[Ngo-sanrm] [VIN] FAO and GMOs

Mon Jun 17 02:25:55 BST 2013

Thanks, Hoanh, first for the FAO link which is a good basic document that
we need to make available on the NGO Resource Center website under the
SANRM Working Group.  The Resource Center's online document storage
capacity is quite large and impressive, so it's an excellent tool for the
SANRM and other working groups including Agent Orange, HIV/AIDS,
Disabilities, etc.

I agree with the cautions and concerns you have expressed.  We simply do
not know enough yet to allow the world to be pushed toward massive
dominance by GMO seeds and crops through the financial and political
manipulations of global corporations such as Monsanto, which attempt to
secret or distort research findings which do not support their claims.
Such manipulation is a fact, and highly respected research scientists have
lost their jobs when their findings disproved public claims coming from
companies pushing their GMO agenda.

Monsanto and others also assured us that Agent Orange was a harmless
herbicide, no danger in any way to human health.  There were a dozen years
or so when anyone could say, truthfully, that "no one has been harmed by
Agent Orange" so what's there to worry about?  Only some years later, when
the horrible effects of dioxin poisoning began to be noticed, did the truth
start to emerge.  We have not had enough time to know whether GMOs will
result in major human health problems, but laboratory tests on animals have
raised significant warning signals.

Craig Stevenson, your contributions are also very important and
thoughtful.  You always share informative and knowledgeable points that are
absolutely relevant to complex issues such as GMOs.  Your credentials as an
organic gardener are persuasive.  Your contributions here help this
discusssion go forward, in a reasonable and constructive way.  These
decisions and policies are critical to future generations.  *We *-- you and
Hoanh and I -- will not be affected much, but the world we leave behind is
a different matter.  And "feeding the world" is not the real mission of
corporate agri-business behemoths such as Monsanto, Dow Chemical, Syngenta,
and others, despite their marketing blitz and glitz.  Profits, *this quarter
*, and dominating the global seed and food market at whatever cost to human
health, family and community independence, and national sovereignty are all
that matter to them.

Hoanh, some useful and interesting comments are resulting from extension of
this issue into the VIN group.  I am forwarding this thread to the SANRM
Working Group list because it is relevant to our discussions and NGO
missions.  Some members of the SANRM Working Group may also wish to
affiliate with the VIN group.

CHUCK

*======================================
CHUCK SEARCY
International Advisor, Project RENEW
Representative, Humpty Dumpty Institute (HDI)
Vice President, Vietnam Enterprise Group (VEG)
Vice President, Veterans for Peace Chapter 160 (Hoa Binh)
71 Tran Quoc Toan, Hanoi, Vietnam
Tel:            +844 6684 2622
Mobile:      +84 (0) 903 420 769
Skype:        chucksearcy
Email:         chuckusvn at gmail.com
 <chucksearcy at yahoo.com>======================================*

On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 5:26 AM, Tran Dinh Hoanh <tdhoanh at gmail.com> wrote:

> Craig and all,
>
> With the population problem, weather problem, land shortage problem, water
> shortage problem... any solution to increase the amount of food supply is a
> good thing.  So we are in agreement here, and I don't think anybody on the
> planet disagrees.
>
> The problem is:  Are GMOs safe for human consumption, safe for the
> equilibrium of the environment, safe for the food security of the nations?
> How to manage GMOs  planting and consumption to  reduce their potential
> harmful affects?
>
> -  For a start, I do not yet believe GMOs are not harmful to human
> health.  The potential health effects may show after 40 or 50 years, and
> there is no experiment on human or animal to that length yet.  But the
> world is  consuming GMOs  like they are completely harmless, and the US
> government doesn't even require GMOs to be  labeled as GMOs.
>
> Non-labeling is by itself a deception (and obviously the US is exporting
> GM products many countries in the world that the US  doesn't want to
> require labeling.  This raises the issue to the level of world-class
> deception.  Morally it is hiding the truth and immoral and deceptive trade
> practice.
>
> -  Secondly, it  is an direct attack to national food security.  Say, if
> 30% of rice-planting acreage of Vietnam is used to plant Monsanto's (or
> some other company's) GM rice, then Vietnam would have  no food security.
> If Monsanto (a US company) withholds seed supply to farmers, Vietnam will
> have a major food crisis and whatever government in place will collapse
> (and maybe a pro-Us government will be in place).
>
> We don't want to turn VN into another Banana Republic do we?
>
> - Thirdly,  the world has never had an experience of turning all the
> farmers from owners into  rent laborers.  Farmers have always owned their
> seeds and  save their seeds for the next crop.  But with GMOs farmers do
> not own their seeds, they must always pay for seeds to grow.  Farmers
> become something like land tenants of the Middle-Age Europe.
>
> This goes to the heart of human dignity and equality/justice of the
> "farmer class".  I would like to see the churches of the world take a
> position on this issue on behalf of the poor farmers of the world.
>
> - Fourth, cross pollination from GM plants to the field of non-GM plants.
> So the owner of cross-pollinated plants may be sued my Monsanto for patent
> licensing too?
>
> -  Fifth, In the case of the huge GM salmon, wouldn't that be so scary
> that several of such GM salmons may got to the ocean and totally change the
> biological balance of the ocean with unknown consequences?
>
> Or some kind of wild weed may develop from the process of
> cross-pollination and become a national disaster?
>
> There are more issues.  And lots of them are unanswered.
>
> I am not saying that GMOs are bad.  I  am saying that GMOs may carry with
> them major health, environment, food security and social problems.  Without
> proper investigation and prevention, it is suicide to go wholesale into
> GMOs.
>
> And if any Vietnamese government goes wholesale into GMOs, I (and I hope
> the entire population) will work  to make sure that such a government is
> erased from Vietnam.  Mark my word.
>
> I have studied the history of monopolies around the world enough to be
> extremely careful when it comes to food and necessities monopolies,
> especially when the monopolistic power is in the hand of a non-Vietnamese
> company.
>
> Let's greet GMOs as new things you will put them into our mouth and our
> children's mouth.  Be careful with them.
>
> I believe that GMOs companies should be required to go into the typical
> safeguarding process to guarantee to a reasonable degree of certainty,  so
> that we don't commit ourselves and our children to some future disasters
> just because we are careless with our present planning.
>
> Let's not talking abut GMOs themselves.  Let's talk about potential
> problems from  GMOs and how to address such problems.
>
> Great day!
>
> Hoanh
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Craig Stevenson <cstevenson2000 at gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>> Hoanh and All:
>>
>> In 1900, the world had 1.6 billion people....
>> 1990, 5.4 billion people.....
>> Today, 7.2 Billion people....
>> Each day, a greater ability for each, even at the lowest levels, the
>> bottom of the pyramid to consume more prolifically...
>>
>> Water, Ethiopia Dam up the Nile, Egyptians considering invading, some
>> settlement today, for how long, who knows, even more likely dire situations
>> in more populous regions of the world....
>>
>> Vaclav Smil, the only person to read on this topic, Czech Researcher who
>> is a Canadian citizen, and who has written on and researched extensively on
>> the topics of technology in general, but upon Water, Energy and Food in
>> particularly insightful ways, not the flash and bang, superficial sparkle
>> of the Anti-GMO crowd, Organic Food crowd, that if it were not for the work
>> of 1 man, Carl Faber, who figured out how to synthesize Ammonia in the late
>> 1800's, that 2/3 of the people on Earth wouldn't be alive.
>> He has a very nuanced, real, non-ideological perspective on each of these
>> primary issues in our shared human future.
>>
>> Now imagine how the world population has increased since the time of Mr.
>> Faber.  Imagine how it has increased since 1990.
>> Imagine How it is expected to Increase.
>>
>> Imagine how the rise of the global middle class will effect, has
>> effected, caloric intake, and food consumption.
>> Imagine what it will take to continue supporting growth on global
>> population and  the growth of the global middle class.
>>
>> Imagine how glaciers are melting, and that if another fossil fuel weren't
>> burned, starting from this moment, how the earth would continue to warm,
>> for several decades, and hoperfully then reverse.  But no, the world isn't
>> go to stop burning fossil fuels, as it is necessary for the increase in the
>> global middle class, and is a function of population regardless.
>>
>> Now, imagine the scarcity of water in the future at present rates,
>> without increased population, how the glaciers in the Andes will not last
>> another 20 years.
>>
>> Now, imagine depriving mankind of possibly the ability to grow corn in
>> the desert, in a swamp, in too sandy soil, too clay soil, or in degraded
>> soil; or rice, wheat, vegetables, renewable fuels, etc....etc....etc...
>>
>>
>> I just finished a course in sustainable agricultural land management.
>>
>> People, there is no real argument between GMO's and USe of Fertilizers
>> and Pesticides, the question is not if, but matters of degree.
>>
>> Not if we should be using them, but how to use them most efficiently.
>> Soil Testing, fertilizing only rows, making sure soil conditions are
>> suitable to crops, that fertilizer usage is just enough and not too little
>> or too much.
>>
>> No joke, I and say this emphatically, we, who discuss this, and think
>> that the world could sustain itself today without fertilizer and pesticides
>> are like dogs chasing fictitious tails.
>>
>> Now at my house, where we have more than a hectare, we have, untested
>> organic fruit and veggies:
>>
>> Fruit Trees: (23 trees) (buying 1 more today)
>> 4 types of Pear (Asian and Dwarfs)
>> Peaches
>> Nectarines
>> Apples
>> Cherry
>> Figs
>> Kiwi
>>
>> Bushes (13 bushes) (buying another 2 today)
>>
>> Blueberry
>> Black Raspberry
>> Red Raspberry
>>
>> Garden:
>>
>> 60 Tomato Plants
>> 40 Pepper Plants (Red, Yellow, Green, and Purple-Black)
>> Cauliflower
>> Broccoli
>> Cabbage
>> Endive
>> Brussel Sprouts
>> Lettuce
>> Watermelon
>> Strawberry
>> Cantaloupe
>> Rosemary
>> Thyme
>> Mint
>> Spearmint
>> Dill
>> Fennel
>> Squash
>> Asian Cucumber
>> Market-more Cucumber
>> Onions
>> Marjoram
>> Cilantro
>> Lemon Grass
>> Italian Sweet basil
>> Purple Basil
>> Yellow squash
>> Eggplant
>> Zucchini
>> Celery
>> Pumpkin
>> Habenero Pepper
>> Cayenne Pepper
>> Jalapeno Pepper
>> Corn
>>
>> I get free horse manure from local farms, and purchase mushroom soil by
>> the ton to supply nutrients, no other fertilizer (at present, or
>> pesticides, but would if necessary, or the just enough principle, to
>> prevent crop loss)
>>
>> Now that is a luxury, and many in urban and suburban should be planting
>> as much as they can:
>>
>> berries, fruit trees, bushes, and as many veggies as possible (square
>> foot and container gardening, if only possible)
>>
>> But, Ag crops for industrial purposes are necessary.... (would we prefer
>> substitute out of the ground, or chemically synthesized, even if that were
>> possible, which it isn't)
>>
>> Food crops that can grow on marginal land, with resistance to disease are
>> required if people still continue to have multiple children, in the poor
>> populous places of the world (this is not a problem for the US, Canada,
>> Russia or Brazil; but is a serious problem for many Asian and African
>> countries, see Bangladesh's land decreasing due to flooding and its
>> population doubling, or Nigeria, India adding another 33% of its population
>> in 35 years, with decreasing amounts of land, where it only produces 60% of
>> the beans it eats at present).
>>
>> We should realize that most of the Green Revolutions and Agricultural
>> Revolutions, insofar as the discovery of important agricultural milestones,
>> were mostly several decades ago, and have just allowed us to feed the
>> people we have today.
>>
>> Finally, I worked in Natural and Organic Foods  2 decades ago, was even a
>> vegetarian, and prefer mostly vegetables to this day, so I understand the
>> perspective that people have, where many are coming from, but we have to be
>> realistic in all these matters, we must be realistic and pragmatic, there
>> is the ideal, and then the real, there is the preferred, and then the
>> possible, rather plausible and actionable.
>>
>> I write about the luxury, of having fruits and veggies, and hopefully,
>> such that people can see more possibilities and do as much as they can, as
>> extra food and veggies can be sold, or given to friends and family, or to
>> food banks, or even rot back into the earth and give it nutrients, if
>> necessary, but the debate over GMO and non-GMO, over Natural and Organic,
>> Fertilizer and Pesticides, is a fantasy of monumental proportions.  Many
>> argue a trade barrier in the case of GMO, that has stymied development of
>> poor Ag countries in Africa, per se.
>>
>> All of the big swing producers in the world economy; Canada, US,
>> Australia, Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan use some GMO varieties.  Even EU
>> countries have begun to sue them more.  For small trade protectionist Ag
>> markets, like Japan and South Korea, or for political motivations
>> elsewhere, the GMO debate is a hot topic.  For no serious, large scale
>> Agriculutral producer in the world, is GMO utilization even questionable.
>>  For the support of the current world population, let alone future
>> populations under conditions of advancing standards of living, well, it is
>> a fairy tale
>>
>> The question is not to outlaw these, the question is to use them when and
>> where necessary in just enough proportions, and this space, the Ag space,
>> and the GMO space will become more important as time goes by, as much as
>> Energy and Water, intrinsically related to these trends.  As far as with
>> fertilizer and pesticides which are often used in too much of an abundance,
>> it is necessary to educate farmers, rather than encourage them to forego
>> the usage.  Different crops respond differently to different types of soil,
>> fertilizers, amounts applied, timing, and similar.  It is not a matter of
>> encouraging them to not use them, organics is not a feasible, global
>> solution to feeding the current world population.  More it is a matter of
>> soil testing, drip irrigation, applying the right amount of fertilizer and
>> pesticides at the right time, in the right proportions.
>>
>> It amazes me how so many people are so wrong on this issue.
>> We need exponentially more work in the field, not less.
>> And yes, it has to be a for-profit model, with IP protections that
>> enables the most work to be done.
>> If I get three times as many strawberries, from a GMO crop, in a drought,
>> than I would otherwise, or tomatoes, whatever, what have you, why would I
>> complain.  What is the marginal increase in the cost of seed, i can always
>> purchase the otehr seed if I want it.  I don't have to purchase the GMO
>> seed, I can approach a heritage seed-bank, or a standard strain of any
>> fruit or vegetable plant if I am opposed.
>>
>> Further, the science hasn't proven a detriment.  There has been no proven
>> maladies, whatsoever from GMO.
>> Why should there be such a standard as is opposed by critics; based on
>> faulty neo-darwinian, pop-scientific principles, of a small sub-set of the
>> global population who are vehemently opposed to GMO.  Or those who use GMO
>> in food and agriculture as a barrier to trade. Silently while government
>> seek small wins, when there is this revelation or that revelation, more and
>> more nations, even many in Europe, are creating, and planting more and more
>> GMO.  Every large Ag producer in the world uses GMO.
>>
>> GMO, does not carry the same ethical baggage, as the cloning, or
>> characteristic creating (high IQ, nice color eyes, hair, nose, etc) that
>> the genetic engineering of people will have in the near future.  People, we
>> need to read more deeply on the global trends related to this topic, and
>> the human race more generally to understand what we are supporting and
>> decrying.
>>
>> Mans impact on the earth, is what it is, and will be what it will be, but
>> more mature perspectives need prevail, in consideration to those areas of
>> human life which are exponential, trends such as population, and in areas
>> that support human life, increase exponentially.  There is more than just a
>> better, or preference, this is about human survival, true the normal people
>> of the world have to become more mature, limit the number of children they
>> have, make proper personal decisions, as they are the ones who will always
>> make such decisions (whether to plant, or compost, or use bio-degradable
>> materials, re-use grey-water, do without air-conditioning, etc), but we
>> cannot stop working on the solutions (and these are best when monetized, as
>> there are just too many areas of public good, for the public to make good
>> on them).
>>
>> I know that this might surprise, but I am continually surprised at how
>> confused people are on this topic and I study it daily.
>>
>> Craig
>>
>>
>>
>>  --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Vietnam Information Network" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to VNinfonet+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
>> To post to this group, send email to VNinfonet at googlegroups.com.
>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/VNinfonet.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Tran Dinh Hoanh, Esq., LLB, JD
> Washington DC
> 703-969-0080
>
>
>
> DISCLAIMER:
> This e-mail message contains confidential, privileged information intended
> solely for the addressee. Please do not read, copy, or disseminate it
> unless you are the addressee. If you have received it in error, please call
> Hoanh Tran at 703-969-0080.  Also, we would appreciate your forwarding the
> message back to the sender and deleting it from your system. Thank you.
>
> This e-mail and all other electronic (including voice) communications from
> the sender is for informational purposes only. No such communication is
> intended by the sender to constitute either an electronic record or an
> electronic signature, or to constitute any agreement by the sender to
> conduct a transaction by electronic means. Any such intention or agreement
> is hereby expressly disclaimed unless otherwise specifically indicated.
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Vietnam Information Network" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to VNinfonet+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to VNinfonet at googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/VNinfonet.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>
>

-- 
*============================
CHUCK SEARCY
71 Tran Quoc Toan, Hanoi, Vietnam
Mobile:      +84 (0) 903 420 769
Email:         chuckusvn at gmail.com
Skype:        chucksearcy
============================
*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://ngocentre.org.vn/pipermail/ngo-sanrm/attachments/20130617/59d4ccb3/attachment-0006.html 