Skip to main content

View Diary: Prop 37: two alternative viewpoints (79 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I'm not sure about boophus, but (6+ / 0-)

    the reason I didn't address the other countries issue is because after reading up on them I don't think it's relevant to our situation.  These are decisions based mostly on politics and ideology.  Europe, for example, has a stronger sense of local protectionism when it comes to agriculture, and the hostility to GM there has led to fairly frequent vandalism of not only crops themselves, but also of research.   We've had relatively little of that here (I can think of one case in Hawai'i involving papaya, but that's all off the top of my head.)  

    As far as unintended side effects go, the GM labeling in Europe has apparently correlated with higher grocery prices overall, but there's debate about whether there's causation, and whether it's applicable in the U.S. context.  Jill Richardson, for example, thinks that American consumers will act differently (no offense to Jill, who I know in person, but her argument rests entirely on this assumption.)   So as far as unintended consequences go, this is a plausible scenario.

    On the second issue, it would seem you wanted to regulate herbicides rather than GMO.   What does the GMO label tell you about the incidence of herbicides in crops that haven't been engineered to resist them?  Nothing at all, I'm afraid.

    (Also keep in mind that pat of butter tried to keep us to five paragraphs or so to prevent the dreaded TL;DR.)

    Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce

    by pico on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 12:06:28 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site