Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on May 2, 2015
Science, Not Politics, Should Drive Trade and Regulatory Decisions
The Obama administration issued a stinging rebuke of the European Union’s decision this week to allow countries in Europe to “opt-out” of U.S. imports of genetically modified (GM) foods and feed. The U.S. Trade Representative said that such a rule “ignore[s] science-based safety and environmental determinations” that modifying crops in laboratories is no more harmful than traditional cross-breeding crops in the fields. Yet, in today’s hyper-politicized culture, the regulatory process in the United States is also often hijacked by special interest groups that subvert science in favor of their own emotional “narratives” that can be deeply misleading.
Modern advances in food science, both in how we produce and deliver food, have become key battlegrounds in the science versus fear-mongering debate. On the production side, GM foods can offer a much-needed path to feeding the world’s population. In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have carefully studied GM foods and found them safe. The lack of any scientifically valid concerns, though, has not stopped special interest groups from seeking federal and state laws requiring that GM foods be labeled. Also, as much as the federal government may want to cast aspersions, the USDA has held up approval of modified salmon despite clear science that such fish are safe.
The politicization of the federal regulatory process takes on a whole new level, though, when one federal agency funds special interest studies that undermine another agency’s scientific conclusions key to federal regulations. This has been happening with bisphenol-A (BPA), which has been used since the 1960s to coat metal food cans to stop germs from growing in the cans that can be harmful to consumers. It has long been well understood that BPA molecules can migrate from the packaging to the food, and the FDA regulates BPA as an indirect food additive.
Here, the global community is united. The FDA, along with the European Food Safety Authority, Health Canada, and the World Health Organization, has studied BPA extensively and found its use in food containers to be safe. These groups have grounded their decisions in science. In short, they have found that humans rapidly metabolize BPA and that any BPA ingested is excreted in urine. Since 2000, though, National Institutes of Health (NIH) has funded $172 million in research of BPA. Many grants have gone to scientists supported by the same groups that oppose GM foods regardless of science — Greenpeace, Natural Resources Defense Council, and others. Not surprisingly, these scientists produce studies critical of BPA.
In response to alarmist reports, a subcommittee of the FDA’s science board recommended in 2008 that the agency re-examine the scientific basis for approving BPA. Last year, the FDA completed a four-year review of more than 300 scientific studies and once again found no evidence that BPA is harmful to humans when used in food containers and packaging. The broader scientific community found the studies critical of BPA to be fundamentally flawed. At this point, NIH must stop funding scientifically questionable studies or it will risk harming the American government’s credibility to be stewards over important scientific issues.
The tactic of trying to influence regulations by undermining science is not unique to food science or any political party or cause. Several years ago, reproductive rights groups rightly called foul when the FDA, under pressure from conservative activists, held up the Plan B over-the-counter pill despite science proving the drug’s safety and effectiveness. We saw what happened with the measles outbreak last year when libertarians across the political spectrum refused to follow regulations based on sound science that children be immunized from certain diseases, including the measles.
Progressives who believe in a strong regulatory regime should follow the U.S. Trade Representative’s sentiment and oppose the use of junk science to undermine the credibility of federal regulations. Since Vice President Gore’s Reinventing Government efforts in the 1990s, progressives have grabbed the pragmatic position in the debate over appropriate levels of government regulation. Federal agencies should get smart on an issue, develop targeted regulations, and effectively facilitate commerce while assuring appropriate protections.
As technology advancements continually push against our political and moral boundaries and regulatory agencies grow their footprints, it becomes increasingly important that science, not politics drive regulatory decisions. Especially when it comes to life’s basics needs, such as finding ways to make food more plentiful and less expensive, if scientific facts become undermined for political expediency, the most vulnerable people among us will lose
11 Comments on "Science, Not Politics, Should Drive Trade and Regulatory Decisions"
Plantagenet on Sat, 2nd May 2015 10:34 am
Liberals are anti-science when it comes to GMOs.
GregT on Sat, 2nd May 2015 12:33 pm
Human beings are anti-smart when they categorize other humans stereotypically. Especially when they limit political affiliations to only two choices.
Once again lil planter, the world is not black and white, but at least 16 million different colours.
Perk Earl on Sat, 2nd May 2015 12:47 pm
“The U.S. Trade Representative said that such a rule “ignore[s] science-based safety and environmental determinations” that modifying crops in laboratories is no more harmful than traditional cross-breeding crops in the fields.”
Well, either the source above or below is lying because they are stating opposite positions.
http://www.naturalnews.com/037249_gmo_study_cancer_tumors_organ_damage.html
Shock findings in new GMO study: Rats fed lifetime of GM corn grow horrifying tumors, 70% of females die early
The study has been deemed “the most thorough research ever published into the health effects of GM food crops and the herbicide Roundup on rats.” News of the horrifying findings is spreading like wildfire across the internet, with even the mainstream media seemingly in shock over the photos of rats with multiple grotesque tumors… tumors so large the rats even had difficulty breathing in some cases. GMOs may be the new thalidomide.
Bob Owens on Sat, 2nd May 2015 1:22 pm
Yes, I want to live in a world ruled by Science and Logic. The problem in our world arises when Government ignores Science and allows mistrust to breed in the population. For example: the wholesale feeding of antibiotics to farm animals not because they are sick but to fatten them up. Now some of their antibiotic resistant germs are passing over to humans. People have a real and perfect right to not trust Government decisions in many cases.
Apneaman on Sat, 2nd May 2015 2:12 pm
Planty was a GMO lab rat
Apneaman on Sat, 2nd May 2015 2:54 pm
FROM THE NON-PROFIT INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX WITH LOVE. THE ART OF ANNIHILATION.
“In his seminal study Science of Coercion, Christopher Simpson observed that communication might be understood as both the conduit for and the actual substance of human culture and consciousness. As Simpson noted, psychological warfare is the application of mass communication to modern social conflict.
In the U.S. Army War College manual on psychological warfare, the stated objective is to destroy the will and ability of the enemy to fight by depriving them of the support of allies and neutrals. Some of the methods used in the manual are sowing dissension, distrust, fear and hopelessness.
In the decades since these publications were first published, a new form of psywar has emerged in the form of false hope. With unlimited funding and organizational support from foundations like Ford, Rockefeller, Gates and Soros, U.S. Government propaganda now has a vast new army of non-profits that, along with corporate media and academia, serve as both a third wing of mass consciousness and a fifth column for destabilization campaigns worldwide.
As Cory Morningstar captures The Simulacrum in her multi-part series on the non-profit industrial complex, domesticating the populace is a fait accompli, and the only question remaining is what will happen if and when capitalist activism is seen for what it is. By following the money from aristocratic derivatives to embodiments of false hope like Avaaz, MoveOn, and Change, Morningstar steps through the looking glass to expose how NGOs have become a key tool of global dominance using social media as a means of social manipulation.
When the smoke generated by phony progressives clears, all that is left is an industrial wasteland of false hope and real threats. When the betrayals of NGOs like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are known, we can finally begin to exercise our responsibilities. Until then, programs like Democracy Now remain little more than adult versions of Sesame Street for the toy Che brigades.”
http://theartofannihilation.com/
dashster on Sun, 3rd May 2015 2:29 am
One of the issues with GMOs is that they have modified crops like soybeans, so that they aren’t killed by Roundup – a herbicide. So they can spray the field with Roundup and everything dies but the soybeans. That’s the good part. The bad part is that you are eating soybeans that have been sprayed by Roundup.
tahoe1780 on Sun, 3rd May 2015 10:19 am
dasher – right on, and your gut microbiome is composed of flora (weeds) that glyphosate residue kills. What could go wrong?
drwater on Sun, 3rd May 2015 11:03 pm
“Up to 50% of males and 70% of females suffered premature death.”
I’m not sold on some GMO crops, but “up to 50% of males … suffered premature death.” Do the math – That means 50% or more lived longer than average, i.e. NO EFFECT on males.
apneaman on Mon, 4th May 2015 12:44 am
GMO’s! Think of the children for heavens sake. There is NO WAY the youth of N America should be forced to wash down their daily box of Little Diabetes Snack Cakes and bag of Doritos with a 2 liter of GMO tainted Mountain Dew. The Horror!
apneaman on Mon, 4th May 2015 12:54 am
Global Pandemic Affecting Growth
http://www.dailyimpact.net/2015/05/02/global-pandemic-affecting-growth/#more-2871