts of
>> > sugar manufacture are used in other food products--dried beet pulp is
>> > used as cattle feed, and beet molasses is used to culture yeast, for
>> > example. But if anyone here can give me specific data on how the GMO
>> > seed affects the final refined product, I'd appreciate it.
>> If anyone coughed one up and I didn't see it, please send it to me off
>> list.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Morgan
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Livingontheland mailing list
>> Livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/livingontheland
>>
>
>
>
>--
>Bruce Smith
>
>@{--+----+------+------------
>
>A little faith will bring your soul to heaven, but a lot of faith will
>bring
>heaven to your soul. ~Author Unknown
>
>_______________________________________________
>Livingontheland mailing list
>Livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/livingontheland







Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page