The irony of it all

[cakadu]

The following article comes from today's just-food.com newsletter:

AUSTRALIA: New guide helps shoppers avoid GE food
with tri-colour rating
29 May 2002
Source: just-food.com editorial team



Australian food expert Margaret Fulton today [Wednesday] launched a new publication designed to give Australian shoppers control over their food.

The True Food Guide reveals which food companies may be using genetically engineered (GE) ingredients in their products and which are not. Greenpeace also released new market research today, which it claims shows that 68% of Australians would be less likely to buy a food if they knew it was GE.

"It is clear that most Australians don't want to eat GE foods, but they've had no way of knowing how to avoid them," said Greenpeace GE campaigner John Hepburn. "The True Food Guide will empower shoppers to say no to GE foods."

Launching the True Food Guide, Fulton said, "GE food threatens everything I stand for. There is enough evidence to tell us that GE food is not a good idea. The True Food Guide will be our reference to what is safe to eat."

The Guide rates food companies according to their policies on using GE
ingredients. Over 170 food companies and 400 products are classified in
three categories:

*Green: companies that have given written assurance that they are not using GE ingredients anywhere in the food chain.

*Orange: companies that are committed to removing GE ingredients and are in the process of doing so.

*Red: companies that have no policy to remove GE-derived ingredients, including those from animals fed GE feed, and companies that did not respond adequately to our enquiries.

Half a million free True Food Guides will be distributed nationally, beginning with the Good Food Shows in Sydney and Melbourne.

Copies can also be downloaded from www.greenpeace.org.au/truefood.


____
I find it quite interesting that groups such as Greenpeace do not want the "big corporations" dictating to us what we eat, but it is okay for the "greenies" to be telling us what we should eat - especially when it is based on seemingly anecdotal and emotional information.

I don't want anyone telling me what I should or shouldn't eat. Give me the information that I need to make an informed, intelligent choice and I will decide for myself.

How do some of the rest of you fee?

By the way, I would go and have a look at the greenpeace website - you may find it interesting.

Cheers!

[jensco]

I try to be an informed adult. I have post-secondary education and an ever increasing amount of "life" experience. I live in a country that allows me personal freedom and "free choice". I am quite capable of making my own choices/decisions. If I make a mistake, well it was mine to make and I have to live with the consequences! I don't want Greenpeace's or the Government's "help" to "protect" me. I want the most accurate info I can get and let me make my own mistakes!! I think that is long-winded enough.

[wilagro]

I have been to the Greenpeace site. What a bunch of loonies they are. ALL canola grown in Canada was developed by genetically altering the old '****seed' we used to grow. I have no use for Greenpeace whatsoever.

[cowman]

I have no problem with food being labelled. I do have a problem with who is doing the labelling! Food Safety is the responsibility of the federal government. We pay them very well for this service.
Now if GMOs are a problem for a lot of people then it should be labelled. And you and I might not have a problem with eating GE canola but 350 million Europeans do(and apparently a whole lot of Chinese)!
To say that canola was "genetically altered" from ****seed is sort of misleading...it was altered by genetic selection not by splicing in a gene that has nothing to do with canola!
The thing to remember is the customer is always right! And if they want genetically pure canola or hormone free beef, that is what we must provide.Yes science might be on our side but perception is all that matters in marketing. Instead of knocking ourselves out trying to bust down trade barriers in Europe why don't we just comply with their standards?

[pandiana]

This topic reminds me of a situation I experienced the other day. I was out checking cows and wanted to cross a rather wet area rather than walk around the long way. The ground was dry and looked firm. I took a couple of steps and they held find. However, after the 4th step, once I was totally committed, I began to sink.

This is rather like science. Within a narrow set of parameters testing suggests that they are safe and specific. Unfortunately, once you are committed, and things go wrong, you are already in deep. Who really knows the consequences of messing with our genome?

[jensco]

That's why the importance needs to be placed on getting the information out. If that includes labelling, great! Unfortunately, they can be misleading or inconsistent. With a standardized label (like the nutrition one) that would be informative. The one Greenpeace has is too biased and not responsive enough to changes.

[cakadu]

The greater irony about the EU is that a portion of the testing for genetically engineered crops is done in the EU and their resistance to allowing in our crops is nothing more than a smoke screen and yet another trade barrier.

You're right - it comes down to information and communication and the big companies handled it in the worst way when they introduced the concepts.

Imagine if you will your reaction to hearing something to the effect of "how would you feel if we came up with a way to reduce the number of times that potatoes are sprayed with pesticides, herbicides etc? Potatoes can be sprayed seven times or more during their growing period. Personally, I'll take my chances with something that has to be sprayed less often, but that is me.

Contrast that with we have come up with something that will enable farmers to lower input costs for their products.

From the second statement has arisen all these special interest groups that are concerned about what you and I eat. Couple that with a general population that isn't overly concerned about where there food comes from. and how much goes back to the producer.

I don't have a problem with labelling either, but what are you going to put on that label that has meaning and be effective? When was the last time you looked at a label in the grocery store?

There are more and more studies out there that are showing the detrimental side of the organic industry as well. Think about it - the organic process includes being more environmentally friendly and sustainable and I would say that with less use of pesticides and herbicides on the conventional side, that you are being more environmentally friendly as well. Don't kid yourself. Part of this is a monetary issue because Bt, which is what is put into the plants as a natural pesticide, is one of the "okay" sprays to use in the organic industry. If the organic industry has to compete with conventional growers, they're going to loose big time. That is their point of differentiation, so they're going to work very hard at keeping it that way.

You can take most things and make them fit whatever scenario you want. I'd like to know how come most of the material against GE is primarily anecdotal and emotional? Where is the scientific information? What I would like is the information and let me decide.

Too often people are not up on the science and how DNA works. In surveys people thought that ONLY genetically modified organisms had DNA in them. Everything has DNA. Jensco is 100% spot on. We need information.

[cowman]

I agree totally with you Linda on the smokescreen thing. Europe doesn't need or want our cheap beef, canola etc.! They overproduce food just like us and they too have to export. It would be nice if we could get into that lucrative market but in reality it just isn't going to happen....but it would be interesting to see what other barriers they would throw up if they didn't have the GE and hormone issues?
The Americans country of origin thing is another typical smoke screen. It is designed to stop Canadian beef and hogs and Mexican beef. Now the calf raised at Maple Creek and the one raised at Sweetgrass are no different.
I agree with jensco that a standard government type label is the best and keep the "nuts" like Green Peace out! Maybe time for our government boys to do their jobs?

[ValueChainFX]

As usual you get into these touchy areas and what do you find, grass roots issues. We can all find the challenges in the industry but it is about time we the producer found the solutions. Our government, their government, our labels, their labels ....YIKES ... Almost every industry related magazine, program, government paper etc etc etc tells us that if we (the producer) doesn't do something other then the same thing over and over, we are going to sink in our own ship!

Every producer knows they have to take control and extend their own profit higher into the supply chain, with that however becomes more responsibility. Darn you have enough of your own challenges to deal with, right!!! Well if you don't make profit then, don't worry so much about your challenges they will be gone soon enough when you have no farm.

Cowman is right again, the customer dictates, be they from the EU, China, Japan or Canada. Yes the market is tough out there but really who said life is easy? Yes there are lots of country's that support there agriculture community more then Canada does. But that only means you best get it together and make something happen soon, you make it happen, looking forward to making it happen myself!

ARE YOU????

[pandiana]

cakadu: Actually information is out there regarding genomics. The problem is that this is an extremely complex scenario. Rather akin to what to eat to avoid cancer. Science provides answers based on a limited design such as under laboratory conditions this did or didn't happen over the time period that it took the student to complete his thesis. It doesn't say much for real conditions over decades of time and many variables. The reason there is little specific information regarding GMO, or global warning or many other problems that are being studied is that there is NO complete information to be had.