GMO producers should be punished as terrorists, Russian MPs say


mentalfloss
+1
#1


GMO producers should be punished as terrorists, Russian MPs say

A draft law submitted to the Russian parliament seeks to impose punishment up to criminal prosecution to producers of genetically-modified organisms harmful to health or the environment.

The draft legislation submitted on Wednesday amends Russia's law regulating GMOs and some other laws and provides for disciplinary action against individuals and firms, which produce or distribute harmful biotech products and government officials who fail to properly control them.

At worst, a criminal case may be launched against a company involved in introducing unsafe GMOs into Russia. Sponsors of the bill say that the punishment for such deeds should be comparable to the punishment allotted to terrorists, if the perpetrators act knowingly and hurt many people.

???When a terrorist act is committed, only several people are usually hurt. But GMOs may hurt dozens and hundreds. The consequences are much worse. And punishment should be proportionate to the crime,??? co-author Kirill Cherkasov, member of the State Duma Agriculture Committee told RT.

Russian criminal code allows for a punishment starting with 15 years in jail and up to a life sentence for terrorism.

Less severe misdeeds related to GMOs would be punishable by fines. For instance the administrative code would provide for up to 20,000 rubles (US$560) in fines for failure to report an incident of environmental pollution, which would also cover harmful GMO contamination, if sponsors of the bill have their way.

Russia gave the green light to import of GMOs and planting of bioengineered seeds as part of its accession to the WTO, but the Russian government remains skeptical of GMOs. In April, Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev announced that his cabinet will postpone the beginning of certification of GMO plants for growth in Russia due to lack of proper infrastructure needed to test their safety.

The government also opposes imports of GMO food, saying the country has enough farmlands to provide enough regular food to feed itself.

rt.com/news/159188-russia-gmo-terrorist-bill/ (external - login to view)
 
Cliffy
Free Thinker
+1
#2
Good for them. GMOs are not food.

(external - login to view)

 
EagleSmack
+1
#3
Enjoy your hunger!
 
Cliffy
Free Thinker
+3
#4  Top Rated Post
Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmackView Post

Enjoy your hunger!

Lots of good homegrown food in these parts. Don't need no stinkin' GMOs.
 
mentalfloss
+1
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmackView Post

Enjoy your hunger!

Now take note of this post and place this in your bookmarks.

The science showing the safety of GMO crops is as solid as the science on global warming.

If you want to accept one on scientific grounds then you cannot deny the other. Similarly, if you want to shut your ears and deny any scientific credibility on one issue, then you cannot embrace the science on the other.

So what will you choose?

Accept both or forsake both?
 
EagleSmack
#6
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

Now take note of this post and place this in your bookmarks.

The science showing the safety of GMO crops is as solid as the science on global warming.

If you want to accept one on scientific grounds then you cannot deny the other. Similarly, if you want to shut your ears and deny any scientific credibility on one issue, then you cannot embrace the science on the other.

So what will you choose?

Accept both or forsake both?

Oh if it was only that easy MF. The science on man-made climate change is not solid which is why you post thread after thread in frustration.

 
lone wolf
Free Thinker
+2
#7
You eat genetically modified food every time you eat an apple or corn
 
mentalfloss
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmackView Post

Oh if it was only that easy MF. The science on man-made climate change is not solid which is why you post thread after thread in frustration.

Scientific consensus on both says you are wrong.

But that's not surprising.

A Tale of Two Scientific Consensuses - Reason.com (external - login to view)
 
EagleSmack
+3
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

Scientific consensus on both says you are wrong.

No it doesn't.

I know you want to stifle debate and the opposition because it is not settled science.

Just like Cobalt Kid having a temper tantrum in the other threads. If we aren't fear mongering alarmist we MUST believe the earth is 6,000 years old and humans walked with dinosaurs. How childish.

 
mentalfloss
+1
#10
I'm not trying to stifle anything.

The more you post the more exposure a thread gets so please, keep up the good work!
 
EagleSmack
+2
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

I'm not trying to stifle anything.

The more you post the more exposure a thread gets so please, keep up the good work!

Oh... and the amount of minds you are changing here must be enormous!

The only reason why you post so many retarded threads is you know they will go right to the bottom and off to the archives like all the others. You're panicking now. You never used to do this.
 
Cliffy
Free Thinker
+2
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

I'm not trying to stifle anything.

The more you post the more exposure a thread gets so please, keep up the good work!

I'm afraid that the battle against self inflicted ignorance is a losing one, my good man. But keep on thinking free.
 
petros
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

Scientific consensus on both says you are wrong.

But that's not surprising.

A Tale of Two Scientific Consensuses - Reason.com (external - login to view)

What consensus?

Is this over health concerns or politics?
 
EagleSmack
+1
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

I'm afraid that the battle against self inflicted ignorance is a losing one, my good man. But keep on thinking free.

Hey Cliffy... read the thread and then you can add another to your DUH column.
 
petros
#15
Do ya think Russia is being pathetic because it lost exports of it's grains?
 
mentalfloss
+1
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

I'm afraid that the battle against self inflicted ignorance is a losing one, my good man. But keep on thinking free.

The funny part is that he just flipped his lid on you and apparently I'm the one that's losing it lol

But yea, there's no scientific consensus because Eaglesmack and petros say so haha
 
Tonington
#17
We eat DNA every day. Every. Day.

The dangers with some GMOs are pesticide residues which are by nature designed to be disruptive biologically, not the fact that the food is made from *gasp* DNA. Loony anti-GMO activists are loons.
 
Cliffy
Free Thinker
+2
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

We eat DNA every day. Every. Day.

The dangers with some GMOs are pesticide residues which are by nature designed to be disruptive biologically, not the fact that the food is made from *gasp* DNA. Loony anti-GMO activists are loons.

Almost all our food has been genetically modified from the original species. But splicing genes from unrelated species, like bacteria or animals into vegetables is insane.
 
Tonington
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

Almost all our food has been genetically modified from the original species.

Yep, even the hippy approved organic, free range, anti-biotic free, cruelty free, enriched environment poultry. Ok the enriched environment I just threw in there...it's free range!

Quote:

But splicing genes from unrelated species, like bacteria or animals into vegetables is insane.

Genes have crossed species barriers horizontally, including from prokaryotes like bacteria to the multi-cellular eukaryotes. Ever heard of spreading antibiotic resistance? That's horizontal gene transfer. DNA is DNA. There is no such thing as 'supposed to be there'. DNA by it's nature is conservative with respect to information, but life on Earth without gene transfer would be boring. There would be very few species...
 
damngrumpy
No Party Affiliation
#20
Many growers in the apple sector are opposed to GMO because it will put a damper
on apple sales in the market place Surveys have been done in parts of Canada and
it demonstrates people don't want GMO apples. Besides the one product that has
applied is promoting a non browning apple for salads etc. Use Ambrosia apples they
have low acidic factor and without GMO they will not brown for at least three hours.
I remain opposed to GMO but I think the Russians have gone nuts with all kinds of new
rules anyway.
 
petros
#21
Do you fear soil? If you fear GMO, you have to fear soil equally because the bacterial genes used in GMO are what makes dirt soil.
 
mentalfloss
+1
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Do you fear soil? If you fear GMO, you have to fear soil equally because the bacterial genes used in GMO are what makes dirt soil.

How is it that you can't make a convincing post even when you're on the right side of the argument?
 
petros
+2
#23
Are you high again?

Bacillus thuringiensis (or Bt) is a Gram-positive, soil-dwelling bacterium, commonly used as a biological pesticide. B. thuringiensis also occurs naturally in the gut of caterpillars of various types of moths and butterflies, as well on leaf surfaces, aquatic environments, animal feces, insect rich environments, flour mills and grain storage facilities.

During sporulation, many Bt strains produce crystal proteins (proteinaceous inclusions), called δ-endotoxins, that have Insecticide action. This has led to their use as insecticides, and more recently to genetically modified crops using Bt genes. Many crystal-producing Bt strains, though, do not have insecticidal properties.[3
 
mentalfloss
#24
Like I said, even if you are right, no one would know or care because it's draped in smug anecdotes.
 
petros
#25
I am right and I'm going to pound reality into you until you bleed out all the childish fantasy.
 
PoliticalNick
Free Thinker
+1
#26
While you all want to debate the crap about certain questionable facts with GMOs I would like to bring forward the proven facts.....

GMOs were originally introduced as a way to feed the starving areas of the world, drought resistant corn for example, yet Monsanto does not have huge farms of corn in Nigeria and Somalia etc. It is hard for anyone with common sense to believe they want to feed the starving when all their farms and development are in places that do not have hunger issues but do have plenty of money for food.

Companies like Monsanto are now applying for and being granted patents on our food supply. This does two things that are very negative. First it allows for price manipulation and second it prevents other people/entities from growing whatever foodstuff we might want or require. The fact that Monsanto instituted policies of not allowing farmers to keep seed for further crops is ridiculous and their policy of now suing neighboring farms that get infected with GMO product through environmental cross-contamination should be a warning that they do not want to feed the world but want to control the world's food supply and most importantly control the pricing.

There may very well be some good things that GMOs can do for our world population but none of this is evident in the approach of Monsanto and it's partners. All their efforts and policies seem to be in line with monopolies and profiteering. I would suggest that any GMO technology be controlled by an international board with view to actually creating a sustainable food supply for the people of our planet and not be held by some mega-corp whose only legal requirement of existence is ROI to shareholders.
 
petros
#27
Jeepers. What do grain producers think about all this?

I used to think like you but my uncle died and the keys to the combine were handed over and I quickly learned that the majority of GMO claims are malarkey.

GMO have brought record crops in quality and quantity which is indeed feeding Billions people.

Monsanto doesn't sell seed. I buy from local seed growers who offer cultivars that regional landrace strains hybridized with the GMO. From there you buy an herbicide/fertilizer package and sign on to a delivery contract with Viterra Pioneers B&H, Cargill etc.

You can buy, plant and keep GMO seed hut you can't buy the herb/fert package without paying a user fee for the herbicide resistant genes.

It's economic suicide to not use ferts or herbicide. Even organics use pre-emergent herbicides.
 
damngrumpy
No Party Affiliation
#28
When it comes to terrorists GMO proponents or other wise we should only hang
the short ones that is those who are shorter than 8ft tall.
Such statements are crazy they are starting to sound like the extremists from the
Middle East but I suppose its like any other society slowly going mad
 
petros
#29
The major grain handlers of the globe have sanctioned Russian grain exports. That what this is about and nothing more.

Cargill alone can make or break Russia.
 
mentalfloss
+1 / -1
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

I am right and I'm going to pound reality into you until you bleed out all the childish fantasy.

Whatever petros.

It's time to press the red button so the nurse can bring you your meds.

Quote: Originally Posted by PoliticalNickView Post

While you all want to debate the crap about certain questionable facts with GMOs I would like to bring forward the proven facts.....
GMOs were originally introduced as a way to feed the starving areas of the world, drought resistant corn for example, yet Monsanto does not have huge farms of corn in Nigeria and Somalia etc. It is hard for anyone with common sense to believe they want to feed the starving when all their farms and development are in places that do not have hunger issues but do have plenty of money for food.
Companies like Monsanto are now applying for and being granted patents on our food supply. This does two things that are very negative. First it allows for price manipulation and second it prevents other people/entities from growing whatever foodstuff we might want or require. The fact that Monsanto instituted policies of not allowing farmers to keep seed for further crops is ridiculous and their policy of now suing neighboring farms that get infected with GMO product through environmental cross-contamination should be a warning that they do not want to feed the world but want to control the world's food supply and most importantly control the pricing.
There may very well be some good things that GMOs can do for our world population but none of this is evident in the approach of Monsanto and it's partners. All their efforts and policies seem to be in line with monopolies and profiteering. I would suggest that any...

Quote has been trimmed, See full post: View Post
What you are really saying here is that there is nothing wrong with GMOs and everything wrong with the private sector.
 
no new posts