tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post4551367851566392026..comments2023-10-17T04:51:08.765-10:00Comments on KauaiEclectic: Musings: On PoliticsJoan Conrowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00172330100788007499noreply@blogger.comBlogger33125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-35000559723671035712016-03-19T23:13:37.981-10:002016-03-19T23:13:37.981-10:00Yes, China had a fit over one type of gmo corn whi...Yes, China had a fit over one type of gmo corn which hadn't completed China's clearance process yet. Meanwhile, it boasts about its plans to become the world's leader in biofortification. (Link previously posted on this blog.) <br /><br />And yep, polls show that a majority of peeps want labeling of foods that contain dna and/or chemicals. Thereby displaying the lack of science in our educational institutions. <br /><br />No reason to insult posters who point out the sad reality.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-66940535351876702362016-03-18T15:37:05.632-10:002016-03-18T15:37:05.632-10:00The nerve. Using his own words to make him look ba...The nerve. Using his own words to make him look bad. What next? Dredging up video clips of him taking the opposite stance on issues?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-53941646101592847682016-03-18T13:31:03.674-10:002016-03-18T13:31:03.674-10:00With all of the stories of plastics and other petr... With all of the stories of plastics and other petro oil's being sneaked into our food by the multinationals I would like to know if there is actual DNA in my food. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-51433029912589964252016-03-18T11:15:46.904-10:002016-03-18T11:15:46.904-10:00Nice baseless attack on Trump. Why don't you ...Nice baseless attack on Trump. Why don't you cover the real background of Tulsi - her family, husbands and schooling with the ties to Chris Burke and membership in his cult? I guess making up stuff about someone else is so much easier.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-66776214695460913892016-03-17T22:31:50.559-10:002016-03-17T22:31:50.559-10:00Geez they want the labeling, but it's pretty s...Geez they want the labeling, but it's pretty simple. The companies using non GMO label and market their product. If it ain't labeled GMO free it must have GMO. Move on.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-11457176265914044102016-03-17T20:11:11.282-10:002016-03-17T20:11:11.282-10:00I find it highly ironic that "John Kauai"...I find it highly ironic that "John Kauai" criticizes someone for posting anonymously. In any case "John", the lawsuit to which you referred ('GMO', China) is against Syngenta. Essentially, they brought the trait to market after receiving approval in the US but didn't wait for China to approve (it's a big export market). Farmers planted it but could not export to China, throwing grain markets for a loop since grain with and without the trait (SYN-162) get mixed together in elevators, train cars, and ships. China has since approved the trait for imports.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-71224295425389754112016-03-17T18:31:13.921-10:002016-03-17T18:31:13.921-10:00John Kauai, this is 2:18 PM. It's too bad tha...John Kauai, this is 2:18 PM. It's too bad that you think I am presenting myself as superior or trying to prove anything; that's all on you, and I suggest you look at that, unless you are just trying to stir things up and/or deflect. IMO, there have been many anti-"GMO" posts on this blog.<br /><br />Food = equals things that were once alive = things that were once alive had to have DNA in them.<br /><br />See?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-60227581274839194742016-03-17T17:05:05.928-10:002016-03-17T17:05:05.928-10:004:36
Aren't you a prince who refuses to take ...4:36<br /><br />Aren't you a prince who refuses to take a position and hides behind a double-blind curtain of being anonymous to protect him/her self from exposure.<br /><br />My reply to the 2:18 comments is hardly an overreaction and if that was you, well, let me repeat, Fuck off.<br /><br />If you want to be a Dick, at least be honorable enough to stand up for being a Dick. If you think I've misinterpreted your bullshit comments then have the courtesy of elaborating so that I might have a better understanding of your point and perhaps apologize for the misunderstanding. <br /><br />In the mean time, if you want to be a coward and throw stones from behind the anonymous wall ... well, you remind me of Ted Cruz and Donald Trump. Lots of noise for people who have no ability to think for themselves.<br /><br />I'm not apologizing for seeking the truth. And your comments @ 2:18 are insulting. As you purposely meant them to be to salve your own ego. "John Kauai is stupid so therefore I am smart".<br /><br />It is often very difficult to admit that you just don't know.John Kauaihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16709115908711629306noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-17012980704833256342016-03-17T16:36:58.415-10:002016-03-17T16:36:58.415-10:003:30. Overreact much?3:30. Overreact much?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-32225881796396640322016-03-17T15:30:59.617-10:002016-03-17T15:30:59.617-10:002:18
Are you seriously considering this a point to...2:18<br />Are you seriously considering this a point to continue discussing to reach some kind of consensus or do you just want to present yourself to be more superior so you can maintain your absolute pro-GMO stance? <br /><br />After all, you are the one who chooses to not stand behind your statements by posting solely as "anonymous" which could be any of hundreds of people. Yes, John Kauai is also anonymous, but seriously, if you wanted to know who that was, how hard could it be? And if you want to know John Kauai's position, you can find him all over the internet. <br /><br />I find it incredible that you don't recognize the DNA statement about how dumb most Americans supposedly are as a putdown. I'm willing to let it slide and forgitaboutit, but I refuse to let you dig it up and pretend that you are so smart that you know the difference between "red" and "blue" when your obvious incentive is to "prove" that you are smarter than those who stand against you. In other words, stand against stupidity.<br /><br />There haven't been any STUPID anti-GMO posts on this blog for me to respond to. Only one's like your's with its "I'm so smart" tone.<br /><br />I am neither pro or anti GMO. My position totally depends on data that is not available. That some scientists stand up and say, "Hey, this stuff isn't good for you", gives me pause and causes me to want to find out more. You and your ilk on the other hand have decided that taking a "give me more information" position means one is anti-GMO and therefore stupid.<br /><br />Fuck Off.John Kauaihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16709115908711629306noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-77641377965457192892016-03-17T14:18:41.869-10:002016-03-17T14:18:41.869-10:00John Kauai, if a person (including you) does not k...John Kauai, if a person (including you) does not know that food contains DNA, then yes, they are ignorant. Not an insult, merely a fact. It also implies that such a person requires much more education before they can provide a meaningful, rational comment on the issue of GE.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-17851985524384822132016-03-17T13:40:54.655-10:002016-03-17T13:40:54.655-10:00Joan:
Sounds like getting yelled at to me.
Perha...Joan:<br /><br />Sounds like getting yelled at to me.<br /><br />Perhaps I'm too sensitive. <br /><br />I am happy to discover we can at least seem to agree on something. Looking forward to more agreement.John Kauaihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16709115908711629306noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-35529949859717885702016-03-17T13:37:58.340-10:002016-03-17T13:37:58.340-10:00That does not mean that we pretend that all GMO is...<i> That does not mean that we pretend that all GMO is good and all anti-GMO is bad. The answer is much more nuanced.</i><br /><br />We agree on that, John. As for innuendo, when you throw it out, (8:37) don't be surprised when it's thrown back. And "yelled at from both sides?" Please.Joan Conrowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00172330100788007499noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-50834101592071952572016-03-17T13:36:28.683-10:002016-03-17T13:36:28.683-10:00soooooo just saved that meme sooooo how I feel whe...soooooo just saved that meme sooooo how I feel when I am in the voting booth alone with my thoughts and that pen trying to stay inside the lines of those bubbles and catching a draft from that tooooo small curtain.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-11194668025198454072016-03-17T13:19:48.634-10:002016-03-17T13:19:48.634-10:0010:24,
My family rents to a family we've know...10:24,<br /><br />My family rents to a family we've known for many, many years when my father took an early retirement so he could keep his job around 1980. The family-friend produces as much as two-times the bushels/acre as other farmers in the area. Our farm is a very small part of the nearly 3000 acres he operates. You may not recall that during Reagan farmers were driving their tractors into banks in protest over how they were being squeezed. One could make a living on 80 acres prior to 1980, so our friend has replaced nearly 40 other farmers. It is possible that those same economic conditions are coming together again so that even 3000 acres isn't going to be a large enough operation to remain profitable. Rather the corporations are about to take it all over.<br />(Just a possibility that if you disagree with I won't try to convince you of otherwise. I only ask you to temper your perspective with the events that are truly happening. And recall the 1%.)<br /><br />Our friend and I often exchange data on GMO, glyphosate, etc. I appreciate that he is an outstanding farmer extremely dedicated to the profession. I think he appreciates that I am concerned about what's going on in Minnesota. In the end though, he is constrained by having to make a buck, which is very difficult since this year the price of the commodity was well below the price of production.<br /><br />He is involved in at least one class-action suit against a GMO company (I recall it to be Pioneer, but it is a detail I'm not all that interested in remembering) over the fact that China rejected that variety of GMO corn. I can speculate on why China might have done this, but there is nothing to back up that speculation. The fact remains that the GMO company pressured our friend into planting this variety and falsely assured him that there would be no problem. Talk about "giant conspiracy theories".<br /><br />The question of being pro or anti to GMO takes on a totally different dimension when talking about someone's livelihood -- just as it should when talking about the folks who work for the GMO companies on the West Side. That does not mean that we pretend that all GMO is good and all anti-GMO is bad. The answer is much more nuanced. The difficulty in discovering the answer is exponentially more difficult. Especially when one is getting yelled at by both sides with what can only be describe as silly innuendo, "...did you not know there was DNA in all food?" What the hell?<br />John Kauaihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16709115908711629306noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-79595940281812471962016-03-17T11:23:50.707-10:002016-03-17T11:23:50.707-10:00For all of you Brewster's Millions fans: https...For all of you Brewster's Millions fans: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXEglx-or6kAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-80183128675701727122016-03-17T10:24:09.572-10:002016-03-17T10:24:09.572-10:00Where does your family get its seeds from?Where does your family get its seeds from?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-66582777838205868102016-03-17T10:04:57.770-10:002016-03-17T10:04:57.770-10:00John, I find it odd that you claim to eat GMOs, an...John, I find it odd that you claim to eat GMOs, and say you aren't anti-GMO, but still wrote, on a previous post:<br /><br /><i>There are reasons to not want to ingest GMO crops. Being a consumer, I want to know what it is I'm eating so that -IF- I eat GMO wheat and find myself suffering from Gluten Intolerance, I'll be able to purchase a loaf of bread that isn't GMO and/or isn't sprayed with glyphosate.</i><br /><br />As for bias, you might want to look at your own, reflected in comments such as:<br /><br /><i>Neither is the reconciliation process that IMHO was a waste of Kauai money only because the seed companies can't be bothered to pay attention to the concerns of those living next to their fields. Why does it have to come down to confrontation?</i><br /><br />You're apparently unaware that the companies voluntarily stopped planting the field next to WCMS, offer pre-spraying notification to neighbors and impose buffer zones precisely because they do "pay attention to the concerns of those living next to their fields."<br /><br />The reason we have confrontation is because people make wild, unwarranted claims while pretending they're all about truth and transparency.<br /><br />And did you not know there is DNA in all food? Why the vehement reaction to me pointing out the ignorance inherent in that? Joan Conrowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00172330100788007499noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-53179442484903242402016-03-17T09:47:37.648-10:002016-03-17T09:47:37.648-10:00Joan:
What I write is to counter what I perceive ...Joan:<br /><br />What I write is to counter what I perceive to be a totally biased pro-GMO perspective. I eat GMO. GMO corn and soybeans are grown on my family farm in Minnesota.<br /><br />Robin:<br />Stupid, Ignorant, little difference to me. It was an insulting comment. The truth of which we can debate, but if it is true then proof that resolution of the GMO debate is a long, long way off.<br /><br />I will allow that determining what and how to label is not simple. Neither is the reconciliation process that IMHO was a waste of Kauai money only because the seed companies can't be bothered to pay attention to the concerns of those living next to their fields. Why does it have to come down to confrontation?<br /><br />FWIW: if labeling is required, it may only mean that a different tier of "GMO-free" products will be offered at a premium which most people won't be able to afford anyway.<br /><br />To throw caution to the wind, there are studies that link obesity to eating GMO. Just like the Golden Rice studies though (which show that the only people who are capable of digesting the food to obtain benefit from the extra vitamin A don't need that vitamin A since they get it through other sources in excess) they need to be replicated and proven. It may not be the GMO that is causing the obesity, but rather the fact that the consumer can only afford processed foods. Since processed foods that don't include GMO are difficult to come by, it would impossible to control the experiment. Which doesn't mean that GMO is innocent of the obesity epidemic.<br />John Kauaihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16709115908711629306noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-2519858673587385432016-03-17T09:22:08.688-10:002016-03-17T09:22:08.688-10:00John Kauai- don't shoot the messenger. Joan ...John Kauai- don't shoot the messenger. Joan did not say that 80% of Americans are stupid, only that 80% of Americans polled said that food should be labeled as containing DNA. That just makes them ignorant. <br /><br />The entire GMO labeling fiasco is just that. Actually, labeling would be a good thing in some regards as people would see that most of what they have been eating for the past 30 years contains some element, however small, of a GE ingredient. It is also clear from the obesity and diabetes statistics that at least 50% of Americans don't really care what they eat anyway. <br /><br />If GMO labeling is required, almost every processed food will be labeled, if only to protect the producers from lawsuits. Even "organic" items will require increased scrutiny. The effect will be the same as the California law that has resulted in almost every business and product being labeled as "possibly containing chemicals that may cause cancer or may be hazardous to your health." No one pays any attention to these warnings since they are virtually everywhere. As a chemist I am all in favor of hazardous labeling, but this is not kind of blanket labeling nonsense.Robinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-861061333250541892016-03-17T09:17:59.496-10:002016-03-17T09:17:59.496-10:00John--
Yes, it bothers me that the anti-GMO grou...John-- <br /><br />Yes, it bothers me that the anti-GMO groups have called me and others shills, even though we aren't paid and are merely expressing our views. Just as it bothers me when a commenter misrepresents my words and views.<br /><br />No, it's not hypocrisy to "play the game." But it is hypocrisy to pretend one isn't.<br /><br />Sort of like your disclaimer, "I'm not pro or anti GMO. I am for transparency and science and the truthful dissemination of information" when everything you've written indicates otherwise.Joan Conrowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00172330100788007499noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-42615540905672156492016-03-17T08:37:25.748-10:002016-03-17T08:37:25.748-10:00Joan:
Are you upset that someone might have sugge...Joan:<br /><br />Are you upset that someone might have suggested you are a "paid shill"? Why such vehemence? (I would not have thought you were, even if you do get paid. I don't think that would rise to the level of being called a shill.) I'll grant you that you did not specifically use the word "conspiracy", but your post certainly suggested it.<br /><br />You've staked our an extremely pro-GMO position calling 80% of Americans too stupid to understand that they have DNA.<br /><br />Is it hypocrisy to "play the game"? The pro-GMO group spent $45M in CA against prop 37 which would have required labeling. I do not know Just-Label-It's budget, but I'm sure it doesn't come close to what the GMA spent on just this one campaign. (If you can find it, I'd like to know.)<br /><br />While it is certain that some organic groups are pushing their product rather than being "pro-consumer" (Whole Foods, for example) Other groups such as CREDO, were against the DARK act. Is CREEDO just some "shill" because they funnel the profits they make from their phone service to organizations that their phone customers vote on?<br /><br />Your attempt to make the Organic Growers into some "big bad cabal" is kind of funny since they may provide only as much as 5% of the food. <br /><br />Now that retailers such as Target are getting into the organic business, are we suppose to just trust these new entries that their product is the "real deal". The USDA doesn't have enough funding now to police organic foods. (Just like the IRS doesn't have the funding to audit tax cheats.)<br /><br />I find it interesting that in the same post you go on to talk about Trump after you had just used Trump's "insult and innuendo" formula for defending your pro-GMO stance. <br /><br />Wanting to know what one is eating is not a huge burden on the Grocery groups. That hardly prevents one from eating GMO foods. the members of the GMA are hardly hurting because of the label-it groups.<br /><br />Which brings us back once again to the Accord 3.0 reconciliation paper. Boring as hell to read, but every page says at least once something to the effect: "There was no reliable data available to us to know what the Seed Companies are doing." A cynic might ask if the seed companies themselves have a clue. If they have the data, why don't they release it?<br /><br />Standard Disclaimer: I'm not pro or anti GMO. I am for transparency and science and the truthful dissemination of information. John Kauaihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16709115908711629306noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-52376789998075121462016-03-17T06:32:47.240-10:002016-03-17T06:32:47.240-10:00Trump has taken positions that seem to be the oppo...Trump has taken positions that seem to be the opposite of what his supporters believe. He's favored abortion, universal health care, banning assault weapons, and gay marriage. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-40774965382908829032016-03-17T06:09:38.910-10:002016-03-17T06:09:38.910-10:00John Kauai -- Who said anything about a conspiracy...John Kauai -- Who said anything about a conspiracy? I was merely pointing out the hypocrisy of the anti-GMO movement, which is quick to label any person who says anything positive about biotechnology as a paid shill, when it itself is paying shills. And you might want to re-examine your assumption that the organic industry, and the nonprofits set up to support it, constitute a "pro-consumer group." It's just another corporate entity looking out for its own economic interests.Joan Conrowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00172330100788007499noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-84600026398937396782016-03-16T21:21:31.553-10:002016-03-16T21:21:31.553-10:00Why is it a conspiracy that a pro-consumer group l...Why is it a conspiracy that a pro-consumer group looks for help in getting out their message while the bribery committed by the GMA in promoting the DARK act is overlooked or is OK? The GMA spent over $41M in 2013 lobbying in Washington DC. Seems like they could hire 410 bloggers for that at $100,000/year. Man being a blogger must pay really, really well.<br /><br />John Kauaihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16709115908711629306noreply@blogger.com