Flax 2

[parsley]

What if an American grower shipped the Triffid into Canada and sold it in Canada, but didn't disclose it was Triffid, with the purpose to destroy established Canadian shipments of flax into the EU food market and step in and take over that market ?

Intent is often looked at.

What was the intent of the Manitoba grower to not grow one of the countless varieties of available flaxseed, to instead choose Triffid, when he was aware of the risk he was putting the established market in?

What does it say about him? Was it his intent to destroy the EU food market? Was he paid by someone to trash the food market? Was he paid a lot of money by someone to advance the breeding of GMO flax, "because, looksee, we already have a contaminated market so what's the big deal" ? Was there intent to injure one of the trade in Germany, for example?

Intent. I'm off to a funeral. So it will give plenty of time for others to reply, and fran likes a quick reply. LOL

[haveapulse]

As I understand, the renegade seed was released as a trial to the then "Value Added" seed growers. There is a known list of who received the genetics. Despite advise to dispose of the seed obviously some or one did not. As I understand with current legislation the act itself is not illegal. The rest we can suppose, is now our history.

I expect the EU will raise their GMO tolerance at some point. Hopefully sooner than later.

I expect GM0 technology is here to stay.

Our challenge as producers is to define our success in the system so we can survive in a world with varying patent laws and as a result production costs.

Our statistics prove that as production increased, gross income grew and net income remained often lower to static, when adjusted for inflation quite dismall actually, and
often requiring subsidies in our recent history to remain postive. As a result, I expect the most important question to the farming community is the question of the share of the pie.

For farmers we an see the success of the CDC program to bring us positive net returns. Pulse crop levys have created publicly owned varities and technology which insured that revenue from this intellectual property remained in farmers hands. Revenue which now often exceeds that of the GMO Cinderella crop canola.

And so our role as responsible producers to the next generation is to question who wins and who looses with technology. Indeed to open another can of worms if allowing total control and direction to be only in the control of shrinking in number often collaborative world oligopolies is a wise way for the future.

Did we go too far when we abandoned our public breeding programs?

Does the success in the CDC pulse program speak volumes to the success of public breeding programs properly administrated.

No grower levy on seed, amazing revenue on the crops, great varieties now world class!

The question to me is more about who owns the technology as they control the miracles and the direction of the miracles for the future. As contract peasant growers we are amazed, but we should contemplate soon how to benefit equitably from the process.

Before we go Rah Rah we should reflect.

[haveapulse]

Ps Thanks Pars and Fran for a fabulous sparring..great stuff on both sides... Rah Rah to you both!

[cottonpicken]

Flax should not be eaten
I don't care what any health nut says

[checking]

If you are going to eat flax, you need to chew it to receive any of its nutrient value. Otherwise its value is a little fiber. No teeth, then invest in a grinder. What I really wanted to ask is "Are there any organic wild game hunters out there?"

[parsley]

"organic wild game hunters"

That's funny.

[cottonpicken]

Essential fats that become rancid become poision.

Cockroaches eat axle grease but they dont eat margarine.

[parsley]

That's why you should grind flaxseed as you use it. Treat it as if it is fresh milk.

Reading labels resulted in throwing all the margarine out the fridge decades ago, never to buy again.

[checking]

The reason I ask is because yesterday my combine rousted a cow-calf moose pair out of a low spot. Beautiful sleek hides from all that ripping standing flax, chewing, and throwing the straw over their backs. Trouble is, how do you keep the wayward rascals from getting into the triffid patch? Organic eaters will never have the experience of chowing down on a delicious moose steak. Although I understand they have been domesticated in Russia, and with the cream milk being 8 to 10 times the concentrate of dairy, it's no wonder they can raise two calves to 800 lbs in little more than four months. There is a market somewhere there for you!!

[Fransisco]

So Pars would you be in favour of banning margarine then? Since it is so "unnatural".

[Fransisco]

Back to the "ethics" question.

Parsley bristles at the thought of being part of a global science experiment. Well they are going on all the time and often we don't even notice. Why? Because there are few problems and almost always the positives outweigh the negatives.

Let me give one example <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine">vaccines. </a> And let me get even more specific, this year the most well known global experiment will be the <a href="http://www.calgaryherald.com/story_print.html?id=1905048&sponsor=">H1N1 flu vaccine.</a>

Developed by profit motivated multi-nationals over a very short period of time , tested for only a short period of time and multiplied in chicken eggs. Some of the most vulnerable people in society will be injected with it first, pregnant women, health-care workers, children and people with chronic conditions such as diabetes or asthma.

Now it seems to me Parsley that you would be opposed to this on a number of fronts. We just don't know what the long term consequences of this vaccine are going to be, furthermore your organic chicken eggs are now at a theoretical risk of being contaminated with genetic material you don't want in them. Is this not a bigger deal than the detection of .05% of GM DNA in a muffin?

Are you opposed to this new vaccine because it gives you the heebie geebees?

I myself am quite comfortable with this "global experiment". I'd much rather have the vaccine around than not. And believe that it would be unethical to deny people this treatment based on what we don't know.

[parsley]

No. I wasn't in favor of banning coke either, even though coke machines were installed in schools. Some even insisted coke was good for kids.

Actually fran, I tend to think every generation is more educated and is more more communicative so they chose to look at the merits of children drinking soft drinks every day.

Parents today often buy natural fruit drinks for their children, hence the food and beverage trade responded in kind with little unsweetened fruit drinks most receptive farmers tote out to the field. I drink them all the time. I also have the odd soft drink.

And the guy who says he has big enough kahoonas to drink 20 cokes a day won't hurt him, will continue to drink them. Actually, I encourage it as it facilitates natural selection......

[parsley]

"Parsley bristles at the thought of being part of a global science experiment. Well they are going on all the time and often we don't even notice. Why?"

Because alterations are slipped into the food we eat without our knowledge.

A lot of people want to know what they eat. Such an old fashoioned idea.

Perhaps targeting one specific starving region of the world, with continuous shipments of altered food enhanced with fertility-termination modification, pillared upon a stated altruistic (tic) intent to "eliminate some of the world's most recognizable social financial burden," would be considered "safe", as well as an acceptable "part of a global science experiment"

Food.
Food for thought.

Pars

[jensend]

two points:

1. science evolves and what seems like a logical concluwsion might, a few years later, be one hundred eighty degrees from reality.

2. this triffid situation is an indicator that traceability and identification of point of origin is coming. grain producers will be mandated to verify their practices, just like cattle producers in their quality assurance program. the more instances of cheating that are found out will just increase the pressure for accountability.

[parsley]

"grain producers will be mandated to verify their practices"

I agree.

And a verification system is costly.

Who pays?

Should farmers who have absolutely nothing to do with modified crops be paying for proving they do not?

Now there is a nimble dowloading trick if I ever saw one in the planning.

And that is why farmers and their organizations need to anticipate that paying for the governmental imposed audit system yet to inevitablty come, will be downloaded on farmers unless we intercept it.

Your future 'license to farm' will be burdened with audit trail costs that are invented and recorded by government union employees.

Sour milk for your morning coffee.

Pars