I liked the EWG (environmental working group) subsidies link. Interesting to see the millions of dollars of subsidy payments doled out to the large farms. I don't think subsidies initially were set up to help the wealthy...

Somtimes the scope of things gets to be just another set of numbers. When thinking of billions (one billion = 1,000 million) of dollars that are supporting biotech GREED, it seems that John and Jane Q public are so busy just getting by -- that this is slipping under the radar. I wish there could be warning COMMERCIALS. . . or something to wake up the sleeping public to the various dangers of GMOs.

The more commentary on this the better. Low tech IS the answer. We need more awareness of permaculture, companion planting, and working WITH nature as if we were a part of it -- because we truly are. There are increasing numbers of school gardens. It would be lovely if this was standard. So many children and adults have not had the experience of where food actually comes from.

 It should be alarming the few studies that have exposed health dangers of genetically engineered foods. It is frightening to consider the many more cross-species frankenfoods that have NOT been studied, yet are potentially dangerous and allowed to exist and proliferate unchecked -- while those who would make more of these environmentally unsound products are laughing all the way to the bank.

I'm glad I didn't read that article now, I had a bad feeling after the first paragraph and gave up.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog

Yes, I do agree that the more compact it is the less time spent on driving. it seems that public transport would be much accessible in rather compact areas since the demand is higher. As for the less compact areas, I don't think they have a choice. And for them, to walk would be far too time consuming and tiring.

The following is from an AgBioWorld -- yes, pro-GMO -- press release (11/13/07) and presents one advantage of GM corn that would benefit stockholders AND consumers...

"The field trials in question were actually designed to determine if crops enhanced to resist insect pests have an effect on the fumonisin content of the grain they produce. Fumonisins are toxins produced by fungi which can infect a growing maize plant. These toxins are dangerous to humans and animals; in humans there is evidence that they cause spina bifida, a highly disabling developmental defect occurring during early stages of pregnancy. Affected children usually cannot walk and they suffer kidney and urinary problems. Often, this is accompanied by brain damage. In horses and pigs, fumonisins cause other kind of illnesses.

The fungi infect a growing maize plant by entering the plant through a wound. Since European corn borers inflict significant wounds on growing maize plants, they leave these plants open to infection. During the field trials in Lombardy, no corn borer larvae were found on the engineered Bt varieties. At the same time, an average of 29 of these parasitic pests were found on each stalk of the conventional varieties--with more than one-third of them in the cobs.

The extensive infection of the conventional plants resulted in a dramatic increase in fumonisin levels, while the engineered varieties had between 100 and 130 times lower levels of the toxins."

I'm maintaining an open mind here regarding whether Bt corn really solves a problem. Decreasing the amount of fumonisins found in maize SEEMS like a good idea. Please present your views regarding the above information, especially...

(1) Is organically grown maize free of corn borers? If so, how is this accomplished?

(2) Is organically grown maize routinely checked for fumonisins and whether the levels present are dangerous?

Until I hear good news from somone, I'm no longer buying organic products containing maize.

Another victim of Jean-Paul Marat's ghost and his virtual guillotine?