Growing Pharma-Food

[ado089]

Parsley, I and many, if not most farmers
and industry people would be far more
open to hearing concerns if they looked
something like this.

"Gene modification X result in a Y%
increase in protein Z. Protein Z has
been shown to increase the incidence of
disease A by B% amongst healthy adults."

Not "Frankenfood ahahhhh! Monsanto is
the devil ahahhhh! Down with corporate
America ahahhhh!

I am genuinely concerned about
sustainability and food safety but
certain key words and talking points set
off my bullshit detector and cause me to
completely shut out the rest of the
message. If you and other like minded
people are genuinely concerned I would
suggest refining your message to cleanse
it from inflammatory language so that
the truly engaged feel compelled
investigate further.

[wd9]

The precautionary principle is a blunt instrument.
We don't need to appoint a layer of people to say 'ooh, you never know!'

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/political-
science/2013/jul/09/precautionary-principle-blunt-instrument

[parsley]

I'm going to take the time to reply to both of you
this morning.

You dont have to read what I say. Or like it. I'm
not diplomatic at times. I won't yes you to death.
But I do have a message that a chorus of voices
sings. And from Day #1, organic farmers heard
that voice

Industry knows they have a problem.  Not so
much with the handful of organic farmers but with
a world of citizens.  Who have a voice,  

The BiotechIndustry gets billions of global dollars
through tax money. 

The results of their  true testing, of developments,
of failures, are not made public because it's
intellectual property, and rightly so.   Only
industry can afford to test,  and there is no
requirement for them to share the test results in
their entirety. 

Governments fund. Massive amounts of money  
So if there is a problem, they are one of the
partners who do not wish to  admit thy made a
bad investmet, or absorb liability.  

They are the officiaIl regulators BUTwith a
conflict of interest .You can bet Redford does not
want to hear any revelation of mishap during the
next election.

Industry is not required to take responsibility for,
say, a disastrous expired patent which hadn't
proven dangerous until twenty years later when
long-term tests tell all  And then... too late  

Thus the basic GMO project plan was flawed
from Day One. 

Money and responsibity are the prime
considerations for a global project. And the very
reason why foodies want to know who is looking
out for them. It's a fair question. Every person in
the world eats. 

And as I have pounded home, many times, faulty
cars kill a few, bad crib smother some, but
dangerous food, if it is, or becomes harmful,
infects every global eater.  That is what foodies
worry about. Inhappen to be one of them.

You think I'm  the bearer of the bad news. You
want me to speak softly.  And then you might pay
attention? You've got it backwards again 

Listen around you, on FB, in stores, on radio....
the consumer is the one carrying the big stick,
not me. Mr and Mrs Consumer carries the big  
stick you should listen to. It's called a purse.
Industry finally gets it. Do you? 

As for growing genetically modified crops for
industrial purposes, ...  a designer world of it's
own, profitable, inventive, nothing ventured
nothing gained. Figure out how to prevent co-
mingling. Modify the flax for paint, ....  purple
would flag it cheerily. 


Food ... No. They lose trust every day as it
stands. You obviously don't like the message, nor
do corps  But get accustomed to it.  You will hear
that message from consumers, again and again
and again unless foodies are assured their food
supply is what they demand it to be.  You can
listen to them or alienate them. Choose.  
Pars 

PS I wouldn't try the humiliation trick since they
pack a purse. And intimidation is not the greatest
marketing tool.  But that's up to you.
Back to painting.

[wd9]

quote "Listen around you, on FB, in stores, on radio....
the consumer is the one carrying the big stick,
not me. Mr and Mrs Consumer carries the big
stick you should listen to."

4% of the population naive enough to believe the fear mongering.

The other 96% find nothing wrong.

The trouble is Parsely, just because you say it over and over and
over, it doesn't make it true.

[parsley]

The trouble is, wd, you keep fretting about the
4%. LOL

[charliep]

Just curious about what foods that are currently on the grocery shelf that should be avoided because of being genetically engineered? My sense is the consumer you reference buys organic for a lot of reasons with whether GE or not being well down the list. I would also suggest that same consumer (they all will be different) likely has canola oil as their main cooking oil. Meat would be an interesting as well. The 4 percent could easily be vegan/vegetarian but they also could attempt to buy organic eggs, milk, meat, etc.

A strange story about a market garden where one of the anti GE customers saw a canola plant (in this case) in with the vegetables and then proceeded to haul it out with gloved hands and tossed it far away from the row. The individual somehow thought the genes from the canola plant would seep through their and contaminate their body.

[ado089]

Foodie is a social status not a
credential. No one is blaming the
consumer or even the producer. My beef
is with the "information" they are using
to make their purchasing decisions . The
organic industry seems to have a carte
Blanche when it comes to the
accountability of their claims. Any
other producer or industry making such
unsubstantiated claims would get slapped
so fast their head would spin.

[parsley]

Dont worry about the neighbor farmer who gets a
good deal, or a free pass, or farms a little
differently.

If you focus on what it is that someone actually
wants and will pay for, you will sell your product.
But know what he wants.

Organic farmers only want to make a living the
same as you want to make a living.

We are not adversaries; rather, we are both food
and commodity producers, with a different means
of production. Organic farmers have a tiny, tiny,
tiny part of the market., compared to what you
service.

There is room for both and we have many things
in common. Pars

[oneoff]

Quote "Organic farmers have a tiny, tiny,
tiny part of the market., compared to what you
service."

And therin lies a great dilema; that is crusaders for the totally unproven health benefits of "organic food" consuption should be held accountable when they can not service the demand for huan food nutrients.

Just how is organic food production going to be be ramped up to double and finally 25 times supposedly current production requirement levels.

And will organic producers still expect the pricee premiums required for lower productivity.

Maybe that works for niche markets; and affluent consumers. But I have a hunch that food banks aren't doling out much organic labelled goods; and while your marketing tactics appeal to the affluent and truly fussy eaters; its going to get real tough to get the 100% market penetration that is being attempted.

First the supplies just aren't available; and finally my guess is that supposed organic production techniques just aren't capable of producing the world's food needs.

But go ahead and attempt to destroy confidence in the food most people are currently eating. If its so darn bad; then the traces that even the crusaders inadvertantly have consumed.....have already sealed your caskets.

[parsley]

Organic farmers began growing in spite of the
negativity by many farmers towards marketing on
their own. Grew from farmgate to farmers'
markets to specialty stores to supermarkets: from
farm to towns to cities to overseas.

It's been an interesting process to build an
industry from the ground up. With no government
subsidies. No expertise. No specialists.

And a noticeable absence of those horribly
negative growers one comes across every now
and again. Pars