Feb 18
Chris Govella commented on Wondering How to Feel About the GMO Labeling Initiative?.
Chris Govella commented on Wondering How to Feel About the GMO Labeling Initiative?.
This is an interesting issue, I think it should be approved or have a yes vote for labeling. The problem is not with the concept of GMO itself, and to borrow from Nassim Taleb, it's a problem of probable risk and payoffs. Set aside the collective benefits/risks for a moment, and look at the individual benefits/risks. How much does an individual consumer stand to gain given the known costs, unknown costs, and benefits or side effects? For example take somebody who is suffering from diabetes type 2, and needs insulin shots. If given the choice of taking GM insulin, or no insulin at all, the probable risk of death is almost guaranteed. The benefit is sustained life, at least, for the moment. Note that health has an upper bound, you can't get beyond full health with more insulin. Now take the example of a person at the supermarket choosing between a GM vegetable and an organic vegetable. Health has an upper bound, you cannot get more than 100% healthy from eating vegetables, you cannot become a superhero. The benefits are fixed, or if not fixed, they are marginal, extra amounts of nutriments for example. But the risk has changed now, because the GM vegetable has unknown risks to an individual.
From the article, "there is no reliable evidence crops containing genetically modified organisms, commonly referred to as “GMO” foods, pose any risks." I argue that the burden of proof lies with the GM corporation to prove that they are safe beyond a doubt. Nature has proven through centuries of evolution that some vegetables are safe, and some vegetables are poisonous. We discover this by the poor people that eat poisonous organisms and get sick and die, e.g. survival of the fittest. For example, take grafting, a process of combining two organisms into one. This is the most rigorous form of genetic modification-- and Mother Nature is the one that decides if the organism should live or should perish.
GM corporations though have decided to use science to create a new product, do a bit of testing and commission Soviet Harvard academic studies. The exposure to unknown risk is dangerous with GM foods, whereas we know that organic foods are a known risk. Both provide the same benefit. Take for example Bisephenol A, before the controversy. What is the benefit of drinking from a BPA container as compared to a ceramic container? What is the risk?
I think that there is an argument to be made for GM technologies in the interest of producing more food on less natural resources or for a greater population, but this argument is a discussion of capital, of distribution, and so on.
More...
From the article, "there is no reliable evidence crops containing genetically modified organisms, commonly referred to as “GMO” foods, pose any risks." I argue that the burden of proof lies with the GM corporation to prove that they are safe beyond a doubt. Nature has proven through centuries of evolution that some vegetables are safe, and some vegetables are poisonous. We discover this by the poor people that eat poisonous organisms and get sick and die, e.g. survival of the fittest. For example, take grafting, a process of combining two organisms into one. This is the most rigorous form of genetic modification-- and Mother Nature is the one that decides if the organism should live or should perish.
GM corporations though have decided to use science to create a new product, do a bit of testing and commission Soviet Harvard academic studies. The exposure to unknown risk is dangerous with GM foods, whereas we know that organic foods are a known risk. Both provide the same benefit. Take for example Bisephenol A, before the controversy. What is the benefit of drinking from a BPA container as compared to a ceramic container? What is the risk?
I think that there is an argument to be made for GM technologies in the interest of producing more food on less natural resources or for a greater population, but this argument is a discussion of capital, of distribution, and so on.
Feb 15
Chris Govella commented on Are Theo's "Fair Trade" Chocolates Unfair to Seattle Workers?.
Chris Govella commented on Are Theo's "Fair Trade" Chocolates Unfair to Seattle Workers?.
solidarity forever.
Jan 26
Chris Govella commented on Seattle Gun Buyback Exceeds Expectations, Blows Through $118,000 in Under Three Hours.
Chris Govella commented on Seattle Gun Buyback Exceeds Expectations, Blows Through $118,000 in Under Three Hours.
lol @25 fails at analogies with the type of enthusiasm and ambition typically reserved for successes.
Jan 24
Chris Govella commented on City Hall at Capacity for Pot Rule-Making Hearing.
Chris Govella commented on City Hall at Capacity for Pot Rule-Making Hearing.
I wonder how many people showed up to make pot related puns in their testimonies. I'm going to guess “four twentii"
Dec 19, 2012
Chris Govella commented on Give Rural Types the Bloody Government They Vote For.
Chris Govella commented on Give Rural Types the Bloody Government They Vote For.
@3 is right on too. The populist outrage that would defund the USPS would be a self-inflicted wound to rural areas. Cheap delivery of messages is too important and too powerful a concept to give up on, at least, until the government gets high speed internet access to everyone and we can use email instead.
Dec 13, 2012
Chris Govella commented on Roughly 3,500 People Crowd Convention Center to Shout About Coal.
Chris Govella commented on Roughly 3,500 People Crowd Convention Center to Shout About Coal.
I loved all the people who spoke on behalf of the poor, the small town city officials who are trying to save their communities from pollution, and the kids who spoke about their futures. Also, the singing grannies were terrific.
Oct 22, 2012
Chris Govella commented on Initiative 1240: A Sucker Punch to Public School Kids.
Chris Govella commented on Initiative 1240: A Sucker Punch to Public School Kids.
The problem is funding to our existing schools, this initiative does nothing to bring in extra funding. I don't see charter schools making up the difference in funding by contracting out work to for-profit corporations.
Oct 4, 2012
Chris Govella commented on Election Stress-Buster: The Bouncing Bulldog!.
Chris Govella commented on Election Stress-Buster: The Bouncing Bulldog!.
This is a refreshing 'change' from the daily Slog-- very clever, very fun, if only everyone else could take the posts with a grain of salt :)
The Stranger
RSSSeattle Art & Performance Quarterly
A complete guide to Seattle's current art, film, dance, and theater season.
Facebook
Twitter
I do not believe that GM as a concept is bankrupt, but you are right in your assertion- on the flip side look at the collective benefits. Where do the benefits for GM food go? Mostly to agribusiness, so that farmers can grow in more extreme climates, or that agribusiness can develop pesticide resilient, to make farming a cheaper process overall while maximizing profits. There is a benefit in cheaper production that is passed onto consumers in the form of lower prices at the market, at the restaurants that they eat, etc, but these are quantifiable, maybe talk to an economist like Paul Krugman or someone for specifics.