It is interesting that those asking for studies and safety data on GMO food
are vilified as ignorant fools akin to "anti-vaxxers".  
They are pointing out a LACK of science and data, and asking for some (or
more).  
How can asking for more and/or better data be "ignorant"?



Its is a great sounding argument,  but fails when you put it to the test.

WE want to prove say a "GMO apple"  is safe,  but to what standards?  We
don't apply that same standard to a basic apple.

The demand for proof exceeds common sense and comparable information.   Its
impossible to prove to "everyone's" satisfaction that something is "safe"
there is always some fringe group screaming about everything.  

One of the issues we have to face as adults and educated people is risk
assessments.  It's what the EPA and FDA do for us.  And I think they do just
fine.  Are they wrong?  Maybe  Time will tell.  But with the data we have at
the moment  seems to me they are making the best risk assessment possible.

2000 years ago Lions and wolves were the huge risk, 200 years ago it was
still starving to death and viruses, 20 years ago it was cancer,  now it's
the genetics of our food?


We have to get past the surface "feel good" platitudes and ask the harder
questions.

Charles

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html