I have been recently noticing that there is more strange looking produce becoming available in our local supermarkets here. Yellow tomatoes, yellow watermellon, brocolini,brociflower etc. How do we know whats Gm or natural occuring. does any one have more info on how we can tell so we can avoid buying this crap. I think Gm foods are dangerous and I dont want any part of them. Also food irradiation does anyone know what foods are being treated without public labling and identification.

-- y2k aware mike (y2k aware mike @ conservation . com), September 13, 1999

Answers

If produce comes to the store in a form that's slower to ripen, it could be that it's GM. It's likely that the gene for a plant hormone, ethylene, has simply been snipped out. Nothing added to these plants, just cut out. Ethylene makes fruit ripen faster, especially if packaged. With no ethylene released, the plant doesnt ripen before it gets to the store.

-- coprolith (coprolith@rocketship.com), September 13, 1999.

I can't answer your question, Mike, but here's another aspect of GM to consider:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk:80/et?ac=000154642417163&rtmo=rhDm3DhX&atmo =6666666J&pg=/et/99/7/10/tlbees10.html ISSUE 1506 Saturday 10 July 1999 Too late to worry about honey and GM crops? [hot links - British Beekeepers Association / Online forum: genetically modified food - The Prince of Wales / The Soil Association / The commercial use of genetically modified crops in the United Kingdom: the potential wider impact on farmland wildlife - Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions / GM farmer destroys own crop - Friends of the Earth

Sam Westmacott finds that bees have been in and out of genetically modified flowers for at least seven years

BEES are good to us. They provide us with honey, one of the purest foods in the world. But are we being good to them? The question is disturbing thousands of beekeepers.

Frank Eggleton, a 67-year-old retired design engineer, is terrified by the threat of genetically modified crops. He cares deeply about bees. There are about 150,000 in the garden of his 17th-century cottage in Wiltshire.

Like many beekeepers, he has infinite patience and a great love of the countryside. Not the kind of chap who you would expect to go ballistic. But he did, when Captain Fred Barker planted genetically modified oil-seed rape at Lushill Farm, Hannington, where his bees forage.

"My bees are in danger," he says. "And what about cross-pollination? Bees scatter pollen all over the place. Wild turnips, cabbages and all kinds of domestic and wild plants will be contaminated."

He knows that the rape, sponsored by AgrEvo - a major GM company with six field-scale trials this year - has an extra gene and a specific herbicide resistance, so that weeds such as charlock will be destroyed without affecting the main crop.

Eggleton is convinced that the gene's presence will contaminate his honey. He has no evidence for this assumption, but that does not deter his protests.

Friends of the Earth held a meeting in the village hall and Eggleton declared: "Big field trials of GM rape are a step too far. I would never give my two-year-old grandson GM honey or eat it myself. I would rather dump my crop."

Captain Barker burnt his crop in response to pressure from his trustees and the Soil Association. But Eggleton's fear spread throughout the beekeeper community. Adrian Waring, the general secretary of the British Beekeepers Association, was besieged by members worried about genetic pollution.

"No one knows what to believe," he says. Rumours spread that beekeepers would be fined #5,000 for a hive near GM crops and that Brussels labelling laws would force them to mark their pots "Contains genetically modified pollen". Who will buy it then?

The beekeepers find it difficult to understand how a scientist can think that a buffer zone of 200 yards between GM and other plants can stop cross-pollination. Bees pollinate plants up to three miles away from the hive.

People have forgotten the reason for buffer zones - to protect a crop from contamination. According to AgrEvo, the industry guidelines initially requested 50 yards so that the grower could claim 98.5 per cent purity of seed certification, although they are not yet growing commercially.

Similarly, while the public believes cross-pollination is a real threat, it seems that the Government has other evidence. Imperial College, London, did a series of experiments examining the effect on pollen transfer through wind and insects, including bees. It was on the strength of that work in the Eighties that the Government allowed open-air trials.

AgrEvo and the Ministry of Agriculture confirmed that conventional oil-seed rape, a man-made crop created about 300 years ago, had never cross-pollinated outside a laboratory. Such intermittent and partial revelations infuriate Waring and association members. "The Government has been so cagey and the bio-technical companies so slow to publish their research, that they've got us all hopping about and shouting," says Waring.

When the Government announced large field trials last October, most people understood that meant a greater acreage of crops would be planted. Wrong again.

The first GM crops were planted in 1987. By 1992, they were un-netted in the open air. Bees could fly freely in and out of the crops. The plots were about the same size as the floor space of a three-bedroom house. The acreage covered could be vast.

One man who knows how far GM research has gone is David Parker. For 30 years, he has worked with agri-chemical and bio-technical companies carrying out trials on his 900-acre farm in Oxfordshire. He sees research as his mission in life. "Why else would God give me an inquiring mind and put me on a farm?" he asked.

Parker has grown GM crops every year since 1996. Sipping beer in the Carriers Arms, Watlington, he waits anxiously for a protest march to arrive on his land and tells me that he is puzzled that the public outcry had not happened sooner.

"The research is lessening. At 18 acres, this is a small trial. The biggest was 27 acres in 1996. Every summer, conventional rape and beehives have been dotted all around my GM crops. The bird or bee has already flown," he says.

AgrEvo and the Government confirmed Parker's statement. The acreage planted is smaller, but this is not in response to public opinion.

In 1998, there were 300 trials, this year there were only 150. "We have collected the data we need for various submission packages to the regulators, so there is less call for trials," says a spokesman for AgrEvo.

Bees all over Britain have been in and out of GM flowers for at least seven years. We have probably already eaten honey made from GM pollen. Does it matter?

The government agency that is responsible for safety standards and the labelling of GM food says: "Consumption of gene products from pollen in honey is likely to be negligible." In other words, they do not know what the effect will be.

Honey must be clearly labelled. If a beekeeper knows his bees have been foraging in GM crops and he does not label his honey, he may be fined #5,000.

Parker suggests that genetic modification is to us what steam travel was to the Victorians. "When George Stephenson developed the Rocket, people said the human body could not withstand speed in excess of 20mph. We always fear what we do not understand."

A recent poll by Mori showed one per cent of consumers believe GM is a good thing. The rest of us do not want organic crops compromised or standards changed to allow GM foods, and we do not want field trials on farmland.

Are our fears justified? Three years ago, Catherine Tulip, a solicitor, resigned to fight for the abolition of GM. Last year, she removed the crops on Parker's farm. I expected her to be well informed, a mistress of the facts.

Not so. She knows there are 32 million hectares of GM crops growing commercially worldwide, but she does not know the extent of trials in Britain nor the nature of those on Parker's farm. She expresses a deep human revulsion against man playing God, but has little evidence on which to base her objections. None the less, she is determined GM will stop.

Unlike America, where farming areas are huge and remote, Britain is a small country where urban sprawl penetrates deep into rural areas. None of us, especially the beekeepers, will rest easy until the politicians come clean and make their research open.

ISSUE 1506 Saturday 10 July 1999

Too late to worry about honey and GM crops?

British Beekeepers Association Online forum: genetically modified food - The Prince of Wales The Soil Association The commercial use of genetically modified crops in the United Kingdom: the potential wider impact on farmland wildlife - Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions GM farmer destroys own crop - Friends of the Earth

Sam Westmacott finds that bees have been in and out of genetically modified flowers for at least seven years

BEES are good to us. They provide us with honey, one of the purest foods in the world. But are we being good to them? The question is disturbing thousands of beekeepers.

Frank Eggleton, a 67-year-old retired design engineer, is terrified by the threat of genetically modified crops. He cares deeply about bees. There are about 150,000 in the garden of his 17th-century cottage in Wiltshire.

Like many beekeepers, he has infinite patience and a great love of the countryside. Not the kind of chap who you would expect to go ballistic. But he did, when Captain Fred Barker planted genetically modified oil-seed rape at Lushill Farm, Hannington, where his bees forage.

"My bees are in danger," he says. "And what about cross-pollination? Bees scatter pollen all over the place. Wild turnips, cabbages and all kinds of domestic and wild plants will be contaminated."

He knows that the rape, sponsored by AgrEvo - a major GM company with six field-scale trials this year - has an extra gene and a specific herbicide resistance, so that weeds such as charlock will be destroyed without affecting the main crop.

Eggleton is convinced that the gene's presence will contaminate his honey. He has no evidence for this assumption, but that does not deter his protests.

Friends of the Earth held a meeting in the village hall and Eggleton declared: "Big field trials of GM rape are a step too far. I would never give my two-year-old grandson GM honey or eat it myself. I would rather dump my crop."

Captain Barker burnt his crop in response to pressure from his trustees and the Soil Association. But Eggleton's fear spread throughout the beekeeper community. Adrian Waring, the general secretary of the British Beekeepers Association, was besieged by members worried about genetic pollution.

"No one knows what to believe," he says. Rumours spread that beekeepers would be fined #5,000 for a hive near GM crops and that Brussels labelling laws would force them to mark their pots "Contains genetically modified pollen". Who will buy it then?

The beekeepers find it difficult to understand how a scientist can think that a buffer zone of 200 yards between GM and other plants can stop cross-pollination. Bees pollinate plants up to three miles away from the hive.

People have forgotten the reason for buffer zones - to protect a crop from contamination. According to AgrEvo, the industry guidelines initially requested 50 yards so that the grower could claim 98.5 per cent purity of seed certification, although they are not yet growing commercially.

Similarly, while the public believes cross-pollination is a real threat, it seems that the Government has other evidence. Imperial College, London, did a series of experiments examining the effect on pollen transfer through wind and insects, including bees. It was on the strength of that work in the Eighties that the Government allowed open-air trials.

AgrEvo and the Ministry of Agriculture confirmed that conventional oil-seed rape, a man-made crop created about 300 years ago, had never cross-pollinated outside a laboratory. Such intermittent and partial revelations infuriate Waring and association members. "The Government has been so cagey and the bio-technical companies so slow to publish their research, that they've got us all hopping about and shouting," says Waring.

When the Government announced large field trials last October, most people understood that meant a greater acreage of crops would be planted. Wrong again.

The first GM crops were planted in 1987. By 1992, they were un-netted in the open air. Bees could fly freely in and out of the crops. The plots were about the same size as the floor space of a three-bedroom house. The acreage covered could be vast.

One man who knows how far GM research has gone is David Parker. For 30 years, he has worked with agri-chemical and bio-technical companies carrying out trials on his 900-acre farm in Oxfordshire. He sees research as his mission in life. "Why else would God give me an inquiring mind and put me on a farm?" he asked.

Parker has grown GM crops every year since 1996. Sipping beer in the Carriers Arms, Watlington, he waits anxiously for a protest march to arrive on his land and tells me that he is puzzled that the public outcry had not happened sooner.

"The research is lessening. At 18 acres, this is a small trial. The biggest was 27 acres in 1996. Every summer, conventional rape and beehives have been dotted all around my GM crops. The bird or bee has already flown," he says.

AgrEvo and the Government confirmed Parker's statement. The acreage planted is smaller, but this is not in response to public opinion.

In 1998, there were 300 trials, this year there were only 150. "We have collected the data we need for various submission packages to the regulators, so there is less call for trials," says a spokesman for AgrEvo.

Bees all over Britain have been in and out of GM flowers for at least seven years. We have probably already eaten honey made from GM pollen. Does it matter?

The government agency that is responsible for safety standards and the labelling of GM food says: "Consumption of gene products from pollen in honey is likely to be negligible." In other words, they do not know what the effect will be.

Honey must be clearly labelled. If a beekeeper knows his bees have been foraging in GM crops and he does not label his honey, he may be fined #5,000.

Parker suggests that genetic modification is to us what steam travel was to the Victorians. "When George Stephenson developed the Rocket, people said the human body could not withstand speed in excess of 20mph. We always fear what we do not understand."

A recent poll by Mori showed one per cent of consumers believe GM is a good thing. The rest of us do not want organic crops compromised or standards changed to allow GM foods, and we do not want field trials on farmland.

Are our fears justified? Three years ago, Catherine Tulip, a solicitor, resigned to fight for the abolition of GM. Last year, she removed the crops on Parker's farm. I expected her to be well informed, a mistress of the facts.

Not so. She knows there are 32 million hectares of GM crops growing commercially worldwide, but she does not know the extent of trials in Britain nor the nature of those on Parker's farm. She expresses a deep human revulsion against man playing God, but has little evidence on which to base her objections. None the less, she is determined GM will stop.

Unlike America, where farming areas are huge and remote, Britain is a small country where urban sprawl penetrates deep into rural areas. None of us, especially the beekeepers, will rest easy until the politicians come clean and make their research open.

-- Old Git (anon@spamproblems.com), September 13, 1999.

Hi, Mike...yes, it's very strange, what's happening to our food! Go to http://www.safe-food.org/index.html.

this is the web site by a group called "Mothers for Natural Law". They recently were trying to get a million signatures for a petition to present to congress, asking that GE food be labeled, so we as consumers can make the choice about whether to eat it or not.

Go to their site and explore....they have a list of all the food that's already being altered, and they list companies that claim not to use any altered ingredients in their processed foods.

At this point, the only way we can be pretty sure of what we are eating, is to consume organic food. Last year, the USDA was toying with the idea of changing the definition of the term "ORGANIC" to include GE food, & food grown in sewage sludge. Several hundred thousand people protested by email, fax, petition, etc. and Mr. Glickman backed down, at least for the time being. I'm sure he's under pressure from the big companies who are experimenting with the GE process.

It's extremely important for all of us who value our good food to get involved with this issue...read up on the facts, tell other people, join a food co-op so you can purchase good quality organic food at affordable prices, etc.

And, by the way, it isn't just produce....it's canola oil, soy beans (which are in MANY foods such as margarine and baby formula), corn (which is fed to farm animals),potatoes, and on and on....

When you find this web site, be sure to tell others about it... Bon Appetit!! Margo

-- Margo (margos@bigisland.com), September 13, 1999.

Bahhh Humbug,

This whole debate reminds me of the time when Margarine was first in the stores. Horrorstories about the side effects for our health and enviroment where in abundance.

Look at it today some 30 odd years after.

I see this fearmongering everytime something new is in the works.

Bahhh Humbug most of it is sponsored by the companies that will have a loss in profit one way or another or the big tabloids that drive on this.

-- bahumbug (bahh@bahumbug.org), September 13, 1999.

Thanks Old Git. This is what makes it so ridiculous for Monsanto and corporate ilk to tell farmers not to plant GM crops next to non-GM crops. Perhaps their selective memory forgot about birds, bees, butterflies and others that carry pollen from field to field.

Between endocrin disrupters, which affects cells and homones, and dioxin which is extremely dangerous, and is in almost all human beings on earth, and TCE which contaminates much of our water, and genetically engineered food, and irradiation which changes the molecular structure of food, and the pesticides, particulate matter, carbon dioxide, steroids, antibiotics, homones, fillers, flavor enhancers chemicals to prolong shelf life, is it any wonder that cancer is rampant, especially among children. And this is only the tip of the iceberg.

Supporters claim that GM food is safe; all of the above claim that minute levels of the above toxins, and many others chemicals I haven't mentioned, are not toxic. But scientists say that when a combination of toxins are taken into our systems, everyday, through food, water and air, we have a toxic brew that when mixed together is threatening our lives and the lives of unborn children.

About a hundred years ago when I was in college. We studied in our Life Science Biology book about how mother's breast milk held DDT for years; think what all has been added to that witches brew.

-- jess (jess@listbot.com), September 13, 1999.

I don't know enough about the subject to argue one way or the other and time doesn't permit sufficient research. But there's enough smoke to make me wonder if there isn't a fire somewhere and so I take anti-oxidant vitamins every day. Can't hurt and it may very well help.

All the articles that have appeared in the Electronic Telegraph compose the "smoke" I see. It's classed as a conservative newspaper and it's highly reputable. I do urge interested parties to go to ET and sign up for a subscription--it's relatively painless and I haven't suffered any spam that I know of. I just wish the same could be said for those cookie-collecting Chinese newspapers I check now and then!

Since I read about the GM-connected deaths of the Monarch butterfly and learned about the atrong-arm tactics of the GM-pushers, I've been quite leery of the whole thing and would rather err on the side of caution.

BTW, you might think Prince Charles is a buffoon, but he does have people to research for him and some of that good info is at his site, hot-linked at the ET page shown above. He DOES run a string of organic farms in Cornwall but the business part of his income can't possibly influence the way he feels because he's richer than Croesus (but not richer than the Queen) and the loss of farm income wouldn't make a dent.

-- Old Git (anon@spamproblems.com), September 13, 1999.

GM foods have been around for years. They are just now starting to come out with even more and the word is out. Think about GM food the next time you eat a seedless grape or a navel orange. These were the predecessors...

lickin' my chops....

The Dog

-- Dog (Desert Dog@-sand.com), September 13, 1999.

Two quick points:

1) The types of genetic modification being practice recombinantly has never been, nor could ever have been, accomplished in the 10,000 years of agriculture. You cannot naturally hybridize fish genes into tomatoes or tobacco viruses into soy beans no matter how ambitious a breeder you are. Apparently Monsanto et al. think that they can cross Machiavelli with Mendel---which brings up my second point.

2) By all means competitively market GM products. Free choice in the marketplace is, after all, what it's all about. But that's the point. Unlabelled or deviously-labelled produce disallows or obfuscates choice---a dangerous precedent compounding a potentially dangerous practice---especially ironic in the light of current "truth in labelling" protections.

Hallyx

"The truth that is suppressed by friends is the readiest weapon of the enemy."---Robert Louis Stevenson

-- (Hallyx@aol.com), September 13, 1999.

bahhumbug, it has also been proved that margarine is worse for your health than eating butter, because of the trans-fatty acids, which cause placque build-up in your arteries. Olive oil is best for cooking, but skip the margarine. And no, it doesn't kill you instantly, but all that margarine, through the years, causes heart attacks later on, and heart attack victims are getting younger and younger.

Just because something doesn't kill you instantly doesn't mean that it isn't affecting you, and possibly, your children and their unborn children. Shell Pest Strips were supposed to be safe and were found to be toxic to children. We used them when my boy was about six; do I worry? You bet. Agent Orange, compliments of Monsanto, was deadly too, but when Peter Montagu exposed Monsanto, they hit him with a SLAPP's suit (Stragetic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) meaning that the public should not have a right to speak out against deadly toxics.

How about DDT? When Rachel Carson exposed the massive agro chemical poisoning in 1962, including lindane, heptachlor and others, the chemical industry went all out to discredit her. It's a good idea to get informed about corporate PR campaigns. Read the book Toxic Sludge is Good For You!: Lies, Damn Lies and the Public Relations Industry, by John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton, by the Common Courage Press. As a teenager I swam in the lake as they were spraying it with DDT! And it hasn't affected me a bit, but what have I passed onto my son, or his son?? Read When Corporations Rule the World.

"Velsicol chemical company tried unsuccessfully to intimidate the publisher into changing the book or canceling its publication. The Nationa Agricultural Chemical Ass'n. doubled its PR budget and distributed thousands of book reviews trashing Silent Spring. And Monsanto published "The Desolate Years", a parody in which failure to use pesticides causes a plague of insects that devastate America."

The term is "Greenwashing." It's purpose is to make bad things look good for you, or at least not bad. If you like I can name you several PR firms that specialize in greenwashing. One of the largest firms, E. Bruce Harrison Company, which has opened a trans national office overseas to dispel fears about toxics. This company employs a staff of over 50 and nets $6.5 million annually "working for about 80 of the world's largest corporations." "As defined by Harrison, 'success' boills down to money and access to power in the nation's capital.

In 1992 when John Robbins, was promoting his book, May All Be Fed, which advocates a strict vegetarian diet. He became the target of an anti-book campaign by Morgan & Myers PR, working on behalf of the world's largest milk-promotion group. They used, behind the scenes, dirty tactics to undermine and limit his book's public exposure. These PR groups have also tried to stop Beyond Beef, Deadly Feasts, and others. The book The War Against the Greens by David Helvarg exposes all their dirty tactics which were aided an abetted by our mainstream media which is in the pockets of the corporations.

As a former bookseller I have read all the books listed above, and have met many of the authors. Their isn't one word that can't be backed up by a reliable source. Many sources are primary and secondary ones must be checked and rechecked.

Also much of the above can be read in the Earth Island Journal, which has a website and, you can subscribe. In my opinion it is the best source for information of all the publications on the market. I have permission in writing, from their editor, Gar Smith, to quote extensively from their publication. It also gives you names, addresses, phone numbers and email addresses at the end of every article.

I do research for an environmental group about toxics, and I have over six hundred reference books on the subject. If you want a good read, and a personal account of one woman's nightmare with cancer, and her journey to expose the toxins, read Living Downstream, by Susan Steingraber.

I also write a regular column about books for our local paper, and I have only had one cut in an article in the past seven years, and that was for mentioning a polluting waste company that's had millions of dollars in fines for pollutiion. The paper was afraid of being sued.

If you want to find out more about what is happening to change our bodies and reproductive aparatus, read Stolen Future by Theo Colburn.

In Missourim "the EPA has participated with corporations in a cover-up that spans at least two decades." The EPA and Monsanto scientists shared "lab reports and physical samples" as early as the summer of 1972. They knew about it 20 years before the government ordered the evacuation of Times Beach residents.

Write your congressman and raise hell! And oh, by the way, if you can't find him, just check in the pocket of the nearest corporation in the state. And get informed. Don't buy into the be happy, don't worry, crap that, "We have the safest food in the world." BULL!! And finally grow all your own food that you can just to be on the safe side, and be sure and stock lots of non-hybrid seeds.

-- gilda (jess@listbot.com), September 13, 1999.

Thanks gilda,

Earth Island Institute

http:// www.earthisland.org/index.cfm

Click on link for... Earth Island Journal

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), September 13, 1999.

Hi, Gilda! How was your trip? Good to see you posting again, and I must say, this was a great one. Very informative.

I was going to point out to Bah Humbug that, even if it were true that margarine got bad press, and that margarine were perfectly healthy, that doesn't mean that he should think that every time he finds out about a dangerous product he should assume that the product is actually safe, because margarine got a bad rap.

I learned about margarine, and how it is artificially hydrogenated by being placed in a high pressure hydrogen environment in order to "satruate", or fill in the empty bonds in its carbon chain, some twenty-two years ago in a nutrition class.

Since then, although I have heard how butter is so harmful because of its cholesterol levels, I have used butter in place of margarine, figuring it was the lesser of two evils. But I do cook with canola and/or olive oil.

I'm 54 years old, and just had my blood pressure checked a couple of weeks ago. 115 over 70. So I guess I'm doing ok, no? (Gotta admit, I've also been an herbivore since 1976, which may account for part of my good score).

Gilda, if I were to send you my email address, would you be willing to send me a copy of some of your articles? I have really enjoyed everything you've posted here.

Say "hi" to Sitter and Bonkers (?)

Al

Al

-- Al K. Lloyd (all@ready.now), September 13, 1999.

Start buying through CSA - community supported agriculture. Then you get to talk to the farmer, know how he grows stuff. None of what we buy from our CSA farm is modified.

We get brocciflower when we put the broccoli and cauliflower too close together. It's not sinister, they just are real closely related.

-- bw (home@puget.sound), September 13, 1999.

I don't think it's simply a matter of "snipping out a gene" - from what I understand, even genes from fish that protect it against the cold were added to tomatoes (or at least attempted) in an effort to make tomato plants more cold-resistant. In Europe they call this "frankenfood" - a monstrous combination. At least the common market people have the good sense to raise hell about it, along with beef hormones.The big corporations own our politicians - you might as well say that the FDA and USDA are actually Monsanto's washington branch offices. I believe that their mission has changed from protecting the public to protecting the corporate bottom line.Absolutely no long term thinking going on there.

-- jeanne (jeanne@hurry.now), September 13, 1999.

Still looking for someone who can edify me on whether or not the early genetic engineering fears about changing perfectly normal, harmless e coli bacteria into some genetic monster (francoli?) is the reason we are now having problems with e coli (and in the STRANGEST ways)

Anybody know anything about this? Gilda?

Al

-- Al K. Lloyd (all@ready.now), September 13, 1999.

great post gilda- thanx. and yes bahhumbug- margarine is bad for you as has been pointed out. i learned this in a coolege bio class in the mid seventies- and it seemed very reasonable to me that the trans structure, not being found in nature, only in the hydrogenated products- would not be healthy. and so I avoided it. Same prof mentioned that the decaf process then in use would be found harmful as well. he was a pretty bright guy- a former Jesuit monk, teaching college biology.

anyway- yes- check out the GM info- another post just yesterday I believe on this as well- re: Brocoflower, yellow watermelon, etc- no problem. there is adifference between hybrids and GM- and some are not even hybrids. i grow a terrific open-polinated yellow watermelon from Seeds of change BTW. Most GM vegies are summer squash and tomatoes at this time. the bigggest threat is in milk products- BGH, corn- corn oil, corn syrup, etc, cotton, soybeans, rape and the like. The chances that you are currently eating GM food is great- and we have no way to know. You would have to eat strictly 100% organic-all the time to avoid it. that includes bread, dairy, etc. It is very frustrating. And with europe not permitting the import of GM foods- guess where this years GM USA crop will be sold?? yup- to us. and all the non-GM stuff will go out of the country. We are a Monsanto experiment folks....

-- farmer (hillsidefarm@drbs.net), September 13, 1999.

coprolith, A & L, et al,

I found the article that I was looking for this weekend {I've been swamped w/company}. This is actually very good news, if we can maintain such standards {she says with trepidation!}.

"Bio-engineers find a way to 'contain' super plants"

http://cnn.com/TECH/science/9804/23/t_t/plant.bioengineering/

-- flora (***@__._), September 13, 1999.

y2k aware mike,

Several of the vegetables that you mentioned are old heirloom varieties. They've been popularized by 'nouvelle cuisine' practitioners, especially notable chefs such as Alice Waters. They offer variety of taste, texture, as well as color. Many are more difficult to grow and keep in edible condition, this is why they seem new and unusual. Thanks to modern shipping technology and a robust economy, we all have intriguing things to gander at in our produce sections.

-- flora (***@__._), September 13, 1999.

Hi Al, I had a good trip. It really helped to have a change of scenery. The girls, Sitter and Bonkers will be here next weekend to help me do a few chores and their mother said they could make a post or two--supervised of course. But you know me, I don't believe in censorship. They really enjoyed being on the forum. Sitter said, "They treated me just like I was a grown-up." She's a very nice girl and so is her sister. They have been a big help to me.

Al, just recently I was reading, in some of my papers, about E coli, but I can't remember what it was in. I'll try and find it and get back to you.

jeanne, I read where most of the British scientists felt that since no one knew the long term risks of GM food, that that in itself was reason enough not to be so quick to market it to the public. I think they have the right idea.

farmer thanks, did you read about the dairyman that was sued by Monsanto for advertising his milk that was rBGH free. That is one of their favorite tactics, suing anyone who criticizes them. They have even threatened the magazine Food and Water out of Vermont. This is another good publication about food and water. It just doesn't get into as many areas of corruption as Earth Island Journal.

Thanks once again Diane, for making a link to the Earth Island Journal.

Al, the email address I use here requires a password. If you would send me your email address through one of the forum moderators, I will be glad to send you some of my articles, especially those that pertain to trashing the enviornment, or poisoning the public. BTW, the book that finally helped me make the grade to being a vegetarian was John Robbins Diet For A New America. It wasn't that I was so addicted to meat, (chocolate is my addiction of choice) but I grew up learning to cook with meat, and I couldn't seem to get the hang of changing. When I read that book, that did it. He's heir to the Baskin Robbins fortune you know, and I think it took a lot of courage to write that book and reject, one day, being CEO of the company.

-- gilda (jess@listbot.com), September 13, 1999.