Musings: On Luddites and Lies

Perhaps it's a personal shortcoming, but I can't help but feel gleeful when folks get their comeuppance.

Especially when it's the Center for Food Safety (CFS), a mainland-based lobbying firm that has worked tirelessly in Hawaii and elsewhere to foment fear and loathing of GMOs, and backed a spate of poorly written laws aimed at destroying Island agriculture.

Now the fear-mongering group is getting some well-deserved recognition, as the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation nominates CFS for the 2015 “Luddite Award.” As ITIF notes:

CFS has many lawyers but only one scientist on staff. The organization has little or no expertise in food safety, but “demonstrated experience in promoting fear.”

“Their raison d’etre is to use misleading claims, lawsuits, and other harassment to oppose agricultural innovation and keep the world safe for Victorian farming methods. Besides opposing more affordable and healthier salmon, the Center for Food Safety also has pushed to stigmatize foods derived through biotech improvements by labeling them even when exhaustive research concludes there is no health, safety, or nutritional information to convey to the public.”

Speaking of stigmatizing by labeling, though CFS claimed credit for defeating the so-called DARK Act, which would've prevented states from imposing labeling laws, U.S. Ag Secretary Tom Vilsack is planning a little sit-down with industry and consumer groups in January to hammer out a labeling compromise.

As the Des Moines (Iowa) Register reports:

The former Iowa governor said he is concerned about "chaos in the market" if more states implement labeling laws with differing provisions. “That will cost the industry a substantial amount of money, hundreds of millions of dollars, if not more, and it will ultimately end up costing the consumer” through higher prices, Vilsack said.

Sounds like CFS's victory celebration was a tad premature. Because no lawmaker wants to be blamed for higher food prices.

Returning to the “Luddite Award,” ITIF says the most comprehensive meta-analysis to date shows biotech innovations in crop improvement have increased agricultural yields on average by 22 percent, reduced pesticide use by 37 percent, and increased farmer income by 68 percent.

But hey, CFS makes its money suing the government over GMOs and begging the public for donations to fight the bogeymen it's created. So it doesn't matter what the facts say: CFS collects its kala fighting GMOs, so it ain't gonna stop.

Speaking of anti-GMO activists with financial interests in maintaining the fight, I noticed that Jeffrey Smith, head of the misnamed Institute for Responsible Technology, is now hawking a supplement called “Restore.” It supposedly closes the tight junctions between intestinal cells that are supposedly opened by GMOs. And such a deal: just $69.95 for 32 ounces.

Why can't folks see through these charlatans?

Meanwhile, in doing a Google search for Hawaii Center for Food Safety, I found this curious site, which claimed:

A little-known fact is that the “Original” and only Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition is a branch of the FDA.

We formed a Hawaii non-profit group called the Hawaii Center for Food Safety for the education about safe, affordable food for Hawaii. Then some time later the Center for Food Safety flew into town; that’s right we were grown here, and they flew here.

It seems that CFS applied some legal bullying, and the Hawaii nonprofit changed its name to Hawaii Center for Safe Affordable Food, though it retained the domain name. CFS then shamelessly snatched up the nonprofit's name for its own Oahu branch office.

Hmmm. This seems to be something of an MO in the ethically challenged anti-GMO ranks. As I noted previously, a new anti-ag/anti-GMO Oahu group stole the name North Shore Ohana from a legit Kauai group that successfully litigated for public shoreline access.

 

In closing, this quote from H.L. Mencken seemed appropos:

The men the American people admire most extravagantly are the most daring liars; the men they detest most violently are those who try to tell them the truth.

So it's not surprising at all that "the Donald," Jeffrey Smith and CFS have their ardent admirers.

As do the Luddites, who were, according to an article in the Smithsonian magazine:

neither opposed to technology nor inept at using it. Many were highly skilled machine operators in the textile industry. Nor was the technology they attacked particularly new. Moreover, the idea of smashing machines as a form of industrial protest did not begin or end with them. In truth, the secret of their enduring reputation depends less on what they did than on the name under which they did it. You could say they were good at branding.