Narrow Search

Comment Archives: stories: Last 30 Days

Re: “As you consider Proposition 105 and GMOs

I want to know what is in my food. Don't you?

Unfortunately, the money is rolling into Colorado to get you to vote no on 105. Don't believe it; vote YES on Prop 105.

Most of us are not aware how genetically modified foods are damaging our health. GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms) were introduced into our food supplies in 1996 by Monsanto. Monsanto modified the seed DNA of corn, wheat, soy, sugar beets, canola, alfalfa, and cotton to tolerate high levels of Monsanto’s herbicide called Roundup.

If you want to know what GMO wheat does to us, read the book "Wheat Belly."

The

An unfortunate side effect is that the crops absorb dangerous amounts of Roundup. Another unfortunate side effect is that it takes increasingly higher levels of Roundup to kill the weeds as the weeds adapt. According to the USDA the use of Roundup has increased 12 fold since genetically modified crops were introduced in 1996.

In addition, Monsanto adds the insecticide BT to the DNA of corn, soy, and canola. The insecticide works by bursting the stomachs of the insects that eat the crop. According to Wikipedia approximately 90% of the corn, soy, sugar beets, and canola produced in the United States are genetically modified. The end result is that our health is in danger because of the ever increasing amounts of herbicides and insecticides in food that we eat.

Like cigarettes in the 60’s, this is a situation that has been swept under the rug. My fear is that the consequences may be even greater. For decades they lied to us about tobacco, they lie to us about almost everything when big money is at stake. Vote YES on Prop 105.

3 likes, 7 dislikes
Posted by OldCrank on 10/16/2014 at 11:35 AM

Re: “Stormwater measure draws $200K

This is just another "TAX" by the government to keep everyone at bay and under their thumbs. This was tried in the past and has been determined to be unconstitutional. These people are stating that they have the right to TAX you more due to the actions of mother nature. This city and the surrounding areas will never fix the problem "THEY" and the building contractors have created with their short sited developing programs. They do no take into consideration what they are doing and letting mother nature handle it her way. The use of non-permeable surfaces forces the water to build up creating floods. The majority of builders/contractors today have no forethought to what the long term problems will be created from their construction projects. They are simply in it for the money and let everyone else pay for the repairs and upkeep required. Everyone needs to say "NO" to these bills and "NO" to the government. Is it not a joke that in the Colorado you are not allowed to catch rain water in any type of container and then the state wants to "TAX" you for runoff that is a "NATURAL" occurring act of nature. NO TO 1B and any other tax increase. Make the government stay within their spending as we all are expected to do.

11 likes, 22 dislikes
Posted by 4thePeople on 10/16/2014 at 7:39 AM

Re: “Should you freeze your coffee beans?

Ok, I'm so confused. I didn't realize coffee roasting was so intense. I love good coffee and I never think about what goes into it. I have a lot of respect for the entire process now and I have some studying to do.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Mikel Gray on 10/15/2014 at 11:50 PM

Re: “Off to the races

Mr. Schlierf, you write, "On the issue of Federal Government inflating tuition, there are a number of reports i.e.[sic] http://object.cato.org..."

First of all, you have not demonstrated "there are a number of reports" by citing this one pitiful example. Second, this report is an economic analysis by a political science professor published by the Cato Institute. With all those reports out there, you could not find one from an actual economist published in a peer-reviewed journal? Third, this report does not call delve into all government spending on higher education, only the student aid. Even an arch-conservative professor is careful of his own bread and butter and does not question what effect the grant money that funds all sorts of pet projects, both praiseworthy and dubious, has on tuition.

The bottom line, according to this report, is that student aid results in more people wanting to become students and earn college degrees. This increases the demand side of the classic supply vs. demand equation, resulting in higher tuition. The only non-governmental, private sector solution to this problem is to cut student aid and discourage young people from trying to get college degrees. Simply put, don't go to college and you won't go into debt--problem solved!

Since I do not live in the district, I will not have the pleasure of voting against you, Mr. Schlierf.

5 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by Mr. K-- on 10/15/2014 at 8:51 PM

Re: “Proposition 105: GMOs

One has to wonder how safe GMO's are if the company that produces them is spending more money to get this proposition shut down then it would cost them to actually label the product. What are they trying to hide? My kids are chemically sensitive--I have to read every label before I can give them food. It is my right to know what is in their food so I can make important decisions about their health!! Vote YES on 105!

15 likes, 6 dislikes
Posted by Jodi Parker on 10/15/2014 at 7:04 PM

Re: “Proposition 105: GMOs

I want GMO foods labeled so I won't make the mistake of buying them. Big Ag's motives re resisting labeling are obvious. They're afraid an informed public will not only avoid buying GMO products - like they avoid HFCS and MSG and GLUTEN, regardless of how cheap the corn tortillas may be - but they will demand govt put a stop to GMO seeds. How many years did it take for the research to come in about how harmful trans-fats are? I'm not waiting for all the facts to be made known about GMOs - this could take decades - and so I buy Certified Organic, which guarantees there are no GMOs.

As for Big Ag's lie that labeling will raise costs, the organic certification process raises costs ... on organic producers. Industrial farms and their govt co-conspirators are squeezing out the small local farmers - and they're the ones producing the healthy food that's fit to eat.

VOTE YES on 105.

14 likes, 6 dislikes
Posted by curious on 10/15/2014 at 5:40 PM

Re: “Proposition 105: GMOs

GE is a breeding method not an ingredient. We don't label food made with ionizing radiation mutagenesis or chemical mutagenesis. We label food based on the ingredients not how the food crops were derived in the first place.

7 likes, 15 dislikes
Posted by Robert Wager on 10/15/2014 at 3:58 PM

Re: “On naked men: A love letter to the fig leaf

"Did you know that the Y required males to swim naked until the 70s? Man up."

Horse manure. Used to swim at the Y all the time. Never had to swim in the buff.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Dave H on 10/15/2014 at 3:46 PM

Re: “Petitions launched on stadium question

If we're talking about the City for Champions stadium, the current plan includes over $200 million in local public funding. The money would be collected from more than 9,400 cash registers located throughout 90% of the city. Some people inaccurately believe the State would pay for the stadium. The State's portion, at most, would cover less than 9% of the cost, and that money is not guaranteed.

42 likes, 10 dislikes
Posted by Anita Laydon Miller on 10/15/2014 at 2:47 PM

Re: “Proposition 105: GMOs

I want to know what is in my food. Don't you?

Unfortunately, the money is rolling into Colorado to get you to vote no on 105. Don't believe it; vote YES on Prop 105.

Most of us are not aware how genetically modified foods are damaging our health. GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms) were introduced into our food supplies in 1996 by Monsanto. Monsanto modified the seed DNA of corn, wheat, soy, sugar beets, canola, alfalfa, and cotton to tolerate high levels of Monsanto’s herbicide called Roundup.

If you want to know what GMO wheat does to us, read the book "Wheat Belly."

An unfortunate side effect is that the crops absorb dangerous amounts of Roundup. Another unfortunate side effect is that it takes increasingly higher levels of Roundup to kill the weeds as the weeds adapt. According to the USDA the use of Roundup has increased 12 fold since genetically modified crops were introduced in 1996.

In addition, Monsanto adds the insecticide BT to the DNA of corn, soy, and canola. The insecticide works by bursting the stomachs of the insects that eat the crop. According to Wikipedia approximately 90% of the corn, soy, sugar beets, and canola produced in the United States are genetically modified. The end result is that our health is in danger because of the ever increasing amounts of herbicides and insecticides in food that we eat.

Like cigarettes in the 60’s, this is a situation that has been swept under the rug. My fear is that the consequences may be even greater. For decades they lied to us about tobacco, they lie to us about almost everything when big money is at stake. Vote YES on Prop 105.

18 likes, 6 dislikes
Posted by OldCrank on 10/15/2014 at 2:44 PM

Re: “Proposition 105: GMOs

Here is the link of the study that shows Roundup is the most toxic out of 9 pesticides tested. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3955666/

14 likes, 6 dislikes
Posted by Caroline Yunker on 10/15/2014 at 2:42 PM

Re: “Proposition 105: GMOs

Any rational person will come to the conclusion that eating toxic pesticides cannot be healthy for anyone. And eating GMOs is eating toxic pesticides. In fact in a recent study - Roundup was found to be the most toxic out of 9 pesticides tested. Those so-called studies that show GMOs are safe to consume are funded by the chemical companies. The FDA does NOT do independent safety testing of GMOs. Instead the FDA "evaluates" studies provided to them by the Chemical Companies. I don't need any FAKE studies to see our children are SICK.

For me the bottom line is that mothers have the RIGHT to KNOW if she is feeding her babies GMO soy infant formula? Or feeding her children GMO cereals. Mothers in 64 other countries can make an informed decision about the food they buy. Why not here?

21 likes, 7 dislikes
Posted by Caroline Yunker on 10/15/2014 at 2:36 PM

Re: “Proposition 105: GMOs

Labeling, information about a product, is a way that companies can alert the consumer: "Here is it! Here is my great product! And here is why you should buy it right now!" The fact that GMOs are NOT labeled leads to the obvious conclusion that while they are beneficial to the company that uses them in some way (cheap, government subsidized, made for pennies in a lab), they have nothing of value to offer the consumer--and may be of lesser quality or even harmful. Just like the artificial colors and man-made chemicals that have replaced real food in much of processed foods, GMOs are less nutritious than non-GMO foods, less healthful and even carry health risks according to several independent scientific studies (while industry studies of course conclude they are "safe") GMOs are not labeled because labeling allows for tracing its effects in consumers, and could therefore reveal that populations who eat GMO vs. those who do not, have more health complaints. Not labeling shows a lack of confidence on the part of companies who use GMOs, to say the least. Fighting labeling to the tune of almost 30 million in just a few years? That shows a desire to hide information. Labeling could have been paid for a hundred times over for that amount--a thousand. What are they trying to hide? Vote yes on Prop. 105 and let the free market decide on this product.

16 likes, 5 dislikes
Posted by Jan Woods on 10/15/2014 at 1:31 PM

Re: “Proposition 105: GMOs

Wether people agree or don't agree with the safety of GMOs, the right to know if our food is genetically engineered is something that benefits everybody.

16 likes, 5 dislikes
Posted by Tracy Madlener on 10/15/2014 at 1:17 PM

Re: “Stormwater measure draws $200K

20 years overdue and not only a safety and property damage issue, one that has cast the region in a bad light for those companies seeking to locate new facilities which could be job creators - there is time left to volunteer to help get the word out on the importance of this issue to the community. Passing this measure can be a step toward polishing the image of the gem which the Springs is! Volunteers are currently being accepted. No limit on hours.

http://projectoneunity.homestead.com/Volun…

16 likes, 10 dislikes
Posted by Staci6 on 10/15/2014 at 1:08 PM

Re: “Edith remakes a paper chain

Thanks Bill!!

Posted by euphster on 10/15/2014 at 12:50 PM

Re: “Petitions launched on stadium question

If you'd like information about where to sign a petition, or would like a petition to circulate yourself, please contact me at ANITA.L.MILLER@ATT.NET. The cause also has a Facebook page: Petition with a mission.
Thank you!
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Petition-wi…

40 likes, 7 dislikes
Posted by Anita Laydon Miller on 10/15/2014 at 12:46 PM

Re: “Petitions launched on stadium question

Here we go again. Yes, by all means—let's hold a citywide election on EVERY LINE-ITEM, EVERY EXPENDITURE in the city budget. That way, our already underworked City Council won't have to show up at meetings at all. And both Anita and her hubby can go on a long vacation. Far away from the rest of us.

12 likes, 53 dislikes
Posted by Ion Cscityhall on 10/15/2014 at 12:45 PM

Re: “Proposition 105: GMOs

I totally agree with Debbie's comment above. The idea that something has to be harmful in order to require a label is utterly asinine. Proteins, vitamins and carbs are not harmful substances, yet we label those ingredients. Since when does an ingredient need to be harmful to be labeled? And furthermore, if an ingredient IS in fact harmful, what the heck are they doing putting it in our food to begin with?

19 likes, 4 dislikes
Posted by Rob Bright on 10/15/2014 at 11:33 AM

Re: “Proposition 105: GMOs

Maybe we should also get rid of the list of ingredients. I mean, they're not harmful either, so why should people be allowed to know?

8 likes, 4 dislikes
Posted by atomicbird on 10/15/2014 at 11:29 AM

All content © Copyright 2014, The Colorado Springs Independent   |   Website powered by Foundation