permaculture

["Lawrence F. London, Jr." <lflj@bellsouth.net>]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [SANET-MG] GM contaminated honey
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 20:22:25 -0600
From: Douglas Hinds <cedecor@GMX.NET>
Reply-To: Sustainable Agriculture Network Discussion Group 
<SANET-MG@LISTS.IFAS.UFL.EDU>, Douglas Hinds <cedecor@GMX.NET>
Organization: CeDeCoR, A.C.
To: SANET-MG@LISTS.IFAS.UFL.EDU


At 10:04:25 AM, Thursday, February 17, 2011, Professor Joe Cummins
informed us that the European Union's highest court has determined
that honey containing traces of genetically modified material from
modified plants will be considered genetically modified itself,
which may enable beekeepers to seek damages due to contamination
from GM crops

> EU beekeepers stage win against GM crop producers
> Deutsche Welle, 15 February 2011


http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,14843153,00.html?maca=en-rss-en-all-1573-rdf

The insistence of Monsanto et. al. on having the right to
contaminate the genomes of wild plants and both conventional and
organic crops through cross pollination can be better understood if
we remember that the chemical companies (who have been contaminating
the environment with impunity since WWII ended) are now the owners
of the largest seed companies, and have become quite adept at
influencing public policy and the political process to serve their
own anti-ecological, anti-public health and anti-farmer independence
interests.

So knowing that the European Union has managed to see through their
hype and misinformation and act in the public interest is good news
indeed, and provides us with an opportunity to examine the
methodological flaws, dishonest tactics and scientific fallacies
that were used to impose their will on the American people and turn
them all into Guinea Pigs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_food_controversies

Informs us that:

  A 2003 review in Trends in Biotechnology identified 7 main parts of
  a standard safety test:[27]

  1.- Study of the introduced DNA and the new proteins or metabolites
      that it produces;

  2.- Analysis of the chemical composition of the relevant plant
      parts, measuring nutrients, anti-nutrients as well as any
      natural toxins or known allergens;

  3.- Assess the risk of gene transfer from the food to microorganisms
      in the human gut;

  4.- Study the possibility that any new components in the food might
      be allergens;

  5.- Estimate how much of a normal diet the food will make up;

  6.- Estimate any toxicological or nutritional problems revealed by
      this data;

  7.- From Additional animal toxicity tests if there is the
      possibility that the food might pose a risk.


I know that Joe can pinpoint the methodological flaws, dishonest
tactics and scientific fallacies (quoting myself) that are contained
in the list, point by point and I hope he's got the time to do so.

Douglas Hinds