|
| Seems the GMO promoting authors of the Nature Biotechnology article timed their article perfectly given the fiasco with American rice farmers losing rice exports and income because GMO rice somehow has contaminated their production.
I would have liked to read the entire article but seems the link only leads to a very brief abstract. I guess Nature Biotechnology has to protect its Intellectual Proerty Rights. I just hope they aren't interfering with the Fair Use rights Congress gave us because I'd really like to read the whole article but I don't have the time to go to the library nor do I want to buy a subscription just so I can read one article.
Labeling foods just because they aren't from GMOs? Is Monsanto trying to turn the tables on those who want mandatory GMO labeling? Or those who want to label their milk as coming from cows not injected with Monsanto's GMO produced Bovine Growth Hormone without having to print on the container the Monsanto forced FDA disclaimer saying "there is no significant difference" with the milk from cows not injected?
That would be funny indeed. How would such a label read? Maybe like this: "The FDA says that milk coming from cows injected with Bst is better than that from cows not injected." I bet the consumers would really go for milk from the Bst injected cows!
By the way, Drew Kershen has written several articles in support of Monsanto's seed saving prohibitions. And the other two authors are also constantly in the forefront promoting GMOs.
Edited by David Dechant 9/21/2006 23:56
| |
|
Risks of "organic" and "non-GMO"
