Maui GMO protest

[dmbwest]

Anyone else lost in a world of over quoting ?

[Delta9r]

Sorry your comprehensive faculties make my wordy comment lose you.

"Life is labor, and all that is good in life comes from that labor..."

[Derrick Barnicoat]

I agree too much quotes.

I also don't see how money coming from the mainland or mainlanders coming to Hawaii to protest is a point. Plus I am not really convinced that this is actually happening but if it is it would make sense. They are effected by the gm produce just as much as the rest of us. It's not like the gm crops are grown just for locals to eat. So yeah it matters to mainlanders.

[Rob Tucker]

Please, let's slow down on the excessive quoting.

Assume the best and ask questions.

Punaweb moderator

[OpenD]

quote:

---

Originally posted by pahoated
It almost eliminates the need for pesticides and herbicides, therefore a large part of the need for GMO, as well as reducing fertilizer needs.

---

Fascinating stuff. Thanks for sharing the information on the Granpa system. It probably deserves its own thread.

But I have to call out your statement above as sharing a common bit of misunderstanding about GMOs. While you may be most familiar with those GMOs that are designed around being resistant to herbicide and reducing pesticide use, because those are in the news in Hawai'i, biotechnology is actually being deployed globally for a very broad range of reasons, including increasing nutritional content, fighting disease, increasing crop yields, reducing the need for fertilizer, etc.

And while the Granpa system might become a viable solution for growing fresh produce in First World industrialized countries with a shortage of workers to do agricultural work, it's a capital intensive approach that I feel would not be a good fit for poor nations that really don't have the capital but do have the workers, if only they had worthwhile crops to grow, and the infrastructure to support them, like low tech pumps for irrigation, or whatever else is missing. Keep in mind that fully 1/3 of the population of the planet simply does not get enough to eat. In many cases GMO crops are being developed to improve their specific local situations.

Marl Lynas is a prominent environmentalist, and was one of the original founders of the anti-GMO movement. Last year he rocked the debate by reversing his previous position and offering an apology. "I was wrong," he said about opposing GMOs. After careful reviewing the science, he concludes that GMOs are the best hope of preserving the environment on the agricultural front, because they can be engineered to reduce the use of fertilizer, pesticides, and herbicides. It's certainly a different refrain from the usual.

Here's one of his key points...

quote:

---

"I think the controversy over GMOs represents one of the greatest science communications failures of the past half-century. Millions, possibly billions, of people have come to believe what is essentially a conspiracy theory, generating fear and misunderstanding about a whole class of technologies on an unprecedentedly global scale.

This matters enormously because these technologies – in particular the various uses of molecular biology to enhance plant breeding potential – are clearly some of our most important tools for addressing food security and future environmental change."

http://www.marklynas.org/2013/04/time-to...cy-theory/

---

[OpenD]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Derrick Barnicoat

I also don't see how money coming from the mainland or mainlanders coming to Hawaii to protest is a point. Plus I am not really convinced that this is actually happening but if it is it would make sense

---

At this point there's no question at all that millions in mainland dollars have been poured into the anti-GMO fight in Hawai'i. It's been reported on by many reliable sources, including journalistic investigations by the Honolulu Star-Advertiser and Honolulu Civil Beat, even the New York Times. Theses articles have revealed, for example, that the Washington based Center for Food Safety, which lists mandatory GMO labeling as a #1 priority on its website, now has an office in Honolulu, with a permanent staff of professional organizers. That doesn't come cheap.

Why it matters to know this is that people's emotions and support get pulled in different directions depending on what they perceive as the motives of the key players in a public debate. One of the ongoing tropes of the anti-GMO message is that it's a David vs Goliath situation, with a little homegrown "grassroots" organization facing off against a rich corporate giant.

Careful analysis of the publicly available facts, however, reveals that the situation is more accurately described as pitting Goliath vs his smaller, but quite powerful cousin "Organic," while the real Davids on the field, the actual small farmers most affected, are being shouldered to the sidelines in the battle of the titans.

If the GMO seed business were to be banned in Hawai'i about 2,000 workers would lose their jobs. How many of them did you see interviewed on the local news? When the Hawai'i County anti-GMO bill was being considered, local papaya farmers literally got squeezed out of the hearings by the organized mob, and they might have gone completely unheard if a special session had not been hastily arranged just for them.

It may or may not be a deal breaker for you to find out that the recent anti-GMO push in Hawai'i was not an authentic grass-roots movement, but instead was a professionally organized "astroturf" movement. Personally I think it is important in a democracy for people to have as clear a picture of what is going on as possible.

There's a lot of money at stake, with the Organic business interests looking to leverage their anti-GMO campaign to push more consumers away from conventional food products and toward the more expensive foods from Organic producers.

That push is mostly based in emotion, rather than in science or facts, so the public is easily manipulated. It's that manipulation that I'm trying to shine some light on. Most revealing , they're not telling you that food prices will go up in Hawai'i if GMO labeling goes into effect, or if GMOs are banned, but it's virtually certain they would.

Respecting Rob's request I won't document this with a bunch of quotes, but if you wish to check it out for yourself simply do an internet search for "anti GMO funding Hawaii".

[Delta9r]

LoL...
The results from the query "anti GMO funding Hawaii" are nearly all citing Jon Entine...

Can you say "Astroturfing?"

"Life is labor, and all that is good in life comes from that labor..."

[Derrick Barnicoat]

I don't think people losing jobs or whether the anti-GMO or GMO labeling movements are backed by "mainland money" has anything to do with the point being made by the protestors or scientists (who btw aren't all pro GMO). There is one fact that may or may not be proven by science, but it is still a fact. You can't eat money. Well, if you want to eat money that is your choice but the rest of us don't have to call it food. Money has no nutritional value and life isn't just about having a job or accumulating little green pictures of dead presidents. People have had all kinds of "jobs" that have destroyed our planet, the animals upon it and our species. People have chosen to sell crack and it should be noted many poor farmers in south america depend on that crack being sold because they grow coca leaves. That industry employs a ton of people but does that mean we should defend crack and make sure that it gets sold. No because it destroys communities and families. It kills people. If scientists want to do some experiments with coca leaves in a controlled situation that is one thing but if they want to experiment by producing stronger and stronger forms of crack and then see what happens when they distribute it thats another thing. Sure they may claim they made it safer than the last batch and that is all gravy baby until someone kicks the bucket. Imagine the GM algae they were going to let loose in Kona's beaches had spread through out the pacific only to find out later that it is killing another species or making people sick so they can't swim anymore. It is just an unnecessary risk when there are other ways to do things.

There are a few things that should be considered that will actually do something good on a grand scale for humanity. For one, release the trillions of dollars that are being hoarded by the grey suits in the big house. If people are really concerned about money they would realize there is enough out there to feed and clothe everyone on earth several times over. The other is educating people on how to grow their own food and become stewards of the land. Also, if people followed their heart, instead of the dead presidents, and found something they love to do with a passion all necessary work would be taken care of and the concept of "work" and "jobs" would be entirely different.

Don't worry about other peoples jobs they shouldn't be wage slaves in the first place. This 1950's idea that you get a "career" or an "occupation" and work for 40 years at that same old daily grind and get a sweet retirement plan is dead and gone. Any corporation that pushes the GMO agenda doesn't care about people and their personal lives. We are just canaries in the coal mine to them. All they care about is profit. We need people to feel empowered, not dependent, for the world to heal. We don't need GMO's. Nature does what nature needs to do, naturally. All we humans need to do is go with the program or nature will do what it needs to do to eliminate us and if we are mucking around with the genes of other living things perhaps we should be eliminated. That's real science for you. Other animals know about this why can't humans get a grip.

"The Earth a kill you if you try to kill it, your body heals you if you discipline it" - King Midas

The discovery of DNA is turning out to be the new atomic bomb.

[David M]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rob Tucker

I think I have a solution.

Since there is no study or research prepared by man that can be relied upon or trusted what is needed is a reasonably priced device that can detect the presence of GMO in food. So each individual can take charge of their own food future.

A device that would sell for, say, three easy payments of $19.95, be hand held and display the results in an easy to understand format.... green light you eat, red light you don't eat.

What is needed is something resembling (or perhaps even might be) a stud finder.

Since a stud finder is designed to indicate the presence of something or nothing - a little minor calibration, a little repackaging and relabeling and a free market, non governmental solution might just be at hand. The development of this device should be much, much cheaper than relabeling hundreds of thousands of food items. And it would certainly be profitable for that fortunate soul who brought the device to market.

Hmmmm.

© 2014 Rob Tucker

---

Solution may not be far off
http://www.techhive.com/article/2148944/...icals.html

David


Ninole Resident
Please visit vacation.ninolehawaii.com

[opihikao]

Update: Article today in Civil Beat: (*Snipped - More at link)

http://www.civilbeat.com/articles/2014/0...ium=social&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=Hawaii

Activists pushing for a moratorium on genetically modified farming in Maui County are stepping up their efforts to gather signatures in advance of a looming deadline.

Members of a nonprofit organization known as the SHAKA Movement have launched a campaign to pay people $5 for each signature collected in support of a citizens initiative. Bruce Douglass, spokesman for the organization, said that the money is intended as a reward and an incentive for the group's 500 existing volunteers. If the organization gathers 8,500 valid signatures, voters on Maui will be able to decide in November whether to temporarily ban genetically engineered agriculture on Maui, Molokai and Lanai.

As part of their effort to ensure that all the signatures are valid, the organization also posted the names and addresses of Maui County’s registered voters online, prompting the state Office of Elections to ask them to remove the information.

The SHAKA Movement's effort is part of a broader backlash against genetically modified farming in Hawaii, a hotbed for multinational agribusinesses like Monsanto Co. and Syngenta. Hawaii County passed a law last year prohibiting any new genetically engineered crops and Kauai County approved a law requiring biotech companies to abide by certain disclosure rules and pesticide buffer zones.

Monsanto and Dow Agrosciences both operate in Molokai, where Monsanto is the biggest employer. Monsanto also operates on Maui, and farms approximately 3,000 acres of corn and soybeans countywide.

The SHAKA Movement submitted 9,600 signatures to the county in early April, in excess of the 8,500 signature minimum. But the group is continuing to gather names in case many of them are invalidated.

Because the county has 45 days to verify the signatures, Douglass said that the group is expecting a response from the county by May 21 next week and plans to submit its supplemental names by May 23.

Douglass said an anonymous woman from Maui is backing the $5-per-signature campaign, which has a cap of 4,000 signatures or $20,000.

Mark Sheehan, a board member of the SHAKA Movement, said that the organization has collected a total of 14,000 signatures so far.

“We want to make sure that there's no basis for risking all the work that we've done so far just because we fall short,” Sheehan said. “We’re just making one final push.”

But the organization’s growing aggressiveness in obtaining signatures has grabbed the attention of some state and county officials.

Maui County spokesman Rod Antone said that the mayor’s office received complaints on Monday after the SHAKA Movement posted the names and addresses of all Maui County registered voters.