Re: OT: Bush slips controversial language into aid package (Ginger you'll love this)

[Guest guest]

Nooooo! This would not be a good solution to the problem. However, it did cross my mind that the "powers that be" will do whatever they can to promote bio-engineered crops to solve these disaster situations. I already came across a whiff of that, on some business site. Yet, I am sure that most of us, who have checked out the Monsanto videos here recently, know that sending bio-engineered seeds to these regions will only add to the problems they are already facing. In India alone, thousands of farmers ended up committing suicide after their genetically-engineered cotton crops failed. Some did not realize that they also should have bought the pesticides to help produce a successful crop, until it was too late (or they couldn't afford doling out more money for the pesticide). These poor farmers became victims of the GMO giants, and the same is likely to happen where GMO seeds are introduced in disaster-stricken areas. We

don't even know for certain, how well people can digest foods made with GMOs. Just because they look and taste like other foods, does not necessarily mean that they act like other foods in our bodies. Their "substantial similarity" to other foods has not been ascertained, because no-one has done these tests and reported them publicly. Aasaangndon1994 wrote: US Using Food Crisis To Boost Bio-Engineered CropsWASHINGTON - The Bush

administration has slipped a controversialingredient into the $770 million aid package it recently proposed toease the world food crisis, adding language that would promote the useof genetically modified crops in food-deprived countries.The value of genetically modified, or bio-engineered, food is anintensely disputed issue in the U.S. and in Europe, where manycountries have banned foods made from genetically modified organisms,or GMOs.Proponents say that GMO crops can result in higher yields from plantsthat are hardier in harsh climates, like those found in hungry Africannations."We certainly think that it is established fact that a number ofbio-engineered crops have shown themselves to increase yields throughtheir drought resistance and pest resistance," said Dan Price, a foodaid expert on the White House's National Security Council.Problems anticipatedOpponents of GMO crops say they can

cause unforeseen medical problems.They also contend that the administration's plan is aimed at helpingAmerican agribusinesses."This is a hot topic now with the food crisis," said Ronnie Cummins,national director of the Organic Consumers Association. "I think it'spretty obvious at this point that genetically engineered crops-theymay do a number of things, but they don't increase yields. There areno commercialized crops that are designed to deal with the climatecrisis."President W. Bush proposed the food package two weeks ago asaid groups and the UN World Food Program pressed Western governmentsto provide additional funds to bridge the gap caused by rising foodprices. The aid must win congressional approval.It would direct the U.S. Agency for International Development to spend$150 million of the total aid package on development farming, whichwould include the use of GMO crops.The U.S.

is the UN food program's largest donor, providing nearly halfthe help the group receives from governments. It gave about $1.1billion to the WFP in both 2006 and 2007. The WFP provided $2.6billion in aid in 2006.In April, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice suggested at a PeaceCorps conference that "we need to look again at some of the issuesconcerning technology and food production. I know that GMOs are notpopular around the world, but there are places that drought-resistantcrops should be a part of the answer."Some aid organizations agree that it is time to consider GMO crops."I think it's good, that it should be part of the package," said MarkRosegrant, an environment and technology specialist with theInternational Food Policy Research Institute. "It shouldn't be theonly thing in the package. It is now showing quite a bit of potentialin starting to address some of the long-term stresses, drought and

heat."But Noah Zerbe, an assistant professor of government and politics atHumboldt State University in California, said that GMO crops might notbe appropriate for developing countries."You get fantastic yields if you're able to apply fertilizer and waterat the right times, and herbicides to go along with that," Zerbe said."Unfortunately, most African farmers, they can't afford these inputs."Africa ambivalentThe U.S. tried to introduce GMO crops to Africa in 2002, with mixedresults. European Union opposition was part of the reason that severalAfrican nations that year balked at an offer of U.S. aid that includedcorn, some of which was genetically modified.In a severe drought, Zambia rejected the U.S. aid altogether. Severalother countries accepted the U.S. corn, but only after it was milled.The NSC's Price said the administration is working to persuadeEuropean nations to lift their objection

to the use of GMO crops inAfrica. Rosegrant of the research institute said that, given currentfood shortages, new bio-safety measures could resolve such problems."There's evidence that those fears tend to be overblown," Rosegrant said