Excellent discussion (lots of references to permaculture) heard earlier today on the Plan: ABC Radio National 'Bush Telegraph' - 23/08/12: The National Food Plan versus the People's Food Plan The POD and transcript should be available (at the link) tomorrow.
Spidermonkey, It is tricky. That's the challenge with pure science, it's not a level playing field. Those with commercial interests that can be patented will always be at a distinct advantage in terms of how much they can spend on research. I'm a big believer that the least powerful side in any debate can still reframe semantics to increase the transparency within public debates, eg referring to them as the 'Pro GMO Herbicide lobby' may go someway towards that. Here are a few links you might like to check out. Impact of GMO free diets on patient symptom alleviation: https://www.naturalnews.com/036861_GMO-free_diet_disease_recovery_medical_patients.html "The American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) applauds the new policy position of the American Medical Association (AMA) in support of mandatory premarket systematic safety assessment for genetically engineered foods." July 2012 https://www.aaemonline.org Many animals avoid GMOs if given a choice https://www.iowasource.com/food/2010_05_gmo.html "AAEM cites a host of problems in lab animals fed GMOs, including infertility, immune problems, accelerated aging, dysfunctional insulin and cholesterol regulation, and damage to major organs and the gastrointestinal system. [...] many experts believe that when GMOs were introduced in 1996, they were a major factor in the subsequent upsurge in disorders, which included chronic illnesses, allergies, autism, infertility, diabetes, and infant health problems." Finally you might be interested in this "Farmer to Farmer" YouTube clip? An English farmer visited the US to speak to farmers who had embraced GMOs and found that an initial improvement in yield from GMOs was short lived and that farmers subsequently had to double or triple spray herbicides to generate the same weed-free impact. It also touches on how GMO seed prices increased significantly after alternatives disappeared so any monetary benefit to the farmer was also short-lived: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEX654gN3c4
for there to be proven or unproven results of risks to health, surely science would need to create parameters before those manipulated food are introduced into our diet stream? and seeing as how the only testing by and large has been test tube and lab' rodents, they now can't say as all of us will be corrupted from the food source. so for me to say there is no proven cases can't be proven, they simply would not know. and they are crops that promote teh use of extra strong chemicals, and as glypho' ready farming has created super weeds by their own admition they now want to bring back the agent orange chemicals to control weeds. len
dunno what you mean? it simply says they did no human testing so therefore have no parameters to look for issues. i find i am not a test tube nor a lab' rat though popular description may no agree with me there. funny realy can chat with people since 2004 and all of a sudden i am like a weed. anyhow i'm not going anywhere. len
The problem with GMO testing on animals is that the time frame is usually short, ie, 3 weeks, and done in Monsanto's case, by the developer with no need for peer review before being signed off by FSANZ. If you follow some of the work of MADGE ( independant group of concerned mother, and amazing collators of research done on GM products ) they have found by Monsanto's own admission there were statistically high rate of problems (liver function, etc) even in this short time, research noted in pencil, and numerous other problems. MADGE dissect some incredible information that other professionals miss, as with outing a Monsanto CEO on Australia's Food Labelling Review, that everyone else in the room had not known of. An exert on how they dissect Monsanto's data
So, the Australian Federal Government's National Food Plan (White Paper) was released on 25 May 2013. I must admit I should not be too surprised, but the level to which this (what could have been) landmark paper has stooped in terms of parroting politically motivated motherhood statements and cross-promoting other, equally ineffectual plans and strategies, has never before been seen in my nearly ten years of study. To say I'm disappointed, is a gross understatement. A terrible waste of time, energy and money. Word search results: 'permaculture' = 0 'bioregion' = 0 'holistic' = 0 'integrated' = 4 'compost' = 3 'organic' = 6 'biodynamic' = 1 But, all is not lost. In stark contrast is the Australian Food Sovereignty Alliance's (AFSA) Peoples' Food Plan (Working Paper) that was released earlier this year. 'permaculture' = 14 'bioregion' = 1 'holistic' = 7 'integrated' = 9 'compost' = 17 'organic' = 30 'biodynamic' = 2 Please make the time to read them both, and when you next think about how we govern ourselves (and by extension, produce and consume food) in this country, ask yourself this question: 'Surely there must be a better way?' And if you then decide that you would like to find an answer to your question, please feel free to join AFSA, or maybe even continue the conversation with us, here.
g'day mark, can i agree there has ti maybe is a better way for providing food, can i do that without actually reading any papers? it may already be too late of a change if it was accepted for many to benefit. len
The alternative People's Food Plan is fantastic! It makes sense on every level. Thanks for the links.
G'day Len Could you please rephrase your question/comment, I'm having trouble understanding exactly what it is that you are trying to ask/say. Thanks, Mark
The final version of the Peoples Food Plan comes out this week I was told the other day by Micheal Croft. It has few changes from the orignal. I went to a number of the forums - it's a pity there wasn't more people at them for better input. Just went to show the general populations appethy towards food in general.
Cheers, Martyn. On the issue of respondents/attendees, I'd take quality over quantity any day. But you are right about a general malaise/apathy among mainstream Australia. While a multi-national 'chicken' outlet sells 12-pieces of cooked 'chicken' for $12 on any given Tuesday, what hope do we have? Still, without an adequate education (vis-a-vis employment opportunities), we can't expect much more from the poor buggers that have to eat it. We're eating local, ethical lamb tonight (and home grown veg), and feel very fortunate to be able to do so. Looking forward to including the final version of the Peoples' Food Plan in our literature review.
dunno? can't real blame the general masses for their apathy so long as their bellies are full of food, and they have mass selection of sports to watch they could really care less, they don't have to think while the regulators think for them. out here on 1.25 acre blocks there is very little vege' gardening going on, strange hey. new neighbour over the back ripping up top growing soil to put in a dam, that may put him at odds with downhill neighbours? waste of good soil. him and his wife work in a hospital, i offered tehm some fresh produce and they declined saying " we hardly cook as we get cheap meals form the hospital". the general attitude out there is it looks fresh so it must be fresh?? take care len
I would most like to know if there is anyone in the whole world who is doing the right thing in your estimation - besides yourself of course.
purplepear, you don't agree there is a general apathy in the masses? that's a new one. of course we are trying to do the right thing, else we would not be able to buy food as it gets dearer, and yes makes no sense at all to rip up good soil to make a dam. anyhow you seem to have gained a delight as you only responded to my salutation. len