Posts: 23
Threads: 1
Joined: Jan 2014
One thing to take into account Rob is that Organic and Permaculture are VERY different things. I have seen conventional farms that are orders of magnitude more sustainable than some organic farms. I won't touch the vast majority of industrially farmed organic produce you can buy in the big markets. I also agree with you that some organic food isn't necessarily healthier than some conventional foods. I'll take a peach fertilized with synthetic fertilizer but no pesticides and via a farmer who works hard to ensure proper nutrient balance any day over an organic peach sprayed with Rotenone. Conversely, some organic producers do a fantastic job and I'll eat their food all day long. But it takes a lot of education to know the difference unfortunately.
I suspect that our future survival will be dependent upon sustainable farming practices in which Permaculture practices will take the lead. Some GMO may indeed play a part in certain circumstances, I don't know. What I do know is that which is not sustainable will, by definition, collapse at some point. I also suspect that it is critically important that we move towards sustainable, hyper-local food production. With threats such as peak oil, climate change, economic calamity, etc, I suspect that the way the world will be fed is locally. That of course means some locations are inherently not sustainable due to population density and usable land. Yet another reason the Big Island of Hawaii is so attractive to me.
Posts: 1,175
Threads: 12
Joined: Jun 2008
Permie, Rob:
Good conversation you two. Need more like it.
The issues that matter are:
1) Seeds that must purchased each year since GMO methods can make it non-reproducible.
2) Patent infringement suits against farmers whose fields are inadvertently contaminated by patented
GMO varieties.
3) Pesticide and herbicide resistance and the attendant impacts.
4) Corporate control of GMO technology to control food supply and farming methodologies.
5) There is nothing inherently wrong with GMO technology, just its control and applications and
purposes for being used.
Posts: 3,188
Threads: 216
Joined: Sep 2007
Organic? - let those without sin cast the first stone.... the industry not squeeky clean (like many for profit structures)
http://www.civilbeat.com/posts/2011/07/2...ing-trial/
Posts: 2,244
Threads: 396
Joined: Nov 2011
quote:
Originally posted by Russell
Richard Ha, the usual pseudonyms, and a couple of pro-GMO PR guys from the mainland have chosen to accuse me of conflict of interest. Having nothing of substance to say, he is repeating these false allegations everywhere he can.
I will reply in detail shortly. But for now please be assured there is no conflict of interest. I have this on the highest authority, that is, the Senate attorneys who decide such matters.
Richard Ha is incorrect ethically, legally, factually and logically. I have explained this to Mr. Ha on several occasions in print, including these pages and he ignores my answer, repeating the falsehood that I have not responded.
Freedom of speech is a two way street, and I did not relinquish my rights when I got elected. In fact I have a greater duty than ever to represent my community.
Mr. Ha subscribes to the infamous theory that if you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it. I feel sorry for him, but I will not be silent on important issues.
Russell
The good senator, (if indeed this is Ruderman) fails to address the question, continues to berate Mr. Ha on a personal level, and claims "facts" that are not backed with exact proof.
When elected to office, there is indeed a higher standard one must meet in order to represent ALL constituents. One must (or should) maintain dignity, understanding, and balance. Unfortunately, in this issue the senator resorts to personal attack instead of factual discussion.
Perhaps we need to give the good senator a little more time to gain experience in both people skills, and studying issues like GMO prior to responding on forums or writing columns. Puna has so many issues that require addressing, and the community deserves fair representation from our elected officials.
As far as the County passing the GMO law, the possible/probable litigation (that we taxpayers will pay for) will be costly in more than one way. It will be interesting to see how Kauai handles the
recent lawsuit filed.
Our hard earned tax dollars will be expended for court fees and lawyers, instead of for our community once again. In the end, the Federal government and the State of Hawaii will rule, not the County of Hawaii.
rainyjim, aloha to you, however, Mr. Ha comes from a family who has been here for generations. This is his home. To infer he should move is not productive. Let the truth be known, in the old days, you would not be allowed to even walk in his shadow.
ourdoc, well stated. Thank you.
JMO.
Posts: 3,188
Threads: 216
Joined: Sep 2007
what exactly is the senators industry back ground? and CV
Posts: 307
Threads: 7
Joined: Feb 2011
quote:
Originally posted by punaticbychoice
Permie, Rob:
Good conversation you two. Need more like it.
The issues that matter are:
1) Seeds that must purchased each year since GMO methods can make it non-reproducible.
Sorry, this is one of the Big Lies being spread by the anti-GMO advocates. There is no seed anywhere... none... which is non-reproducible due to GMO technology. Where GMO saved seeds are non-reproducible it is entirely due to being F1 hybrids, the same as the non-GMO F1 hybrid corn that American farmers have been growing since the 1930s... and buying fresh seed for each year.
The UH Rainbow Papaya falls into this category, but it was hybridized from the first GMO papaya, the UH SunUp, and that does breed true from saved seeds.
Also notice that the lawsuit around GMO soybeans which recently concluded in Indiana, the farmer (who lost) was not an innocent victim of crossfield contamination, as some claimed, but in fact he deliberately planted seed that he knew was part GMO stock, then sprayed the young plants heavily with weed killer so that only the GMO plants were left alive, then he harvested their seeds and planted them again and again for nearly a decade, in a deliberate strategy to bypass the patent and thereby save the licensing fees. Theft, in other words.
Posts: 3,188
Threads: 216
Joined: Sep 2007
theft only if one can copyright life
Posts: 1,975
Threads: 47
Joined: Jul 2012
turns out pesticides are poison and are sprayed on food. i doubt even you can/will dispute that. i don't know why you are talking about lawyers but whatever... i should realize the futility in attempting to breach any of your 'unassailable bastions of truth', sorry if i offended your delicate sensibilities obie
denial is not a river in egypt.
Posts: 8,442
Threads: 1,031
Joined: May 2003
Herbicides, fungicides and insecticides are commonly in use on most all food crops be they non-GMO or GMO... and have been for many years.
Assume the best and ask questions.
Punaweb moderator
quote:
Originally posted by OpenD
quote:
Originally posted by Oneself
pesticides are ****ing poison.
Only to the organisms they are toxic to. Case in point, Bt pesticides are only toxic to certain insects, not at all to others. That should be a clue that they are not inherently toxic, but only specifically toxic. And the fact that they have been safely used by organic farmers for over 50 years, with no adverse effects, should be another clue.
Let's look at it from the other end of the picture. People safely eat many foods that are toxic to pets. As one example, you can kill a dog by feeding it just a few pieces of chocolate. In Colorado chocolate has been shown to be a safe and effective "pesticide" for controlling coyotes, while leaving other animals in the ecosphere unharmed.
This explanation of that effect explains why Bt pesticide is not a concern to people.
quote:
The different toxicities have to do with the way different species metabolize the alkaloid; humans process it much more efficiently than canines. And in small amounts, theobromine’s effects can make it medically useful. But even here, it shows complexity. It increases heart rate and at the same time it dilates blood vessels, acting to bring down blood pressure. It can also open up airways and is under study as a cough medication. It stimulates urine production and is considered a diuretic. It interacts with the central nervous system, although not as effectively as caffeine.
http://blogs.plos.org/speakeasyscience/2...chocolate/
And let's not overlook the fact that many homeopathic medicines start out as highly toxic substances that are diluted down.
quote:
How are we even having this conversation ?!?
It's simple. Because after more than 20 years on the market... long enough that the original soybean patents have already expired... there still is no credible evidence that there is any danger from GMOs, and the majority of scientists consider GMOs generally to be safe.
And that is the simple truth that anti-GMO advocates cannot overcome, so they have invented all kinds of bogus propaganda to try to bury it under.
Everything you've said is completely inaccurate. you are just spouting off old wives tales. At this point your just lying or you arent educated on the subject matter you speak of.
1- FACT -It would take a dog of medium size to eat 1-3 pounds of bakers 85% or more cacao chocolate to cause serious damages. That amount of chocolate would make any one sick.
2- just because there hasnt been studies, doesnt mean its not true.
Anyone who was able to tie their shoes all by themself in high school, can understand that poison, any form is harmful to a degree.
If you are suggesting that the round up and other pesticides are not harmful to humans, than why are they spraying them in HAZMAT suits ?
you have to be kidding me. SMDH.
|
