207 search results for “genetically improved foods” (page 2)

Organic foods marketers and nonprofit nannies find new poster boy

Six months ago it was Percy Schmeiser, the Saskatchewan farmer-turned-activist, that the Nanny Culture tried to pass off as a simple, unbiased farmer whose livelihood was destroyed by…
Posted August 20, 2001 at 12:00 am

CSPI calls for less fear of biotech foods

We weren’t imagining things when we reported on Tuesday that Gregory Jaffe, the Center for Science in the Public Interest’s top biotech researcher, was urging calm and rational discussion of…
Posted August 9, 2001 at 12:00 am

Biotech foods are still held hostage by ‘eco-propaganda’

In an Agence France Presse report today, food-technology advocates charge that the activist Luddite Lobby has already put a crimp in research funding and closed borders to exports of genetically…
Posted July 20, 2001 at 12:00 am

Genetically improved crops gaining ground in the U.S. and elsewhere

Despite dire predictions of doom and gloom from the likes of Greenpeace, the Center for Food Safety, and the Organic Consumers Association, American farmers planted 18%…
Posted July 3, 2001 at 12:00 am

But What About Genetically Improved Beer?

A member of Canada’s Liberal Party has introduced a bill in Parliament that would mandate the labeling of any food product containing genetically improved ingredients. MP Charles Caccia insists that…
Posted May 7, 2001 at 12:00 am

Another Anti-Genetic Myth Debunked

A potent weapon of genetically improved foods' opponents has been the claim that transgenic food crops have a tendency to behave like invasive weeds, crowding out naturally-occurring species. A 10-year research study just released in the UK should put that old saw to rest. Researchers at England's Imperial College planted genetically-enhanced crops in 12 different habitats all around Great Britain. Their results show that even the hardiest of modified plants had no real survival advantage over conventional plants.
Posted April 9, 2001 at 12:00 am

Public Relations Jihad

A Washington Times editorial provides us with a cautionary tale, referring to the "public relations jihad" against genetically improved foods "by extremist environmental groups all across Europe." The Times adds that "there is not a shred of evidence that genetically modified foods pose a threat to either humans or the environment." This holy war is being fought here as well as in Europe. Without additional such voices of reason, the lunatic fringe may eventually have its way in the United States.
Posted March 12, 2001 at 12:00 am

Double, Double, Toil And Trouble

A coven of nannies is gathering to stop what they see as "a terrifying new generation of technologies" like genetically improved foods that could save millions of lives and industrial agriculture that feeds the world.
Posted February 20, 2001 at 12:00 am

Why Label If They’re The Same?

The battle over mandatory labels for genetically improved foods continues. A Food and Drug Administration report finds consumers feel "outrage" when they learn how many supermarket products are already produced through biotechnology. Of course, nannies will be disappointed to know that when people find out that the FDA doesn't consider genetically improved foods to be any different from conventional foods, the number wanting mandatory labeling declines substantially.
Posted February 13, 2001 at 12:00 am

Eliminating Hunger With Biotechnology

George McGovern, the U.S. delegate to the United Nations agencies on food and agriculture, pleaded with President Bush earlier this week to support the U.N. plan for ending hunger. One of the centerpieces of the plan is the global distribution of genetically improved foods. As McGovern (a big Consumer Freedom supporter) says, "The scientific, biotechnical improvements in both the quality and quantity of foods is a major breakthrough. It must not be stymied by voices raised against the hypothetical, while real disease and starvation threaten millions of people."
Posted January 26, 2001 at 12:00 am