Skip to comments.Russia may totally ban GMO products
Posted on 02/14/2014 11:40:46 AM PST by Altenkrug
Russian parliamentarians will submit to the State Duma a bill, which severely restricts imports of genetically modified agricultural products, and completely bans their domestic production, RT reports.
This bill is an amendment to the existing law On Safety and Quality of Alimentary Products, which sets norms for the maximum content of transgenic and genetically modified components in food. The powers to establish that norm, go to the government and products with excessive content of GMO components should be banned for turnover and imports.
Evgeny Fyodorov, the author of the bill and a member of the United Russia party, says that it does not suppose a total ban on imports of genetically modified products, but imposes government control on it.
The head of Russias Organic Farming Union, Yakov Lyubovedsky, believes that the passing of the bill would show if the Duma can defend the interests of population. He also added that GMO was an experiment on humanity itself and that the industry could do very well without genetically-enhanced plants and animals.
The bill will be submitted to the State Duma in two weeks time and its authors claim its chances of passing are very high.
(Excerpt) Read more at freshplaza.com ...
Looks like they’ll be force-feeding this crap to us, cause nobody else on the planet is going to take it anymore.
What percentage of USA-grown produce is GMO?
GMOs have probably saved more life than anything except perhaps DDT.
“SAVED more life??? Please explain.
Amen! GMO is AWESOME!
What percentage of USA-grown produce is GMO? >>>>>>
GMO means GMO grains and beans. At least not yet.... no GMO fruits and vegetables.
At this point I think a large amount of the corn (grain) is GMO. Wheat too. Soybeans
Allow me to explain:
By keeping millions of people from starving.
And sugarbeets and some papaya and yellow squash.
I wish we would ban GMO products.
I only recently even heard of these Frankenfoods.
The first one that seriously affected me was the tomato.
I could not eat any tomato products without getting sick for several days. My doctor suggested trying a store that specializes in non-GMO foods. I did and found that I can eat nature designed tomatoes. The stuff that is designed to resist white fly larva and other critters will also make me sick.
We’re at a point where it has become difficult to find corn that is NOT GMO.
Russia is looking better and better, might just be time to start learning Russian.
Saved them from starving but condemn them to a shortened life filled with GMO induced illnesses. Seems like one step forward and one step back.
A half a million children that become irreversibly blind due to malnutrition could have been had that spared fate if GMO golden rice were available.
How many people have problems like this from GMO?
being able to raise 200 bu/acre of corn during a dought doesn’t happen all by nature itself.
In large parts of the world where malnutrition is an issue, their governments have the choice of buying food or guns and they more than often buy guns. GMO is not going to help these cases.
Not to mention the million or so children who die every year because their vitamin A deficiency compromised immune systems can't protect them from disease. Most of these children are under five years of age. Golden rice would eliminate most of this death and suffering, but idiots like Greenpeace are making sure that doesn't happen. Yeah, save the whales. Screw the human children. Why any conservatives would get into bed with the likes of Greenpeace is a mystery.
The Gallant Men of Oldsmobile?
All they need to do is wash them and water them with the stuff coming out of the Sochi water taps and they won't have to worry about GMO products anymore.
Nonsense. Golden rice could easily be introduced into countries like India, Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philippines. Rice is a staple of their diet, especially in the rural areas. Rice doesn't offer Vitamin A. GMO rice would make Vitamin A to these people, and the death and blindness would end.
Government isn't the problem in this case. Luddites who don't know their butts from a hole in the ground are. I refuse to support Greenpeace, or any organization that denies children the opportunity of life. Greenpeace is a bunch of depraved elitists, which is typical of groups that support totalitarian ideology.
GMO concerns are such first world problems.
General Moly, Inc.
NYSEMKT: GMO - Feb 14 4:06 PM ET
Glenn Miller Orchestra.
From the country that brought us Lysenko.
The same people probably still believe Paul Ehlich's predictions. Idiots on parade, every last one of them.
Keep them from starving? I’d rather starve then die of who knows what illness
labeled as such?
I wish we would ban GMO products.
GMO saved about 1 billion people.
Opposition to GMO is part of the anti-human movement.
Name a food that hasn't been genetically modified over time?
Everything you eat has been subjected to genetic modification so labeling it as such doesn't make much sense.
Careful, your stupidity may be fatal.
GO TO HELL!
You are an idiot. GMO’s kill but it is a slow kill.
Yes, imaginary cancer is much worse than very real starvation. Clown.
You know "slow kill"......like dying at age 92 from cancer, or heart disease, or a stroke, rather than their preferred method of dying: Starving to death before age five.
Some people just prefer the latter because it saves them from having to eat GMO food all those years. Personally, I prefer to die from old age, but that's just me.
Yes, No, Maybe so? We`re waiting...
The effects of Glyphosate or Roundup herbicide on our physiology? How much Roundup is now getting into our food chain thru the use of these Roundup ready crops?
Are these trans-genetic modifications crossing over into the wild flora and if so what effects will that have on the biota?
There are many questions that need to be answered by independent, peer reviewed research.
But perhaps the greatest question of all can be answered by GMO`s supporters: We won`t you guys support the labeling of food as to it`s GMO content?
If these are really such super foods and so wonderful for us then put your money where your mouths are and simply label them! Let the consumer decide for themselves.
Or do you not believe in allowing the individual a choice? I can only assume you do believe in the concept of individual rights and responsibilities as you are a member of a CONSERVATIVE forum, yes?
Well then, do we, or do we not have the individual right to decide what we will and will not eat? Or would you also force a vegan to eat meat or a Kosher Jew to eat pork?
If not, then do you support the labeling of GMO content and letting "We the people" decide for ourselves?
Seems like whether someone has the right to choose their foods is the more important question to answer here and labeling would solve that issue quite definitively, but I tend come down on the side of individual freedom, what about you?
By the way, your personal page says you are a “freemarketeer” well labeling would put your GMOs to the ultimate free market test, wouldn`t it?
Excellent idea. Let me know when you find an authentic problem with GMOs.
Let the consumer decide for themselves.
If GMOs get your panties in a bunch, feel free to overpay for "organic" alternatives.
How does a GMO labeling regulation reduce government interference in our markets?
Do your own reading. I not here to educate you or debate you. I could not care less what you think.
Starvation kills pretty fast.
Are you sure I am an idiot?
The evidence for GMOs saving lives is pretty clear.
Again, if you personally don’t want to eat GMOs that is your business but I definitely don’t want you to stop me and the rest of the world from eating GMOs—especially when it clearly prevents starvation and mass death.
If GMOs get your panties all wet then eat them. But let others decide not to.
How does hiding them in our foods advance the cause of the individual`s right to self determination? We can do this all day, answering a question with a question.
No, I avoid nothing, especially the fact that you can't seem to grasp that everything you eat has been genetically modified over time. Why you want to force businesses to state the obvious on their labels is a mystery. Maybe the reason your side can't even manage to win with this nonsense in places like California and Washington is because, unlike yourself, most people get it.
You`ve placed your personal faith in these super foods, so now put these super foods to the test.
Maybe you missed the reports about how we're living longer today than at any other time in our history. If genetic modification in food is so bad, where are the ill effects?
But beyond the obvious lack of logic on your part, are you saying, as a conservative, that you want to force manufacturers to add additional labeling to their foods to address a problem that doesnt even exist? Conservatives shouldn't be offering costly solutions that are wholly disproportionate to a nonexistent problem.
Labeling mandates based solely on an alleged consumers' "right to know," rather than on a products measurable characteristics, is in violation of the Constitution.
You are not allowed to demonize a product, or to create fear about a product, unless you can prove that there is a problem with the nutrition or safety of that product. You guys are big on whining, yet can offer nothing in the way of proof. The organic food industry supports your efforts, though, and they are doing all they can to foment anti-GMO hysteria. That way, more and more people can pay higher and higher prices for food that delivers absolutely zero additional benefits.
Every suggestion you've made here is anti-conservative in nature. Why you would openly confess your faith in far left causes on a forum such as this, and then throw your lot in with the likes of Greenpeace, begs the question: Are you really a conservative?
Yes, No, Maybe so? We're waiting......
The rest of your argument is simply wrong or specious, Examples: the genetic modifications done to crops before the introduction of recombinant techniques have not been lab induced trans-domain genetic introductions but simple breeding selections, and yes, life spans have been increasing due to long term advances in, take your pick: the development of asepsis, refrigeration, vaccines, modern infrastructure such as sewage or water treatment, the list goes on, but GMO tech is only a recent development. The rest of your statement is little more than ad hominem opinion, I will not dignify it with a response.
The foods you eat every day contain trace amounts of dangerous chemicals, but because we know the dose makes the poison, we are not afraid of these trace chemicals in our food and, therefore, don't demand the food industry list every single one of them on every single package. That you want the government to force industry to list things present in the foods that you can't offer any legitimate evidence of being dangerous, is very telling about how you see the role of government.....big government.
You see, you are not allowed to demonize a product, or to create fear about a product, unless you can prove that there is a problem with the nutrition or safety of that product. This is what the left does. They create lies about a person or product and then use the media to demonize them/it. You want to do the same thing. That makes you no better than they are.
The fact that you can offer any proof that GMO food compromises the nutritional value or safety of those foods places you in the same league as the global warming alarmists and Greenpeace. Nice company you keep.
The rest of us shouldn't have to pay more for food simply because a bunch of scientific illiterates believe all the BS they read on the internet and don't have the education, or in this case, the common sense, to separate fact from fiction.
Again, everything you eat has been altered from its "raw stage" so I don't know how you manage to stay alive, by eating, while remaining consistent. Truth is, you can't be consistent when you promote nonsense like this.
You clearly don't understand modern bioengineering. Using a gene gun simply gets you where you want to go faster, and more accurately, than with selective breeding methods. As a matter of fact, selecting just one gene to be modified is much less risky than utilizing hybridization, because we are not messing with the other genes. With selective breeding, we are making all sorts of changes without really knowing what the outcome will be. Not so with modern methods of genetic engineering. To claim or suggest that modern genetic engineering is riskier than traditional methods cannot be supported by science. Like with so many of the anti-GMO crowd, it is nothing more than feelings.