Home   |   Browse       NEW: (hypothetically starring) VIC REEVES as LUKE SKYWALKER .. in "Waiting for Godot, the hollywood version".

The European Food Safety Authority appears to be the European Corporate Profits for Frankenfood Producers Safety Authority.   Share:  
Thrust of argument: In 2015 I discovered: The insertion of a novel gene into an organism is dangerous.

The University of Minnesota's School of Public Health website says that "all genetically modified foods that have been approved are considered by the government to be as safe as their traditional counterparts and are generally unregulated".

The site points out that "there are several types of potential health effects that could result from the insertion of a novel gene into an organism. Health effects of primary concern to safety assessors are production of new allergens, increased toxicity, decreased nutrition, and antibiotic resistance (Bernstein et al., 2003)".

A leading supermarket website says "Whilst the latest scientific research and current Government advice is that GM ingredients do not present any risks to human health, we acknowledge the concerns of our customers and do not permit the use of GM crops, ingredients, additives or derivatives in any [NAME]'s own label food, drink, pet food, dietary supplements or floral products, this remains the case".

The industrial world, in places, does not appear to be interested in a completely open and transparent dialogue between society, corporations, science and state regarding the ever more widely understood dangers of "the insertion of a novel gene into an organism".
Direction of resistance / implied resistance: GeneWatch UK recently wrote 'GM crops enter Europe mainly for use in animal feed, following an EU approvals process. Most UK supermarkets, except Waitrose, have back-tracked from commitments to avoid the use of GM animal feed (6). Meat, milk and eggs produced using GM feed are not labelled.'

 

I WOULD TRADE NOW ON:
bp AT APPROX 468.90 bt AT APPROX 231.65 capita (at half strength)
AT APPROX 170.25 hammerson (at half strength)
AT APPROX 465.60 icag (at half strength)
AT APPROX 612.40 m&s AT APPROX 297.50 pearson (at half strength)
AT APPROX 696.20 sage (at half strength)
AT APPROX 701.20 standardlife AT APPROX 380.60 taylorwimpey AT APPROX 189.90 vodafone AT APPROX 200.90

THIS IS NOT TRADING ADVICE. CLICK HERE FOR MORE DETAILS.

 

Enter your DOMAIN NAME to
collect this point:

 

Removal of resistance: MailOnline writes that the rejection of an 'application by Upper Austria to be declared a GM-free zone for all existing and planned GM crops or animals' by the EU watchdog known as the European Food Safety Authority, 'sets a precedent across Europe'. Unification: This makes it all the more urgent that the ruling be legally overturned and corporate frankenfood monsters chased out of 'Upper Austria'.

With reference to corruption and corporate subservience on the part of EFSA in a different incident, Counterpunch writes 'The sedaxane saga illustrates that the standards applying on both sides of the Atlantic are already too low. Any attempt to lower them further must, therefore, be resisted.'
Rebut this point   Support this point   Edit this point

(TVhobo's estimated size of readership since 2013, mainly in the UK and USA, with Germany in third place:
over 200,000 readers across approximately 200 cities/towns

 

Copy/paste point into your work:

Type: Open statement

3 versions:

1. Server time: 17:31:55 on 13/2/2018
2. Server time: 17:49:4 on 13/2/2018
3. Server time: 17:49:36 on 13/2/2018

Related points:

References:

http://www.genewatch.org/article.shtml?als[cid]=568547&als[itemid]=575242
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-187781/New-watchdog-bans-EU-GM-free.html
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/01/21/a-farcical-approach-to-food-safety/

 

 

previous point on the grid   |   next point on the grid

 

Click here to read about Shams Pirani, the editor and chief author on this grid - note, if you can actually prove anything written above wrong, I would gladly, if the proof is sufficient, correct what I've written and what I think - if I could, however, prove your attempted proof wrong, then I would accordingly say so and maintain whatever point of view is completely based on fact and proof.

Browse the index: 1 | 2 |3 |4 |5 |6 |7 |8 |9 |10 |11 |12 |13 |14 |15 |16 |17 |18 |19 |20 |21 |22