REVscene - Vancouver Automotive Forum


Welcome to the REVscene Automotive Forum forums.

Registration is Free!You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Go Back   REVscene Automotive Forum > Vancouver LifeStyles (VLS) > Food & Fine Dining

Food & Fine Dining Hungry? Come on down to Wings - Fun, Food and Drinks.
Top Restaurants in town? Got a good recipe to share? Share culinary info or post up photos of your delicious dish. #revsceneVLS

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-05-2013, 10:41 PM   #76
I WANT MY 10 YEARS BACK FROM RS.net!
 
Soundy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Abbotstan
Posts: 20,730
Thanked 12,143 Times in 3,365 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by saucywoman View Post
Genetically engineered foods have not been adequately tested;
And who decides what's "adequate"? Some will declare it adequate if the things don't burst into flame in the fields... others will never be satisfied even with 20 years of intensive laboratory testing.
Advertisement
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godzira View Post
Does anyone know how many to a signature?
..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianrietta View Post
Not a sebberry post goes by where I don't frown and think to myself "so..?"
Soundy is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 07-06-2013, 02:05 PM   #77
I am grateful grapefruit
 
gars's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 4,094
Thanked 831 Times in 392 Posts
Interesting Article from a Post-Doctoral Fellow at Harvard in Chem and Bio-Chem talking about how the Canadian Federal Green Party is misinforming it's supporters that GMO foods are harmful.

Don't get me wrong, Harper scares me with his anti-science approach, but the Green Party scares me with their tinfoil hat approach to science.

Quote:
Type “the war on science” into Google. Hit enter. You’ve just received 1,320,000,000 results in 0.28 seconds and, unsurprisingly, “The Republican War on Science” is the top result. It’s a clichéd narrative, not to imply that it’s undeserved. But scroll down to the fifth entry and you’ll find, “The Canadian War on Science”. Canadians? Canada is typically regarded as a left-leaning nation, when measured against the American political spectrum. And left leaning parties are often viewed as embracing scientific discovery and research-based policies, right?

For the sake of full disclosure, in addition to being a Harvard scientist, I’m an overly-apologetic, maple syrup swilling, citizen of America’s hat. Emulating our southern neighbors, Canada’s conservative government is shamefully guilty of waging their own war on science. Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government is busy attempting to greenwash oil-covered wetlands, while simultaneously gutting funding for water quality monitoring , rendering impotent the national census, and prioritizing federal funding to favor research with direct industrial application. Shameful to be sure, but this is not the war with which we concern ourselves here. In Canada, as in much of the US and Europe, science is under a coordinated attack on a second and much ignored front. The aggressors? The far left.

For every young-earth creationist, climate-science denier, and opponent of stem-cell therapy, there is a GMO-protester, homeopathy enthusiast, and vaccine-a-phobe. The key difference being that on the right end of the political spectrum, the enemy is generally perceived to be big government; on the left, it’s big business.

While recent political trends in North America have bred legislation that reflects the irrational arguments of the right, there is an emerging and alarming trend of legally indulging the irrational left. Take for example the Green Party of Canada, whose mailing list I recently subscribed to. For a while, the incoming e-mail bulletins were mostly innocuous. That all changed a few weeks ago when the bulletins began urgently warning me of the dangers of genetically-modified foods, and not simply the dangers that GMOs could pose to the environment. Instead, these warnings urged me to take action against the “potentially serious threat” that GMOs pose to our personal health.

Just to be clear, there has never been a single reputable, peer-reviewed study that has found any link between the consumption of genetically modified foods and adverse health effects. Perhaps as importantly, there is no proposed mechanism that can explain why any such link could exist. The claim that GMOs are unsafe for human consumption is entirely unsupported and is a prime example of thinking informed by unscientific and purely emotional arguments. For a political party to blindly propagate these ideas is irresponsible at best and, at worst, ideologically-motivated alarmism.

Let me emphasize that the Green Party claims to inform its policies with the best possible science. This is the party that claims to have science on its side. This is a party that a disproportionate number of scientists likely voted for. This is the party that I voted for.

I was so taken aback that I was prompted to do something for the very first time: I sent a concerned letter to my politicians. I e-mailed the leader of the Party, Member of Parliament Elizabeth May, and her shadow cabinet member representing agriculture, Kate Storey. Earnestly thinking that there must be some kind of misunderstanding, I politely expressed my concern and asked them to consider the evidence and reconsider their policies towards GMOs. I offered my knowledge and resources to help clarify the finer points of the science and to answer any question they might have. The reply that I received was less than enthusiastic. Instead of considering their own policies, Mrs. Storey asked me to consider initiating “comprehensive, peer reviewed and independent studies of GMO foods”, stressing the importance of “independent studies, free from the conflict of interest which has compromised the validity of the GMO health research.”

In reply, I sent Mrs. Storey links to reviews featuring over 70 studies meeting her requested criteria. All independent. All peer-reviewed. I tried to emphasize that there exists much independent research on this topic and that as the evidence continues to mount, we are more and more certain that there is no link between adverse health effects and the consumption of GMOs.

Ignoring this, Mrs. Storey’s reply insisted that the seed companies had not allowed independent studies (as though companies have the power to limit independent research) and that we scientists “must free [ourselves] from [our] ties to corporate profit” and that if we cannot, then we “will obviously continue to have distrust from the public.”

At this, I attempted to lead Mrs. Storey through some of the literature to demonstrate that there were, in fact, no conflicts of interest present. I tried to describe the process by which reputable journals attempt to eliminate such conflicts of interest. My email went unanswered.

Back to Google. It’s somewhat comforting to know that I’m not the first person to observe the irrational attitude of the far-left towards science and the political framing of GMOs in particular. Others have recently made similar criticisms of Green parties in other nations. Although the British and Canadian “Green Parties” share no official connections, they seem to share the very same anti-scientific beliefs. This begs the question: Is Green the new color of scientific ignorance?

Aside from removing my name from their mailing list and vowing not to vote Green until they clean up their act, what can be done? Let’s consider the appeals: Logos clearly failed and ethos is likely hopeless, leaving pathos as the final option. And perhaps this is the very crux of the issue: Despite their claims, the far-left is championing legislation not because it’s supported by evidence, but instead because it feels right. Otherwise put, the legislation coincides with a worldview built upon emotionally-motivated misinformation. In this sense, the political spectrum appears to be more of a political donut. The far right and left meet on this donut, ironically sharing far more in common than either would like to admit. Both groups are attempting to coopt science to serve ideology. This is a difficult admission for many of us who identify so strongly with environmentalism, sustainability and other parts of the green manifesto.

Perhaps in today’s age of party politics, there can be no party with which a person can identify completely. At the very least, however, scientists and informed citizens should attempt to hold our politicians to a slightly higher standard, calling them out on their indiscretions when appropriate. I urge you to contact your representatives the next time they back legislation contrary to science. At the very least, their responses may expose a deeper truth about their motivations.

Aaron Larsen is a post-doctoral fellow in the Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology at Harvard University.
Not so quiet on the left-ern front | policylab
__________________
Proud member of GRAPE Great Revscene Action Photographers Enthusiasts
gars is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 08-14-2013, 11:48 PM   #78
Banned By Establishment
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: bedroom
Posts: 3,111
Thanked 3,491 Times in 1,176 Posts
Amusing debate:

5 ways a 14-year-old crushed an arrogant interviewer | Articles | Home
dinosaur is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 08-15-2013, 12:17 AM   #79
OMGWTFBBQ is a common word I say everyday
 
DragonChi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: vancity
Posts: 5,263
Thanked 572 Times in 279 Posts
I wouldn't say that was crushing, but it's that she didn't give into his game or admit that GMO had any scientific or societal merits. Maybe O'Leary has some soul in him, since he seemed a lot nicer than usual to the kid, compared to how he is with Mrs. Lang. The comments in that link say it all.

Turns out Golden rice wasn't scrapped and the Philippines might approve it for testing next year. What's more, GMO does increase yields (chapter one or two in the book below, haven't read it in a long time so and I'm too lazy to cite it properly). How did our population increase so much without more food and with traditional farming techniques?! . That little girl seems to be turning a blind eye to some of this. Or I could be wrong and didn't do my research properly.

Good book with lots of great examples on our current food situation:
http://books.google.ca/books?id=njIJ...page&q&f=false

I agree with the Labeling, that's fine, but how are you going to test foods for the long term? Really, like a 5 year study on just one food product?

Independent food reviewers fine, even if we had to put in a couple cents per item to test it.

More info, how they GM GMO!
The Age of Plenty - IEEE Spectrum

If you have a proxy or use hotspot shield, some GMO satyr:
Leela and the Genestalk - Episode - Season 7 - Ep. 722 | Comedy Central
__________________
DragonChi's BuySell rating

Last edited by DragonChi; 08-24-2013 at 02:26 PM.
DragonChi is online now   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 08-15-2013, 10:46 AM   #80
Banned By Establishment
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: bedroom
Posts: 3,111
Thanked 3,491 Times in 1,176 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by DragonChi View Post
I wouldn't say that was crushing, but it's that she didn't give into his game or admit that GMO had any scientific or societal merits.
Yes, I agree the title is a little misleading, but I do really appreciate her effort.

She is quite articulate for a 14 year old and did not appear to be nervous or intimidated.
dinosaur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2013, 10:49 AM   #81
I WANT MY 10 YEARS BACK FROM RS.net!
 
Soundy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Abbotstan
Posts: 20,730
Thanked 12,143 Times in 3,365 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by DragonChi View Post
I wouldn't say that was crushing, but it's that she didn't give into his game or admit that GMO had any scientific or societal merits. Maybe O'Leary has some soul in him, since he seemed a lot nicer than usual to the kid, compared to how he is with Mrs. Lang. The comments in that link say it all.
The book on Mr. Wonderful is that he really is a nice guy in person, and what you see is mainly a TV persona... kinda like Gordon Ramsay.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godzira View Post
Does anyone know how many to a signature?
..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianrietta View Post
Not a sebberry post goes by where I don't frown and think to myself "so..?"
Soundy is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 08-15-2013, 11:43 AM   #82
OMGWTFBBQ is a common word I say everyday
 
DragonChi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: vancity
Posts: 5,263
Thanked 572 Times in 279 Posts
Nice, I will head out to the library in a few days for this.

Thanks!
__________________
DragonChi's BuySell rating
DragonChi is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Revscene.net cannot be held accountable for the actions of its members nor does the opinions of the members represent that of Revscene.net