Robert Wager 
Member since Jul 10, 2014


Custom Lists

  • Zip.

Stats

Friends

  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “An interesting twist in the GMO debate

Has anyone ever tried to insert real science about GMO's into any discussion on a anti-GMO blog, magazine, etc. It is blocked or removed asap. Pot meet kettle.

4 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by Robert Wager on 10/23/2014 at 8:01 AM

Re: “As you consider Proposition 105 and GMOs

Consider these:

xcellent selection of quotes
“Indeed, the use of more
precise technology and the greater regulatory scrutiny probably make them even safer than conventional plants and foods; and if there are unforeseen environmental effects - none have appeared as yet - these should be rapidly detected by our monitoring requirements. On the other hand, the benefits of these plants and products for human health and the environment become increasingly clear.”
--European Commission, Press Release of 8 October 2001, announcing the release of 15 year study incl 81 projects/70M euros, 400 teams (http://ec.europa.eu/research/f...
and http://ec.europa.eu/research/f... )
“The main conclusion to be drawn from the efforts of more than 130 research projects, covering a period of more than 25 years of research, and involving more than 500 independent research groups, is that biotechnology, and in particular GMOs, are not per se more risky than e.g. conventional plant breeding technologies…”
http://ec.europa.eu/research/b...
“…because the technique is so sophisticated, in many ways it is probably safer for you to eat GM products - plants that have been generated through GM - than normal plant foods, if you
have any sort of reaction to food, because you can snip out the proteins that cause the negative reaction to certain parts of the population."
--Sir David King, Chief Science Advisor, UK. The Guardian Unlimited, 27 November 2007 http://www.guardian.co.uk/gmde...
“In contrast to adverse health effects that have been associated with some traditional food production methods, similar serious health effects have not been identified as a result of genetic engineering techniques used in food production. This may be because developers of bioengineered organisms perform extensive compositional analyses to determine that each
phenotype is desirable and to ensure that unintended changes have not occurred in key components of food.” (p. x).
--National Academy of Sciences, 2004. Safety of Genetically Engineered Foods: Approaches to Assessing Unintended Health Effects. National Research Council, Washington DC. 256pp.
ISBN 0-309-53194-2. http://www.nap.edu/catalog/109....
"…in consuming food derived from GM plants approved in the EU and in the USA, the risk is in no way higher than in the consumption of food from conventionally grown plants. On the
contrary, in some cases food from GM plants appears to be superior in respect to health."
--- Union of the German Academies of Science and Humanities. Commission Green Biotechnology, InterAcademy Panel Initiative on Genetically Modified Organisms. Group of the
International Workshop Berlin 2006. “Are there health hazards for the consumer from eating genetically modified food?”
at http://www.akademienunion.de/_...
“If we look at evidence from [more than] 15 years of growing and consuming GMO foods globally, then there is no substantiated case of any adverse impact on human health, animal health or
environmental health, so that’s pretty robust evidence, and I would be confident in saying that there is no more risk in eating GMO food than eating conventionally farmed food.”
Anne Glover, Chief Scientific
Adviser, European Commission, 2012
http://www.isaaa.org/kc/cropbi...
“GMO products have been tested to a particularly high extent and are subjected to rigid legislation control.”
--Commission on Green Biotechnology, Union of the German Academies of Science & Humanities, at www.abic2004.org/download/repo...
“Food from GM Maize is more healthy than from conventionally grown maize… samples with the highest fumonisin concentrations are found in products labeled ‘organic.’ ”
--Commission on Green Biotechnology, Union of the German Academies of Science & Humanities, at www.abic2004.org/download/repo...
“…the dangers of unintentional DNA mutation are much higher in the process of conventional plant breeding…than in the generation of GM plants. Furthermore, GM products are subject to
rigid testing with livestock and rats before approval.”
--Commission on Green Biotechnology, Union of the German Academies of Science &
Humanities, at www.abic2004.org/download/repo...
“Whereas for conventional varieties there is no legal requirement for allergy tests of their products, for GMO products, very strict allergy tests are mandatory… For this reason, the risk of GM plants causing allergies can be regarded as substantially lower than that of products from conventional breeding.”
--Commission on Green Biotechnology, Union of the German Academies of Science & Humanities, at www.abic2004.org/download/repo...
As for claims of “unexpected effects” – to date there are none reported, and “According to present scientific knowledge, it is most unlikely that the consumption of …transgenic DNA from approved GMO food harbors any recognizable health risk.”
--Commission on Green Biotechnology, Union of the German Academies of Science &
Humanities, at www.abic2004.org/download/repo...
“There is abundant and accumulating evidence from extensive worldwide experience for benefit, and lack of evidence for environmental or human health risk associated with GM crop technology.”
“There is compelling evidence that GM crops can contribute
to sustainable development goals with benefits to farmers, consumers, the environment and the economy.”
European Sciences Advisory Council 2013 report-Planting
the Future; www.interacademies.net/News/23...
“The World Health Organization, the American Medical Association, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, the British Royal Society, and every other respected organization that has examined the evidence has come to the same conclusion:
consuming foods containing ingredients derived from GM crops is no riskier than consuming the same foods containing ingredients from crop plants modified by conventional plant improvement techniques.”
“Several current efforts to require labeling of GM foods are not being driven by any credible scientific evidence that these foods are dangerous, AAAS said. Rather, GM labeling initiatives are being advanced by “the persistent perception that such foods are somehow ‘unnatural,’” as well as efforts to gain competitive
advantages within the marketplace, and the false belief that GM crops are untested.”
American Association for the Advancement of Science 2012
http://www.aaas.org/news/aaas-board-direct…

7 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by Robert Wager on 10/17/2014 at 10:34 AM

Re: “Youth riot again, GMO battle lopsided, another city severance deal

xcellent selection of quotes
“Indeed, the use of more
precise technology and the greater regulatory scrutiny probably make them even safer than conventional plants and foods; and if there are unforeseen environmental effects - none have appeared as yet - these should be rapidly detected by our monitoring requirements. On the other hand, the benefits of these plants and products for human health and the environment become increasingly clear.”
--European Commission, Press Release of 8 October 2001, announcing the release of 15 year study incl 81 projects/70M euros, 400 teams (http://ec.europa.eu/research/f...
and http://ec.europa.eu/research/f... )
“The main conclusion to be drawn from the efforts of more than 130 research projects, covering a period of more than 25 years of research, and involving more than 500 independent research groups, is that biotechnology, and in particular GMOs, are not per se more risky than e.g. conventional plant breeding technologies…”
http://ec.europa.eu/research/b...
“…because the technique is so sophisticated, in many ways it is probably safer for you to eat GM products - plants that have been generated through GM - than normal plant foods, if you
have any sort of reaction to food, because you can snip out the proteins that cause the negative reaction to certain parts of the population."
--Sir David King, Chief Science Advisor, UK. The Guardian Unlimited, 27 November 2007 http://www.guardian.co.uk/gmde...
“In contrast to adverse health effects that have been associated with some traditional food production methods, similar serious health effects have not been identified as a result of genetic engineering techniques used in food production. This may be because developers of bioengineered organisms perform extensive compositional analyses to determine that each
phenotype is desirable and to ensure that unintended changes have not occurred in key components of food.” (p. x).
--National Academy of Sciences, 2004. Safety of Genetically Engineered Foods: Approaches to Assessing Unintended Health Effects. National Research Council, Washington DC. 256pp.
ISBN 0-309-53194-2. http://www.nap.edu/catalog/109....
"…in consuming food derived from GM plants approved in the EU and in the USA, the risk is in no way higher than in the consumption of food from conventionally grown plants. On the
contrary, in some cases food from GM plants appears to be superior in respect to health."
--- Union of the German Academies of Science and Humanities. Commission Green Biotechnology, InterAcademy Panel Initiative on Genetically Modified Organisms. Group of the
International Workshop Berlin 2006. “Are there health hazards for the consumer from eating genetically modified food?”
at http://www.akademienunion.de/_...
“If we look at evidence from [more than] 15 years of growing and consuming GMO foods globally, then there is no substantiated case of any adverse impact on human health, animal health or
environmental health, so that’s pretty robust evidence, and I would be confident in saying that there is no more risk in eating GMO food than eating conventionally farmed food.”
Anne Glover, Chief Scientific
Adviser, European Commission, 2012
http://www.isaaa.org/kc/cropbi...
“GMO products have been tested to a particularly high extent and are subjected to rigid legislation control.”
--Commission on Green Biotechnology, Union of the German Academies of Science & Humanities, at www.abic2004.org/download/repo...
“Food from GM Maize is more healthy than from conventionally grown maize… samples with the highest fumonisin concentrations are found in products labeled ‘organic.’ ”
--Commission on Green Biotechnology, Union of the German Academies of Science & Humanities, at www.abic2004.org/download/repo...
“…the dangers of unintentional DNA mutation are much higher in the process of conventional plant breeding…than in the generation of GM plants. Furthermore, GM products are subject to
rigid testing with livestock and rats before approval.”
--Commission on Green Biotechnology, Union of the German Academies of Science &
Humanities, at www.abic2004.org/download/repo...
“Whereas for conventional varieties there is no legal requirement for allergy tests of their products, for GMO products, very strict allergy tests are mandatory… For this reason, the risk of GM plants causing allergies can be regarded as substantially lower than that of products from conventional breeding.”
--Commission on Green Biotechnology, Union of the German Academies of Science & Humanities, at www.abic2004.org/download/repo...
As for claims of “unexpected effects” – to date there are none reported, and “According to present scientific knowledge, it is most unlikely that the consumption of …transgenic DNA from approved GMO food harbors any recognizable health risk.”
--Commission on Green Biotechnology, Union of the German Academies of Science &
Humanities, at www.abic2004.org/download/repo...
“There is abundant and accumulating evidence from extensive worldwide experience for benefit, and lack of evidence for environmental or human health risk associated with GM crop technology.”
“There is compelling evidence that GM crops can contribute
to sustainable development goals with benefits to farmers, consumers, the environment and the economy.”
European Sciences Advisory Council 2013 report-Planting
the Future; www.interacademies.net/News/23...
“The World Health Organization, the American Medical Association, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, the British Royal Society, and every other respected organization that has examined the evidence has come to the same conclusion:
consuming foods containing ingredients derived from GM crops is no riskier than consuming the same foods containing ingredients from crop plants modified by conventional plant improvement techniques.”
“Several current efforts to require labeling of GM foods are not being driven by any credible scientific evidence that these foods are dangerous, AAAS said. Rather, GM labeling initiatives are being advanced by “the persistent perception that such foods are somehow ‘unnatural,’” as well as efforts to gain competitive
advantages within the marketplace, and the false belief that GM crops are untested.”
American Association for the Advancement of Science 2012
http://www.aaas.org/news/aaas-board-direct…

0 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by Robert Wager on 10/17/2014 at 10:33 AM

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.

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

Re: “Oh no, 'GMO'

"isn't any research" Wow such ignorance (lack of knowledge not an insult) of the real science. Here is a statement from the American Association for the Advancement of Science:

"Moreover, the AAAS Board said, the World Health Organization, the American Medical Association, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, the British Royal Society, and “every other respected organization that has examined the evidence has come to the same conclusion: consuming foods containing ingredients derived from GM crops is no riskier than consuming the same foods containing ingredients from crop plants modified by conventional plant improvement techniques.” (2012)

From the World Health Organization:

“GM foods currently available on the international market have passed risk assessments and are not likely to present risks for human health. In addition, no effects on human health have been shown as a result of the consumption of such foods by the general population in the countries where they have been approved.

Or from Europe:

A Decade of EU-Funded GMO Research 2001-2010

Food Safety:
“The main conclusion to be drawn from the efforts of more than 130 research projects, covering a period of more than 25 years of research, and involving more than 500 independent research groups, is that biotechnology, and in particular GMOs, are not per se more risky than e.g. conventional plant breeding technologies.”

5 likes, 11 dislikes
Posted by Robert Wager on 07/10/2014 at 9:25 AM

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

All content © Copyright 2017, The Colorado Springs Independent

Website powered by Foundation