On Feb 18, 2006, at 6:03 pm, Ken Stuart wrote:

> Much opposition to GMO and other techniques comes from science-free  
> irrational
> knee-jerk responses.


Personally I think they are justified knee-jerk responses.  Just  
about everything that has changed in agriculture in the last 50 years  
has been for the producer's (or retailer's) benefit, not ours.  And  
the repeated story is that these modern "advancements" are shown  
later to be hazardous to our health, not beneficial.  I have yet to  
hear of an additive or sweetener that *protects* against cancer or  
nerve damage.

Our digestive systems took millions of years to evolve, so to  
introduce completely new foods and chemicals to it is asking for  
trouble, especially for things where the dose is so low that effects  
may not appear for many years.  It should be proved beyond any  
reasonable doubt that preservatives, colours, sweeteners, GM etc is  
safe, because these things are much easier to get into market when  
they are assumed harmless, than to get them off the market when  
people take them for granted or the producers make too much money off  
then (think aspartame).

I'm all for irrational knee-jerk responses to attempts to pollute our  
food.  They seem to be our only hope right now.

Ashley