Flax?

[parsley]

You were waiting, right?........


<p></p><p class="EC_style8ptBK"><strong>[URL="http://www.collegehumor.com/picture:75637"](Even the timid can develop)[/URL]</strong></p>

[Fransisco]

http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/bio/dd/dd9824e.shtml

Decision Document 98-24:
Determination of the Safety of the Crop Development Centre's 'CDC Triffid', a Flax

ii. Background Information

"The Plant Biotechnology Office of the Plant Health and Production Division, with input from the Plant Health Risk Assessment Unit, on behalf of the Plant Protection Division, CFIA, has reviewed the information submitted by the CDC for the determination of environmental safety, based on the following assessment criteria as described in the regulatory directive Dir94-08: Assessment Criteria for Determining Environmental Safety of Plants with Novel Traits:

•potential of the PNT to become a weed of agriculture or be invasive of natural habitats
•potential for gene flow to wild relatives whose hybrid offspring may become more weedy or more invasive
•potential for the PNT to become a plant pest
•<b>potential impact of the PNT or its gene products on non-target species, including humans</b>
•potential impact on biodiversity"

potential impact of the PNT or its gene products on non-target species, <b>including humans</b>

potential impact of the PNT or its gene products on non-target species, <b>including humans</b>

including humans

humans

<b>humans</b>

[Fransisco]

"Triffid growers have a controversy on their hands, and nobody is stepping up to the plate"

Can you please point to the farmers and the fields that are growing Triffid? Can you show us a bin full of Triffid? Since you are so sure this is the case it should be easy.

[Fransisco]

And since you're making comparisons to Maple Leaf can you please show us some bodies or at least someone in the hospital? Perhaps with a triffid induced sniffle.

[Fransisco]

And for something a little different how's about the latest in anti-GM fashion.

<a href="http://judoinfo.com/discuss/uploads/post-4-1125429608.jpg "> http://judoinfo.com/discuss/uploads/post-4-1125429608.jpg</a>

[Hopperbin]

If there was a producer growing Triffid flax then there should be samples saved at the elevators, could be used to find out where the contamination come from. I would think jail time should be in order if that was the case and the farmer should lose his right to be a producer. Now if there is GMO contamination in all our flax then the biotech company should be on the hook for that one. Just one other thought, is there anything that a European is allowed to eat???

[parsley]

Let's clear the air on this one first...one step at a time, franny.

1.Could we agree that finding GM canola in flax in Europe was not desirable, ?
Yes or No

Now trhe next step

2. If it is not desirable, who do you think SHOULD step up to address the issue..canola growers like hopper? How about barley growers? Or bean growers? Or the Toronto symphony, perhaps? Nobody?

I'm interested in your TWO answers

[Fransisco]

You first.

Is zero GM tolerence reasonable?Yes or No

[parsley]

Your retort-question is not pertinent to the two questions I framed. Don't ask my opinion about arranged marriages either.

Europe sets there own tolerances! What I or you THINK is irrelevant. It is not my place to tell EU what their standards should be. Lawsey.

I just want to sell to them. I can comply or not comply with their standards. The marketing questions I ask relate to injury to entry to that market. It is something we...Canadians... can fix/improve.

I would hope you are capable of answering two simple questions, franny. Pars

[Fransisco]

Oh,I disagree the question is so very relevant.The answer to it answers your question.

[parsley]

"Could we agree that finding GM canola in flax in Europe was not desirable?"

That was the question. It should have been easily answered.

Few think outcome from bad publicity, regulatory incidents,or customer dissatisfaction is desirable.


If you think that finding GMO flax in EU is DESIRABLE when they specified they don't want it, when they buy our products, when they pay, then I guess you do.

Most exporters would be disappointed the requirements were not met.

Most exporters hope for a repeat sale.

Most exporters try to supply what their buyers want.

Most exporters do not want to be offside of the law.

Most exporters don't want contoversy.

Most exporters don't want to lose their reputation.


I view GM canola in flax in Europe, is an undesirable incident.

So, fran, we have no common ground.

And I would hope, for those contemplating exporting or resuming exportation, that a view/attitude such as yours, is neither endorsed or expressed by those who officially represent producers and exporters.
Parsley

[Fransisco]

First off, I would ask you to please not put words in my mouth.

Secondly, the question I asked you was equally simple.

Did you refuse to answer it because perhaps you believe that it is perfectly reasonable to be unreasonable? Or is it that you don't think zero tolerance is reasonable but that doesn't help in demonizing GMOs so you'd rather not say?

Let me answer my own question then.

I do not think that a zero tolerance policy on GMOs is reasonable. Not that long ago we could only detect things in parts per thousand, then it was parts per million, then billion, now it's probably parts per trillion and steadily climbing. You put a big enough microscope on anything and you will eventually find something you didn't want.

Now, I am willing to be reasonable when it comes to a governments wishes regarding GMOs. But there is nothing reasonable about zero tolerance of things that have no empirical evidence of causing any harm especially when they can be traced down to microscopic levels.

Nothing good comes from pandering to unreasonableness. And that is what is at the root of this flax issue.

Yes, a shipment didn't meet spec. But when impossible standards are applied should we be aghast that at some point someone doesn't meet them? Again that would be an unreasonable and disproportionate response.