Europe is united: no bioengineered food

[CVX]

Some are smokers. Some drink too much. Some admit they love red meat. But virtually all shoppers here at the Migros Supermarket on the bustling Rue des Paquis are united in avoiding a risk they regard as unacceptable: genetically modified food.

That is easy to do here in Switzerland, as in the rest of Europe, where food containing such ingredients must be labeled by law. Many large retailers, like Migros, have essentially stopped stocking the products, regarding them as bad for public image.

"I try not to eat any of it and always read the boxes," said Marco Feline, 32, an artist in jeans, getting onto his bike (with no helmet). "It scares me because we don't know what the long-term effects will be - on people or the environment."

The majority of corn and soy in the United States is now grown from genetically modified seeds, altered to increase their resistance to pests or reduce their need for water, for example. In the past decade, Americans have happily - if unknowingly - gobbled down hundreds of millions of servings of genetically modified foods. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration says there have been no adverse effects, and there is no specific labeling.

But in Europe - where food is high culture, if not religion - farmers, consumers, chefs and environmental groups have joined voices loudly and stubbornly to oppose bioengineered foods, effectively blocking their arrival at the farms and on the tables of the Continent. And that, in turn, has created a huge ripple effect on trade and politics, from North America to Africa.

The United States, Canada and Argentina have filed a complaint that is pending before the World Trade Organization, contending that European laws and procedures that discriminate against genetically modified products are irrational and unscientific, and so constitute an unfair trade barrier.

More: http://www.iht.com/bin/print.php?file=542151.html

[Bill Sikes]

CVX wrote: virtually all shoppers here at the Migros Supermarket on the bustling Rue des Paquis are united in avoiding a risk they regard as unacceptable: genetically modified food.


I'm very glad to hear it.



CVX wrote: That is easy to do here in Switzerland, as in the rest of Europe,


Switzerland is not involved in the political entity that is the "EU". Lucky them.



CVX wrote: The United States, Canada and Argentina have filed a complaint that is pending before the World Trade Organization, contending that European laws and procedures that discriminate against genetically modified products are irrational and unscientific, and so constitute an unfair trade barrier.


I wonder how long the EU gh will take to cave in.

[gmc]

Hopefully they wont. It's not just labelling of genetically engineered content, we have labelling showing what preservatives etc are used. If you happen to have allergies you need to know.

If it was left to the gib agricompanies we would have this stuff already, they want to change the lebelling so they can import the stuff whether we like it or not.

I'm curious though, do they nor have such labelling in the US? Or is it a case it's taken off in the states because nobody knows whet's in their food?

[Bill Sikes]

gmc wrote: Hopefully they wont. It's not just labelling of genetically engineered content, we have labelling showing what preservatives etc are used. If you happen to have allergies you need to know.


That effective labelling is required is a good safeguard, BUT content needs IMO

to be listed unequivocally. From my point of view I would not allow *any* content

of GMOs in anything labelled "GM free" - the current thinking seems to be to allow

a small percentage.



gmc wrote: If it was left to the gib agricompanies we would have this stuff already, they want to change the lebelling so they can import the stuff whether we like it or not.


Well, they do know best, don't they. And it's not just us, it's to save the world.

(HOLLOW LAUGHTER)

gmc wrote: I'm curious though, do they nor have such labelling in the US? Or is it a case it's taken off in the states because nobody knows whet's in their food?


As far as I'm aware, there is no labelling requirement, and attempts towards a

requirement have been bitterly contested by the companies making/selling this

stuff. There seems to be a body of anti-GM opinion in the 'States, but without

labelling it is virtually impossible to do anything. No doubt someone will be

along shortly to give an opinion.



I re-open this to state that my concerns are particularly environmental.

[gmc]

As far as I'm aware, there is no labelling requirement, and attempts towards a

requirement have been bitterly contested by the companies making/selling this

stuff. There seems to be a body of anti-GM opinion in the 'States, but without

labelling it is virtually impossible to do anything. No doubt someone will be

along shortly to give an opinion.


I would be curious to see if the reaction would be the same as in europe if there was.

I re-open this to state that my concerns are particularly environmental.


What are they then?

[Bill Sikes]

Sikes> I re-open this to state that my concerns are particularly environmental.

gmc wrote: What are they then?


In a nutshell, alien things have a habit of occasionally giving rise to profound

effects on existing flora - or even fauna. Even things found in the wild that

are transferred by us elsewhere have had damaging effects, so things that

we make that are entirely alien to the current world have, IMO, much greater

potential for causing damage.

[gmc]

In a nutshell, alien things have a habit of occasionally giving rise to profound

effects on existing flora - or even fauna. Even things found in the wild that

are transferred by us elsewhere have had damaging effects, so things that

we make that are entirely alien to the current world have, IMO, much greater

potential for causing damage.


sounds pretty much an environmental concern to me, I would also add in the knock on effects to other fauna of the concomitant herbicides.