Support NeoGAF

[TarNaru33]

The US represents a staggering amount of 7% of all VW cars sold in a year.

366,970 cars sold in U.S is still quite a lot of cars. It isn't about how many cars they are selling now, it is about how many cars they can sell if they manage to increase their market share.

Same way it's okay to sell other goods across the world that don't meet EU standards. But this is dodging my point. It wasn't about them being bad, which I don't agree with myself, but you reading a wee bit more evil into their statements than warranted.

He may not be meaning as such, but he is saying it. He is saying GMOs are bad for people and shouldn't be allowed into EU plain and simple, while at the same time saying poorer nations can/should be sold it. If it is as bad as he makes it seem, he should be saying "no one should eat it and there needs to be a better alternative".

Anyways, the guy obviously do not know what he is talking about and he gave me some laughs and tremendous frustration reading his posts. I commend those able to respond to him over and over in such a polite manner.

OT:

For people that seems to think U.S has a really low food standard, you obviously do not know U.S regulations and how vast the choices of food there are. The issue is more of diet, health care, poverty, etc that makes U.S living and health standards worse.

For those defending EU's restriction of GMOs please do your best to understand it has more to do with trying to prevent U.S's cheaper agriculture products out of the EU market than health standards. Plenty of countries do this and do not say there is no market for GMO foods in EU, because there is, the cheaper price will definitely make it so.

 

[Frankfurter]

366,970 cars sold in U.S is still quite a lot of cars. It isn't about how many cars they are selling now, it is about how many cars they can sell if they manage to increase their market share.



He may not be meaning as such, but he is saying it. He is saying GMOs are bad for people and shouldn't be allowed into EU plain and simple, while at the same time saying poorer nations can/should be sold it. If it is as bad as he makes it seem, he should be saying "no one should eat it and there needs to be a better alternative".

Anyways, the guy obviously do not know what he is talking about and he gave me some laughs and tremendous frustration reading his posts. I commend those able to respond to him over and over in such a polite manner.

OT:

For people that seems to think U.S has a really low food standard, you obviously do not know U.S regulations and how vast the choices of food there are. The issue is more of diet, health care, poverty, etc that makes U.S living and health standards worse.

For those defending EU's restriction of GMOs please do your best to understand it has more to do with trying to prevent U.S's cheaper agriculture products out of the EU market than health standards. Plenty of countries do this and do not say there is no market for GMO foods in EU, because there is, the cheaper price will definitely make it so.

That might be your take-away, but that doesn't make it true.

Assuming properly labeling GMO products as such, I don't see a big market for them. European consumers hate GMO food, to say the least (for good reason or not).

 

[AmFreak]

366,970 cars sold in U.S is still quite a lot of cars. It isn't about how many cars they are selling now, it is about how many cars they can sell if they manage to increase their market share.

No, it is about them collapsing if the us would block the import of their cars, cause that was the post i replied to.

 

[Gutek]

That's really not illustrating anything. If anything atleast in terms of the importance of unions it shows a difference between the US and much of Western Europe. Considering that unions are one major reason that income inequality isn't as bad in most of Europe as it is in the US, one might argue that unions certainly have a positive effect btw. (not for corporation, but the people).

Edit: You are free to create any company in Germany, as long as you follow the laws, just btw. Germany is a market economy, but for obvious reasons not without laws that have to be followed.

Uber, as it is in the USA, is banned in Germany. You have to have a cab driver's license to be an Uber driver in Germany. That's what I mean with red tape. Why is it like that? To protect cab drivers from "unfair" competition. God forbid cab drivers had to re-think and re-structure their service.

 

[TarNaru33]

No, it is about them collapsing if the us would block the import of their cars, cause that was the post i replied to.

They won't collapse, but it would be a significant event for near 400,000 car sales to just go up in smoke with no actual transition. Luckily things like that are mainly just used in threats and are not usually followed.

That might be your take-away, but that doesn't make it true.

Assuming properly labeling GMO products as such, I don't see a big market for them. European consumers hate GMO food, to say the least (for good reason or not).

Yes, I wonder why they hate GMO foods? Also I disagree with you, cheaper alternatives reign supreme if no restraints are present, that is why everything is being made in poorer countries.

Most of this situation going on right now, is about trying to prevent foreign products as much as possible while allowing one's own to saturate the other's market. Demonizing (GMO anti-science) brands/industries of another country and setting laws up for "higher standards" are tools for this. I am not saying it is the primary reason those standards exist, but it is a large part of why, it isn't just "the public deserves it!".

Also Liberals tend to be protectionist when it comes to trade.

 

[freeofgreed]

That might be your take-away, but that doesn't make it true.

Assuming properly labeling GMO products as such, I don't see a big market for them. European consumers hate GMO food, to say the least (for good reason or not).

Well then why not let European consumers decide that for themselves then? If Europeans hate then so much, then they just won't buy them and the market for them will just disappear. I don't see what the issue is with simply giving them the option.

 

[F1Fan]

Well then why not let European consumers decide that for themselves then? If Europeans hate then so much, then they just won't buy them and the market for them will just disappear. I don't see what the issue is with simply giving them the option.

Yeah i am really looking forward to having to look at the back of the packageing to read a size 5 font to see if it is gmo or not, on every product that i buy.

I am sure most consumers are looking forward to that day.

 

[Palculator]

Uber, as it is in the USA, is banned in Germany. You have to have a cab driver's license to be an Uber driver in Germany. That's what I mean with red tape. Why is it like that? To protect cab drivers from "unfair" competition. God forbid cab drivers had to re-think and re-structure their service.

The Personenbeförderungsschein also requires you to be above a certain age, have a minimum of two years driving experience, pass a test to prove you know your way around the region you plan to work in and whatever other idiosyncrasies lie in regulations surrounding it. You know, basic things you can expect when you're paying someone to wheel you around. It's the same requirement for cab drivers, chauffeurs, ambulance drivers, caretakers and whathaveyou. There's no reason to make an exception for whatever teenage yokel who wants to make some cash after obtaining his licence and people who meet those requirements can easily apply for one. Again, whatever you read into it, it protects customers as well.

It's worth pointing out that the very thing you infer from this requirement -- 'To protect cab drivers from "unfair" competition. God forbid cab drivers had to re-think and re-structure their service' -- has been contradicted by a German court almost word for word when newspaper outlets tried to outlaw the use of adblockers:

In a significant rebuke to the company behind Süddeutsche Zeitung, the Munich regional court said that "the law does not exist to save or uphold publishers’ business model(s). Rather, according to the ruling, it is up to them to innovate."

 

[F1Fan]

Oh well, I can't explain it any clearer than that.

This is of course made all the more frustrating by your lack of any willingness to learn more about the history of plants, how they were irradiated and chemically treated to force unknown mutations, the favorites of which are still in use today. Your fear of GMO seems to come almost entirely around lack of understanding of how it works versus previous methods, and since you refuse to learn anything about it, I will no longer be responding as my time would be better spent cutting my lawn with scissors.

Good, the feeling is mutual.

Bye

 

[diehard]

Nah, don't own a single console either.

Hows that Intel CPU and Nvidia GPU treating you?

 

[freeofgreed]

Yeah i am really looking forward to having to look at the back of the packageing to read a size 5 font to see if it is gmo or not, on every product that i buy.

I am sure most consumers are looking forward to that day.

That's why I said properly labelled. And don't most consumers already look at food labels for things like calories, and experation dates? Also you would think since Europeans are supposedly so food conscious they wouldn't take offense to having to look at the nutrition facts for the food they're eating.

 

[F1Fan]

That's why I said properly labelled. And don't most consumers already look at food labels for things like calories, and experation dates? Also You would think since Europeans are supposedly so food conscious they wouldn't take offense to having to look at the nutrition facts for the food they're eating.

Even if it is properly labeled, consumers over time will become decentivize as with most things that are around you. Apart from a small minority.

Gmo havent been popular in eu since day 1, so why the insistence of pushing for it?

Maybe its time to just accept its a different culture, just like football (soccer) will never be as popular in the us as in the eu.

 

[freeofgreed]

Even if it is properly labeled, consumers over time will become decentivize as with most things that are around you. Apart from a small minority.

Gmo havent been popular in eu since day 1, so why the insistence of pushing for it?

Maybe its time to just accept its a different culture, just like football (soccer) will never be as popular in the us as in the eu.

Again, I'm not seeing the issue here? It seems like you just want it blocked for the sake of it being block or for bullshit "cultural" reasons. You haven't given me a single good reason why it shouldn't be sold there.

 

[ScHlAuChi]

Uber, as it is in the USA, is banned in Germany.

They are banned for this reason:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misclassification_of_employees_as_independent_contractors
Also UberBLACK and uberTAXI are NOT banned in Germany, ONLY UberPop, as that is the one that violates the above!

You have to have a cab driver's license to be an Uber driver in Germany. That's what I mean with red tape. Why is it like that?

Becasue you wouldnt let any random idiot without experience transport people?

To protect cab drivers from "unfair" competition.

Those laws dont exist to protect the cab drivers, they exist to protect the PASSENGERS! If you get a cab you can be sure that the cab and the cab driver meet the standards you would expect!
So the only "unfair" thing about this is that Uber wants to be a cab-company without having to adhere to the laws that come with it!

God forbid cab drivers had to re-think and re-structure their service.

If by re-thinking their service you mean "using unfair and illegal tactics to be competitive" - then yes, thats exactly what Uber is doing and why they are currently being sued and already paid 100 million$: http://uberlawsuit.com/

 

[F1Fan]

Again, I'm not seeing the issue here? It seems like you just want it blocked for the sake of it being block or for bullshit "cultural" reasons. You haven't given me a single good reason why it shouldn't be sold there.

Read the rest of the thread if u want to know my opinion.

I don't want it because i don't trust it. If you guys want to trust some large corporations with you health, then go for it. I mean we all know large corporations are the most responsible and honest organisations on this planet, so what could possibly go wrong.

 

[Palculator]

If by re-thinking their service you mean "using unfair and illegal tactics to be competitive" - then yes, thats exactly what Uber is doing and why they are currently being sued and already paid 100 million$: http://uberlawsuit.com/

Dat innovation tho

 

[Drek]

Even if it is properly labeled, consumers over time will become decentivize as with most things that are around you. Apart from a small minority.

Gmo havent been popular in eu since day 1, so why the insistence of pushing for it?

Maybe its time to just accept its a different culture, just like football (soccer) will never be as popular in the us as in the eu.

Because GMOs are a clear path to ending world hunger while also reducing environmental pollution and reducing the workload on food producers.

GM technology increased crop yields by 22 percent, reduced pesticide use by 37 percent, and increased farmer profits by 68 percent.

All sensible first world nations need to get on board with GMOs NOW because with them we can produce enough food NOW to end world hunger and food based poverty while also reducing the clean water and soil contamination resulting from pesticides.

It is morally reprehensible to oppose the sensible advancement of GMO technologies and the U.S. is entirely in the right to use any means necessary to break obstruction.

 

[diehard]

Read the rest of the thread if u want to know my opinion.

I don't want it because i don't trust it. If you guys want to trust some large corporations with you health, then go for it. I mean we all know large corporations are the most responsible and honest organisations on this planet, so what could possibly go wrong.

Nah man, European governments are the most responsible and honest organizations on the planet.

 

[F1Fan]

Nah man, European governments are the most responsible and honest organizations on the planet.

More honest than some large corporation only looking to increase their profit margins not matter what the cost to the environment or to the people.

The eu while far from perfect has done far more for the ordinary worker than any large corporation has ever done.

Hows your 60 hours per week job going? Make sure you don't piss off your boss or u might lose your health insurance. And make sure you don't take more than 5 days off in a year or your friendly corporation might think you are lazy.

 

[freeofgreed]

Read the rest of the thread if u want to know my opinion.

I don't want it because i don't trust it. If you guys want to trust some large corporations with you health, then go for it. I mean we all know large corporations are the most responsible and honest organisations on this planet, so what could possibly go wrong.

And that's fine. If it does come your way, nobody is going to force you to eat it. But I don't see why your in support of blocking that option for the people who do want to eat it.

 

[Mael]

Because GMOs are a clear path to ending world hunger while also reducing environmental pollution and reducing the workload on food producers.

Can we stop with the world hunger thing on GMOs?
The EU isn't starved for produce and throw more food than it ever needs to consume anyway.
Producing more isn't going to help.

Farmers in France cannot even live off their production and it's already cheaper to throw their produce than to just give it away.
Heck we already have an issue replacing the aging farming population as it is.
No need to flood the market with cheap shit that is even less healthy than the shit they're already producing.

 

[freeofgreed]

Can we stop with the world hunger thing on GMOs?
The EU isn't starved for produce and throw more food than it ever needs to consume anyway.
Producing more isn't going to help.

Farmers in France cannot even live off their production and it's already cheaper to throw their produce than to just give it away.
Heck we already have an issue replacing the aging farming population as it is.
No need to flood the market with cheap shit that is even less healthy than the shit they're already producing.

Which is a good thing. The EU agricultural market is ridiculously and needlessly subsidized. There really isn't any really need for Europe to keep producing so much of it's own food when the same produce can be obtained much cheaply from other nations.

 

[diehard]

Hows your 60 hours per week job going? Make sure you don't piss off your boss or u might lose your health insurance. And make sure you don't take more than 5 days off in a year or your friendly corporation might think you are lazy.

Well if we are just going to wildly inflate statistics, hows being unemployed?

 

[Mael]

Which is a good thing. The EU agricultural market is ridiculously and needlessly subsidized. There really isn't any really need for Europe to keep producing so much of it's own food when the same produce can be obtained much cheaply from other nations.

Fuck that, the US subsidize it's agriculture as well and apart from the Economist no one seems to care.
How about the US follows this advice and let the US farmers to rot while the market is flooded with cheap produce from South America and the rest of the world.
It's unreasonable to ask the EU to just disarm like that and get to be dependent of foreign crops when it was perfectly self sufficient before.
Any politician trying to do that overtly would be shipped overseas if he wasn't killed before by an angry mob.

Well if we are just going to wildly inflate statistics, hows being unemployed?

Why do you assume he's French?

 

[F1Fan]

Well if we are just going to wildly inflate statistics, hows being unemployed?

Its decent, i am not homeless and i still have healthcare and can still buy food to feed my family due to the support from the government.

 

[freeofgreed]

Fuck that, the US subsidize it's agriculture as well and apart from the Economist no one seems to care.
How about the US follows this advice and let the US farmers to rot while the market is flooded with cheap produce from South America and the rest of the world.
It's unreasonable to ask the EU to just disarm like that and get to be dependent of foreign crops when it was perfectly self sufficient before.
Any politician trying to do that overtly would be shipped overseas if he wasn't killed before by an angry mob.

Classic whataboutism. Who said I was okay with the US doing it either? and I'm pretty sure most farmers from developing countries who are losing out on all the potential revenue care. The EU has no comparative advantage in agriculture whatsoever. It's agriculture policies are only there to appease it's rural base and that's it. it literally benefits no one else. Not the EU consumers, and not the people living in poverty abroad.

 

[Gallbaro]

Uber, as it is in the USA, is banned in Germany. You have to have a cab driver's license to be an Uber driver in Germany. That's what I mean with red tape. Why is it like that? To protect cab drivers from "unfair" competition. God forbid cab drivers had to re-think and re-structure their service.

In Ubers largest market, NYC, they completely caved to city regulations and are an actual cab fleet.


Edit:

What is the problem with the USA pressuring EU n negotiations? That is part of a negotiation...

 

[diehard]

Why do you assume he's French?

At least it wasn't Spanish?

Its decent, i am not yet homeless and i still have healthcare and can still buy food to feed my family due to the support from the government.

oh shit are you really unemployed

 

[witchedwiz]

Europe's anti-GMO hysteria is an embarrassment.

Eat it yourself then by all means..
From an idealistic point of view, eu cares that if we bring something on our table that something must be tested and we must be reasonably assured that there are no short term or long term consequeces..
But leaving idealism aside, in europe health is not a business but something offered by the state..
Say that we go for gmo-heavy without proper testing, we accept everything..
In 5 years we discover that a particular product will cause some issue/malady with long term consumption.. Now even if we ignore the public percepition on this, in such an instance each individuAl country would have to perform the medical assistance on those affected and check to Whoever might have consumed this food, but differently from is it would be done at the country's expense since public health is, duh public and state financed..

But let's not digress, if we have tests performed under the guidante of the relevant eu agency to ensure the usual assessment on the quality of each individual food product (and knowing efsa, it will take a long time), i won't mind..
Anything else?
Thanks, but no thanks..

 

[Palculator]

What is the problem with the USA pressuring EU n negotiations? That is part of a negotiation...

It is a natural part but the reason this is given attention in this case is mostly the fact that this is a controversial agreement and thus pressure being required is seen as indicative of the European governments not really being on board themselves -- otherwise pressure wouldn't be needed.

 

[Mael]

Classic whataboutism. Who said I was okay with the US doing it either? and I'm pretty sure most farmers from developing countries who are losing out on all the potential revenue care. The EU has no comparative advantage in agriculture whatsoever. It's agriculture policies are only there to appease it's rural base and that's it. it literally benefits no one else. Not the EU consumers, and not the people living in poverty abroad.

The EU has no obligation to citizen outside its borders.
The same goes for the US.
the consumers are not better served with lower quality produce shipped from half a world away anyway.
the EU citizen will certainly not be better served by the food grown in the US when they could actually buy most of their groceries from farmers less than 100km away from them(which is probably close to what happens already).
Heck if farmers in poorer countries are the issues as well as world hunger, they can very well take the market of hungry countries as well, it's not like EU produce compete there either.
You're providing a solution without a problem AND creating a problem with your solution.

At least it wasn't Spanish?

oh shit are you really unemployed

And there goes my joke, I'm not going to discuss this.

 

[Palculator]

At least it wasn't Spanish?

oh shit are you really unemployed

Oops!

And there goes my joke, I'm not going to discuss this.

Don't worry, I got it.

 

[freeofgreed]

The EU has no obligation to citizen outside its borders.
The same goes for the US.
the consumers are not better served with lower quality produce shipped from half a world away anyway.
the EU citizen will certainly not be better served by the food grown in the US when they could actually buy most of their groceries from farmers less than 100km away from them(which is probably close to what happens already).
Heck if farmers in poorer countries are the issues as well as world hunger, they can very well take the market of hungry countries as well, it's not like EU produce compete there either.
You're providing a solution without a problem AND creating a problem with your solution.




And there goes my joke, I'm not going to discuss this.

Yes they would. Competition is always good for consumers. And if the goods are so much lower in quality what is the big deal with allowing them there. Surely most Europeans will just ignore them and continue to buy EU grown produce then right? SO surely you have nothing to worry about...

 

[Mael]

Yes they would. Competition is always good for consumers. And if the goods are so much lower in quality what is the big deal with allowing them there. Surely most Europeans will just ignore them and continue to buy EU grown produce then right? SO surely you have nothing to worry about...

Again, elected officials have no obligations to people that are not their constituents.
Free market is great and all but regulations putting borders on free market works best.
As it is, the EU is not barring the food, it's barring them if they don't satisfy the health norms of the Union.
As it is they're not considered safe anyway.
It's better to buy food grown locally wherever you are but it's not always the easiest.

I'll argue that if you put cheaper lower quality food on the market the big corporations working as intermediaries WILL pocket the difference and not necessarily lower the price to the end customer.
How I know that?
It's already their MO on local produced food right now.

The only customers that will benefit from this are the Carrefour, Géant and other Monoprix (basically the Wallmart of the countries) at the expense of the farming population with no benefit to the customers.
I'm not anti corporation (far from it actually) but I don't like Michel Edouard Leclerc THAT much that I would sacrifice farmers for his annual bonus.

 

[Kinitari]

Eat it yourself then by all means..
From an idealistic point of view, eu cares that if we bring something on our table that something must be tested and we must be reasonably assured that there are no short term or long term consequeces..
But leaving idealism aside, in europe health is not a business but something offered by the state..
Say that we go for gmo-heavy without proper testing, we accept everything..
In 5 years we discover that a particular product will cause some issue/malady with long term consumption.. Now even if we ignore the public percepition on this, in such an instance each individuAl country would have to perform the medical assistance on those affected and check to Whoever might have consumed this food, but differently from is it would be done at the country's expense since public health is, duh public and state financed..

But let's not digress, if we have tests performed under the guidante of the relevant eu agency to ensure the usual assessment on the quality of each individual food product (and knowing efsa, it will take a long time), i won't mind..
Anything else?
Thanks, but no thanks..

You understand that all GMOs in the united states are thoroughly tested before they're sold, right? I think this has been said a few times but i don't understand - do people think the US is asking for GMOs to be available for sale before testing in the EU? If that's the case, i missed that snippet.

 

[G.O.O.]

People saying we need to be 100% sure about food safety before selling : meat has been deemed cancerous for less than a year.

Nothing you've been eating is 100% safe. Nothing.

 

[le-seb]

I don't speak French, but it's there under insecticide and fungicide. It's full name Bacillus thuringiensis. Correct me if I'm wrong?

edit: Yeah, translated the document and it looks like it's approved for use, alongside a LOT of other things as pesticides, herbicides and fungicides.

Okay, but I'd argue that there's still a difference between allowing one-off use of a bacteria that produces a toxin, and making the plant produce the toxin itself during its whole life, bringing massive amounts of toxin to the ecosystem.
Because it's far from being innocuous.

 

[MonsterHunter]

Let us celebrate with a nice glass of subsidized corn syrup

 

[Ethranes]

We only want the good stuff from America, the technology and the entertainment, you can keep everything else over there, we don't want it.

 

[spekkeh]

You understand that all GMOs in the united states are thoroughly tested before they're sold, right?

They aren't.

I think this has been said a few times but i don't understand - do people think the US is asking for GMOs to be available for sale before testing in the EU? If that's the case, i missed that snippet.

They are.

Here is the American Medical Association demanding the US adopt the EU way of treating GMOs.


http://www.chicagotribune.com/dinin...y-hit-the-market-says-ama-20120619-story.html

This obviously didn't happen, because business lobbies are more powerful than doctors in the US, and now they want the EU to follow US regulations.

 

[Frankfurter]

Uber, as it is in the USA, is banned in Germany. You have to have a cab driver's license to be an Uber driver in Germany. That's what I mean with red tape. Why is it like that? To protect cab drivers from "unfair" competition. God forbid cab drivers had to re-think and re-structure their service.

Uber is considered to be a cab-like service and therefore needs to have a cab license in Germany (also its drivers). It doesn't have a license, therefore it's illegal.
Sounds pretty straightforward, doesn't it? I'm sure the US has laws, too, and when you don't comply with them, you'll get into trouble.
If that respective law makes sense, is totally up for debate obviously.

On top of that Uber is one of those companies using the shady business practice of actually not employing people, but rather having them as independent contractors. Which is a really nice thing for uber, because it means that their costs are extremely low, but it's a terrible thing for their non-employees, because they are totally on their own (no insurance, no paid vacation, etc.; more regulations being enforced by evil Germany ).
Again, totally up to debate whether a country should care about this kind of behaviour.

Well then why not let European consumers decide that for themselves then? If Europeans hate then so much, then they just won't buy them and the market for them will just disappear. I don't see what the issue is with simply giving them the option.

Last I checked some GMO foods were allowed in the EU, because they are considered safe - by the European Union that is, not by the US or corporations.

But I guess we are running circles anyway. 'GMOs are safe', 'Na, we need to find out first', 'But there are studies...'.

 

[Sickboy007]

Oh please, this conflict is not about pro or anti science.

Washington wanted the EU to replace its precautionary consumer safety principle by the liberal US approach of permitting foodstuffs until risks are proven

That is the two principles battling it out here.

This is what I'm worried about. I like our current system as is, we shouldn't compromise it.

 

[F1Fan]

At least it wasn't Spanish?


oh shit are you really unemployed

Depends how you frame it i guess. I am a full time student if u really need to know. ;-)

 

[Kinitari]

Okay, but I'd argue that there's still a difference between allowing one-off use of a bacteria that produces a toxin, and making the plant produce the toxin itself during its whole life, bringing massive amounts of toxin to the ecosystem.
Because it's far from being innocuous.

You'd argue that there is a difference, but could you tell me what it is? Are you sure you aren't arguing that there is a difference in -favour- of one time spraying because you're working backwards from a conclusion?

They aren't.

They are.

Here is the American Medical Association demanding the US adopt the EU way of treating GMOs.


http://www.chicagotribune.com/dinin...y-hit-the-market-says-ama-20120619-story.html

This obviously didn't happen, because business lobbies are more powerful than doctors in the US, and now they want the EU to follow US regulations.

All GMOs in the US have gone through years of testing - right now the testing is done voluntarily from the producers, and is regulated by the FDA and the USDA, and sometimes the EPA depending on the type of crop.

There hasn't been a GMO released in the US that I know of that hasn't undergone years of testing, and doesn't have dozens and dozens of studies conducted on it's safety. What the US is trying to do, as far as I know, is create a unified standard for GMO testing - they probably want to say "just use our system" - their system which has had all GMOs tested before going to market, even if voluntarily. However I can appreciate the position the EU if they want to have their own standards separate from the US in that regard, however the idea of having a unified standard for testing would save a lot of time and money.

https://gmoanswers.com/ask/how-are-gmo-foods-regulated

 

[spekkeh]

Well I can't speak for every single GMO, apparently you're in the business of GMOs, so you're probably more knowledgeable on this, but the AMA doesn't agree with your assessment--that the testing is thorough and extensive, instead pointing out how industry led testing results in very different findings from independently supervised testing. It's in this case quite similar to the Diesel scandal in Europe, where the car manufacturers were allowed to do their own tests on emissions and surprise surprise, couldn't be trusted.

However note that more importantly, the US doesn't think that the testing is good as it is, they're lobbying that it doesn't have to be done at all. This is the main point of contention. I would be all for a standard. Preferably a European one.

 

[le-seb]

You'd argue that there is a difference, but could you tell me what it is? Are you sure you aren't arguing that there is a difference in -favour- of one time spraying because you're working backwards from a conclusion?

Nope. Farmers being allowed to use a bacteria producing a toxin doesn't necessarily mean that they will use it. Because treatments cost money, so if they don't need it, they simply won't use it. And even if they do, spraying BT on the foliage has low persistence, because the natural bacteria doesn't tolerate UV rays very well.

That's a massive difference with GM corn that will produce this toxin through its roots, branches, foliage and pollen during its whole life, and not only when there are harmful bugs around.

How could you tell there's no difference?

 

[boiled goose]

Being blanketly against GMOs is like being blanketly against "chemicals".

There is no single reason why GMOs would be INTRINSICALLY harmful. Now, there are economic and ecological concerns that should be regulated, but other than that, making them all illegal is silly and not based in fact.

 

[spekkeh]

But they're not blanket banned.

 

[boiled goose]

But they're not blanket banned.

Yes that is fine. GMOs that are being used to express pesticides should be tested for safety IMO. I am against blanket labeling.