Awaiting Proof GMOs Are UnsafeI stand with Kaneohe veterinarian and family physician Gary Johnson, who wrote in the Star-Advertiser that “I have never seen a research article showing harm from genetically modified organism (GMO) products.”
And with Monsanto Hawaii, which says, “there have been many wild accusations about us, with no basis in truth.”
The Food & Drug Administration has approved our GMO foods and even a new GMO’d flu vaccine.
That’s based on science, not the scare book Genetic Roulette by Jeffrey Smith, who has no background in genetics, no scientific degree, and says he studied business at the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi International University.
The opposition to GMO foods has become a Salem-like witch hunt. No intellectual rationale.
Opponents cite the potential for production of new allergens, increased toxicity, decreased nutrition and antibiotic resistance.
All this is worthy of more research.
But terrorizing Monsanto Hawaii fields or threatening its employees is not pono. Calling GMO products “Frankenfood” is not helpful.
Yes, labeling GMO foods would be helpful, because if you don’t want them you could avoid them.
We should be more worried about fried, sweet and processed foods than the GMO in our corn on the cob.
Anybody recall my column decrying those trying to jump to higher political office while interning where they are?
I can’t ding U.S. Sen. Brian Schatz, because he was appointed and unlikely would say, “Sorry, but I need more seasoning,” even though he should have.
Brand-new U.S. Rep. Colleen Hanabusa wants his seat.
Unfinished-with-term City Councilman Stanley Chang wants her seat.
It’s the new-and-untested Tulsi Gabbard syndrome. Don’t even finish learning how to make law with nine local people but rush in to do it with 434 people.
The Democratic Party of Hawaii is challenging our open primary because Republicans often vote a Democrat ballot, hoping against hope to elect a weak opponent. It’s never worked, but you know about hope.
Primaries are party affairs. So only party members should nominate candidates.
We try to be more democratic and let nonmembers have a say.
Most of us are not party members.
Here’s my problem with a closed primary. I object to having to pick one party’s ballot at a polling station because that identifies my preference to the station workers, who can tell many others.
If we can get to all mail/computer balloting, then I might endorse the closed primary.
Otherwise, privacy of association should prevail in the eventual court case.