Sierra Club, Patsy Mink PAC endorse Joy

[Frankie Stapleton]

It appears that no matter what Joy puts on her brochure or on her website as her position on labelling: Da Vinci is insistent on name-calling Joy and calling the Sierra Club, a well-respected organization, naïve for their endorsement. What a shame: Joy is the strongest candidate to take on the incumbent and a vote for anyone else would split the vote allowing the incumbent to remain in office.

[DaVinci]

@rainyjim. You said " Genetic modification is a natural process..." and then I said that modern gene splicing is not natural. Your claim vis a vis agrobacterium tumafaciens is not incorrect, but it is not a sound basis for rebutting my observation that modern artificial recombination efforts are not slow, nor random. And that therefore they have the potential to cause harm. You would probably argue that the a.tumafaciens adaptation allows for a naturally occurring, non-random introduction of new DNA into species of the eudicot clade, and I would have to agree. But the effect of that transfer introduces crown gall disease into the eudicots, so while it might be a clever adaptation by a species of bacteria, it doesn't make for much of an argument in favor of GMO.

[rainyjim]

Please refrain from putting words in my mouth, I can and will speak for myself. You can infer whatever you want from my statements just don't post drivel I never said as if it was my opinion.

By no means do I dispute using transgenic organisms in agriculture could have unattended consequences.

Tying your shoe-laces, walking outside, getting out of bed, driving on highway 130 could all have unattended consequences.

I'm still curious about your motivations and your vendetta against this particular candidate.

[peteadams]

Davinci said:

"And that is the foundation of my criticism of modern GMO products. The genetic change is not slow. It is not random. It is a decision by a human being that the change will provide a benefit. And that might not be true. And every product released into the wild without scrupulous testing has the potential to do harm. I am opposed to that."

Everything said is entirely applicable to traditional pollination techniques. The "genetic change" resulting from traditional pollination is not slow either. The changes are available in the next generation! You seem to be confusing natural selection with human plant breeding. Very little, probably nothing, of what we eat has been genetically unmodified for 10,000 years. Do you think that any backyard plant breeder who produces a genetic modification via pollination then tests their new hybrid as to whether it "has the potential to do harm?" Don't think so.

Any serious plant breeding, traditional or otherwise, normally has a purpose, there is a "decision that the change will provide a benefit." What's new?

GMO is simply a laboratory technique. It is relatively precise and has quite predictable results. Maybe you like random genetic modifications via traditional breeding. That's fine, we can certainly get unexpected results that way, including harm.

"GMO safety is NOT settled science, like natural selection, climate change, cosmic expansion, or general relativity."

DeGrasse Tyson calls climate change science "emergent science" which puts it in the same category as the genetic sciences. We know a lot about genetics, including the GMO technique. And if you use Punaweb's search function to look at our previous GMO threads, there are many links posted by myself and others showing GMO safety based on independent study.

You really don't know what you're talking about.

[DaVinci]

DeGrasse Tyson has said that the fundamentals of climate change are clearly understood and that there is no credible scientist anywhere that would dispute the fundamental truth of it. The basis is human introduction of CO2 into the atmosphere. Genetic manipulation is an active process. New combinations are being tried all the time. So it's not in the same category as climate change. Tomorrow a new and potentially harmful recombination might be introduced somewhere. And Monsanto for one, will not allow any trials that exceed the mandated 90 days. So sure, you can probably show me a hundred studies of clinical trials that last exactly 90 days, and then claim the product is safe. What I wonder about is why Monsanto will sue anyone who tries to study its products for longer than that. And why they work very hard to ruin any small farmer that chooses not to plant their seeds. And why labeling would be such a burden. And why dozens of foreign countries have all opted out of GMO. I understand why local farmers who want to make more profit are interested in a product that increases yield, but I wonder why they are not willing to just say that out loud. And why so many GMO proponents recite the same arguments and point to the same studies again and again, and then claim that GMO opponents are just ignorant. Don't know what they're talking about. Yes, cross pollination is also not slow. And dwarf wheat, a product of cross pollination, contains an enzyme not found in either parent (amylopectin A), that some have suggested is contributing to the rise in obesity and diabetes in this country. Anything we do to our food can potentially benefit humankind, by increasing yields, or cause harm, by inadvertently causing disease. My position is not complicated. I just want to know. For sure. And I don't think that is an unreasonable thing to want.

Edited because I got the dwarf wheat thing wrong. Amylopectin A causes a glycemic index spike that is greater than table sugar. And that has been linked to diabetes, not gluten intolerance as my original post suggested. Mea culpa.

[dakine]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Frankie Stapleton

FYI, Joy SanBuenaventura, candidate for State House District 4, has been endorsed by the Hawaii Island chapter of the Sierra Club. Earlier, the Patsy Mink Political Action Committee (PAC) endorsed her candidacy as well.

For those who would like a chance to talk issues or just get to know the candidate, please come to a coffee hour-type event from 2 to 4 p.m. Saturday, June 28 at the Nanawale Longhouse (turn right at the 4-way stop on Nanawale Blvd and the longhouse will be on your immediate left). There will be plenty parking, a playground for the keiki and refreshments. Please come!

---

"Bump!" or.. "How dakine tried to highjack an already highjacked thread with the original post" or.. "Oh how all that GMO stuff is going on way too long... I mean we all want to have the final 'my way's right' kinda thing but gentleman please!"

[pahoated]

The subject line is about Sierra Club endorsement, and the people in the Sierra Club in east Hawaii are virtually synonymous with the anti-GMO clown troupe.

Why do so many people think it so important for this island to take on mainland psychotic movements? Just because it is becoming US of Gun, does that mean we need drive-by spraying of lead here too?

Why are local issues less important than these global mainland issues? It is really annoying to keep coming across all these self-righteous vigilantes against corporations turn around and start whining about "lack of amenities" with "these locals".

Too many of these mainland issues are being brought here, just like invasives and contagions, by people that go back and forth to the mainlands, and due to jet travel, never seem to recognize the uniqueness here from the isolation. The big problem now is several local politicians unable to realize where they live, all the time they mouth the words of "protecting the land".

"This island Hawaii on this island Earth"

[rainyjim]

Joy appears to be more stable of an individual than any of the other candidates running. I believe her experience in the court room will assist her in brokering deals and communicating to make both sides of a dispute compromise in order to move forward and achieve real progress rather than endless bickering - the status quo. This is my hope for Joy and Puna / Hawaii.

I don't see a better candidate and am pleased that for this particular race/office Joy is actually a promising choice not "just" a better choice than the other clowns / punatics.

[DaVinci]

I respectfully disagree. The Sierra Club misidentified the best candidate in this race for the environment and for Puna. That candidate is not Joy. It is Leilani Bronson-Crelly. She is in my estimation, the better choice.

www.vote4puna.com

[pahoated]

The better question to ask the candidates is if they support the Hawaii county GMO ban as law? That is, to set up an enforcement program for monitoring and fining research laboratories and farmers for any crops not grand-fathered in the GMO ban (papaya, corn)?

This is going to come back to the next county council and they will be responsible for enacting the law. In addition, with lawsuits and counter-lawsuits being prepared and submitted, are they ready to provide testimony in favor of the local law against GMO? Are they ready to begin the line item budgeting for this enforcement agency? It's all going to be very amusing, now that the wheels have been set into motion.

"This island Hawaii on this island Earth"