Please join us at our new site: www.sirhumphreys.com.
The RSS feed for sirhumphreys.com is now here.
link rel="DCTERMS.isreplacedby" href="http://sirhumphreys.com" >
There already has been a massive consumer backlash against GE overseas. I remember writing to Sanitarium in Oz a number of years ago asking if they used GE products in their products and they just sent me some sort of marketing crap about how they adhered to current food standards, etc. About a year or so later they proudly announced that they were GE free.I leave you to read the moonbat reply to this, because I then had to write again:
I personally will never buy GE food willingly. Having two children with food allergies, I'm already an avid ingredient reader. I have to make sure that there's nothing dangerous for them in anything I buy. With GE, there is a potential for dangerous food being sold under the guise of safety ie food spliced with genetics of something some people are allergic to. Like if peanuts were spliced with apples for instance, and there was no warning, my very peanut allergic son, who loves apples, could die from the the reaction.
Brian S wrote: If what you are concerned about was a risk, it would have happened by now.What I don't get is why Libertarians are for genetically modified food. I thought the prime reason for a Libertarian's existance is freedom for the individual. Unlabelled genetically modified food takes away that freedom, that right to protect your own body from harm. Instead you have to rely on outside forces to be benign enough to not accidentally kill or main you. Their argument that genetically modified food is safe just doesn't cut it, it's still not in wide enough use to be proved without a shadow of a doubt. That's just way too anarchistist and fatalistic for me.
Failed attempt at logical thinking Brian S - try again. One DOES NOT EQUAL the other. Lookup up logical fallacies on the web.
No, my point does not apply generally. My children have not to date had allergic reactions out of the blue to foods they normally eat. Maybe they might in the future. That is always a risk. Pesticides to tend to affect wider populations than specific allergies do, so hopefully if that ever became an issue, it would be picked up pretty quickly by the people in the orchards getting affected first. I also know that particular pesticides are no longer in use because they have been shown to be harmful as well.
Brian S wrote: If peanut genes spliced into apples did cause a problem, the market would soon respond, labelling or no labelling.
And where would that leave my son, Brian, if he were to have an allergic reaction? Quite possibly dead. Oh, but that's ok in your book, because the market will respond. Pardon me if I don't agree on that point.
Food is what we all need to live on. No food, we die. This is not a choice about something trivial, this potentially life or death for some people. Do you get that? By being against labelling, you take away the choice from people to avoid potentially dangerous food.