Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Monday, April 4, 2011
Why Ghana should reject GM foods
This article is in response to the headline on the front page of another paper that stated that pressure is being put on the government of Ghana to sanction the growing of Genetically Modified (GM) foods into Ghana. The essence of this article is to give both moral and ethical reasoning for avoiding GM foods.
Contrary to what is being said and the myths that western NGO's have peddled about it, GM Food is extremely dangerous because what the West and their scientists are not telling Afrikans is that GM foods contain poisonous organisms that are dangerous to the body's immune system as they are made with a cross-breed of different species rather than made the organic and natural way.
GM foods are even more deadly than food that is made using pesticides, DDT and other harmful chemicals.
Europe, as a result of these health concerns, has already banned the use of GM foods. In the UK, the heir to the British throne, His Majesty Prince Charles has been a vehement critic of GM foods citing that the science behind it is extremely alarming.
Prince Charles has a team of advisors and scientists who are extremely knowledgeable on this issue.
Furthermore Prince Charles, aware of the dangers GM foods possess, has his own Organic farm in Gloucestershire, where he grows Organic food in accordance with nature and free from dangerous chemicals like pesticides, DDT, fertilizers and so forth. Please read the following article by His Royal Highness from a recent edition of the Daily Mail - a UK based paper
Prince Charles Challenges British Government to Be Scientific Regarding Safety
Prince Charles has launched a scathing attack on genetically-modified products, and the UK Government has responded with annoyance and propaganda rather than science.
"In a recent article in the Daily Mail, Prince Charles poses a series of questions about the safety of GM foods and attacked the lack of independent scientific research. And he rejects the hype that GM crops represent a solution to feeding the world's growing population as a case of "emotional blackmail".
Asserting that the argument sounded "suspiciously like emotional blackmail," the Prince said the countries that could be expected to benefit took a different view.
Representatives of 20 African countries, including Ethiopia, had published a statement denying that gene technologies would help farmers to produce the food they needed.
"They think it will destroy the diversity, the local knowledge and the sustainable agricultural systems . . . and undermine our capacity to feed ourselves," said the Prince.
Deep divisions emerged within the British Government following the Prince's challenge. Although the Prime Minister's spokesman refused to be drawn into a direct clash with the Prince, it was clear there is considerable anger in Whitehall at the way he has re-ignited the debate in Britain on the issue.
The Prince's intervention has delivered a body blow to the government's attempts to re-assure corporations that their people could be made to accept unproven genetically modified crops as safe.
Here are the ten important unanswered questions posed by the Prince:
1. Do we need GM food in this country?
The Prince: The benefits, such as there are seem to be limited to the people who own the technology and the people who farm on an industrialized scale.
2. Is GM food safe for us to eat?
The Prince: Only independent scientific research, over a long period, can provide the final answer.
3. Why are the final rules for approving GM foods so much less stringent than those for new medicines produced using the same technology?
The Prince: Before drugs are released on to the market they have to undergo the most rigorous testing...Surely it is equally important that [GM foods] will do us no harm.
4. How much do we really know about the environmental consequences of GM crops?
Contrary to what is being said and the myths that western NGO's have peddled about it, GM Food is extremely dangerous because what the West and their scientists are not telling Afrikans is that GM foods contain poisonous organisms that are dangerous to the body's immune system as they are made with a cross-breed of different species rather than made the organic and natural way.
GM foods are even more deadly than food that is made using pesticides, DDT and other harmful chemicals.
Europe, as a result of these health concerns, has already banned the use of GM foods. In the UK, the heir to the British throne, His Majesty Prince Charles has been a vehement critic of GM foods citing that the science behind it is extremely alarming.
Prince Charles has a team of advisors and scientists who are extremely knowledgeable on this issue.
Furthermore Prince Charles, aware of the dangers GM foods possess, has his own Organic farm in Gloucestershire, where he grows Organic food in accordance with nature and free from dangerous chemicals like pesticides, DDT, fertilizers and so forth. Please read the following article by His Royal Highness from a recent edition of the Daily Mail - a UK based paper
Prince Charles Challenges British Government to Be Scientific Regarding Safety
Prince Charles has launched a scathing attack on genetically-modified products, and the UK Government has responded with annoyance and propaganda rather than science.
"In a recent article in the Daily Mail, Prince Charles poses a series of questions about the safety of GM foods and attacked the lack of independent scientific research. And he rejects the hype that GM crops represent a solution to feeding the world's growing population as a case of "emotional blackmail".
Asserting that the argument sounded "suspiciously like emotional blackmail," the Prince said the countries that could be expected to benefit took a different view.
Representatives of 20 African countries, including Ethiopia, had published a statement denying that gene technologies would help farmers to produce the food they needed.
"They think it will destroy the diversity, the local knowledge and the sustainable agricultural systems . . . and undermine our capacity to feed ourselves," said the Prince.
Deep divisions emerged within the British Government following the Prince's challenge. Although the Prime Minister's spokesman refused to be drawn into a direct clash with the Prince, it was clear there is considerable anger in Whitehall at the way he has re-ignited the debate in Britain on the issue.
The Prince's intervention has delivered a body blow to the government's attempts to re-assure corporations that their people could be made to accept unproven genetically modified crops as safe.
Here are the ten important unanswered questions posed by the Prince:
1. Do we need GM food in this country?
The Prince: The benefits, such as there are seem to be limited to the people who own the technology and the people who farm on an industrialized scale.
2. Is GM food safe for us to eat?
The Prince: Only independent scientific research, over a long period, can provide the final answer.
3. Why are the final rules for approving GM foods so much less stringent than those for new medicines produced using the same technology?
The Prince: Before drugs are released on to the market they have to undergo the most rigorous testing...Surely it is equally important that [GM foods] will do us no harm.
4. How much do we really know about the environmental consequences of GM crops?
The Prince: Lab tests showing that pollen from GM maize in the United States caused damage to the caterpillars of Monarch butterflies provide the latest cause for concern. More alarmingly, this GM maize is not under test
5. Is it sensible to plant test crops without strict regulations in place?
The Prince: Such crops are being planted in this country now - under a voluntary code of practice. But English Nature has argued that enforceable regulations should be in place first.
6. How will consumers be able to exercise genuine choice?
The Prince: Labeling schemes clearly have a role to play, but if conventional and organic crops are contaminated by GM crops, people who wish to avoid GM food products will be denied choice
7. If something goes wrong with a GM crop, who will be held responsible?
The Prince: It is important that we know precisely who is going to be legally liable to pay for any damage - whether it be to human health, the environment or both.
8. Are GM crops really the only way to feed the worlds growing population?
The Prince: This argument sounds suspiciously like emotional blackmail to me.
9. What effect will GM crops have on the people of world's poorest countries?
The Prince: Where people are starving, lack of food is rarely the underlying cause. The need is to create sustainable livelihoods for everyone. Will GM crops really help or will they make the problems worse?
10. What sort of world do we want to live in?
The Prince: Are we going to allow the industrialization of life itself, re-designing the natural world for the sake of convenience? Or should we be adopting a gentler, more considered approach, seeking always to work with the grain of nature?
The above article from the heir to the British throne poses some very serious questions that Ghanaians should be aware of before we even contemplate the idea of consuming such dangerous food.
An American company called Monsanto has been commissioned to look into the possibility of cultivating GM Food on a large scale in Ghana/Afrika. By the way Monsanto is a biotech company owned by the American elite who are a part of the secret world government, the illuminati.
Monsanto and their monopoly on the GM foods market are very dangerous and they are aggressively targeting the Afrikan market.
For those who want to know more about the dangerous Monsanto Company and the evils of GM food, I recommend you watch the French documentary, called "The world according to Monsanto" directed by independent filmmaker Marie-Monique Robin, which paints a grim picture of a company with a long track record of environmental crimes and health scandals.
After seeing "The world according to Monsanto", Greenpeace International campaigner Geert Ritsema said: Mrs. Robin should be congratulated for revealing the sinister practices of the world's leading producer of genetically engineered seeds. Her film is alarming and should be a call to action for everybody who cares about the quality of our food and a healthy future for our planet."
The above is a very serious warning to those who want to engage in this diabolical practice of cultivating and consuming GM foods in Ghana.
5. Is it sensible to plant test crops without strict regulations in place?
The Prince: Such crops are being planted in this country now - under a voluntary code of practice. But English Nature has argued that enforceable regulations should be in place first.
6. How will consumers be able to exercise genuine choice?
The Prince: Labeling schemes clearly have a role to play, but if conventional and organic crops are contaminated by GM crops, people who wish to avoid GM food products will be denied choice
7. If something goes wrong with a GM crop, who will be held responsible?
The Prince: It is important that we know precisely who is going to be legally liable to pay for any damage - whether it be to human health, the environment or both.
8. Are GM crops really the only way to feed the worlds growing population?
The Prince: This argument sounds suspiciously like emotional blackmail to me.
9. What effect will GM crops have on the people of world's poorest countries?
The Prince: Where people are starving, lack of food is rarely the underlying cause. The need is to create sustainable livelihoods for everyone. Will GM crops really help or will they make the problems worse?
10. What sort of world do we want to live in?
The Prince: Are we going to allow the industrialization of life itself, re-designing the natural world for the sake of convenience? Or should we be adopting a gentler, more considered approach, seeking always to work with the grain of nature?
The above article from the heir to the British throne poses some very serious questions that Ghanaians should be aware of before we even contemplate the idea of consuming such dangerous food.
An American company called Monsanto has been commissioned to look into the possibility of cultivating GM Food on a large scale in Ghana/Afrika. By the way Monsanto is a biotech company owned by the American elite who are a part of the secret world government, the illuminati.
Monsanto and their monopoly on the GM foods market are very dangerous and they are aggressively targeting the Afrikan market.
For those who want to know more about the dangerous Monsanto Company and the evils of GM food, I recommend you watch the French documentary, called "The world according to Monsanto" directed by independent filmmaker Marie-Monique Robin, which paints a grim picture of a company with a long track record of environmental crimes and health scandals.
After seeing "The world according to Monsanto", Greenpeace International campaigner Geert Ritsema said: Mrs. Robin should be congratulated for revealing the sinister practices of the world's leading producer of genetically engineered seeds. Her film is alarming and should be a call to action for everybody who cares about the quality of our food and a healthy future for our planet."
The above is a very serious warning to those who want to engage in this diabolical practice of cultivating and consuming GM foods in Ghana.
Sunday, November 28, 2010
Be Careful about Honey
Honey is the natural sweet substance produced by honey bees from the nectar of blossoms or from secretions of plants.
When visually inspected, the honey shall be free from any foreign matter such as mould, dirt, scum, pieces of beeswax, the fragments of bees and other insects and from any other extraneous matter.
The colour of honey vary from light to dark brown. Standards for honey have been prescribed under Prevention Food Adulteration (PFA) Rules, 1955 as under.
(a) Specific gravity at 27OC Not less than 1.35
(b) Moisture Not more than 25 per cent by mass
(c) Total reducing sugars Not less than 65 per cent by mass
(c-i) for Carbia colossa and Honey dew Not less than 60 per cent by mass
(d) Sucrose Not more than to 5.0 per cent by mass
(d-i) for Carbia colossa and Honey dew Not more than 10 per cent by mass
(e) Fructose-glucose ratio Not less than 0.95
(f) Ash Not more than 0.5 percent by mass
(g) Acidity (Expressed as formic acid) Not more than 0.2 per cent by mass
(h) Fiehe's test Negative
(i) Hydroxy methyl furfural(HMF),
mg/kg Not more than 80
If Fiehe's test is positive, and hydroxy methyl furfural (HMF) content is more than 80 milligram/kilogram, then fructose: glucose ratio should be 1.0 or more.
Rule 44 D provides for restriction on sale of Carbia Callosa and Honey dew. Carbia Collosa and Honey dew shall be sold only in sealed containers bearing AGMARK seal.
Rule 45 specifies that food resembling but not pure honey cannot be marked as honey. No person shall use the word „Honey‟ or any word, mark, illustration or device that suggests „Honey‟ on the label or any package of, or in any advertisement for, any food that resembles honey but is not pure honey.
Violation of the provisions of PFA Act/Rules attracts penal action.
No pesticide residues or antibiotics are allowed in honey.
The maximum limits of heavy metals in various foods are prescribed under PFA
Rules, 1955. Rule 57 of PFA Rules prescribes the limits of contaminants under category
“Foods not specified” (which includes honey) as follows:-
1. Lead Not more than 2.5 ppm
2. Copper Not more than 30.0 ppm
3. Arsenic Not more than 1.1 ppm
4. Tin Not more than 250.0 ppm
5. Zinc Not more than 50.0 ppm
6. Cadmium Not more than 1.5 ppm
7. Mercury Not more than 1.0 ppm
8. Methyl Mercury Not more than 0.25 ppm
Standards of Honey under AGMARK
The Department of Agriculture and Cooperation has laid down standards of honey under the Grading and Marking Rules (AGMARK), which lays down the grades, designation of honey as Special, Grade–A and Standard to indicate the quality of honey for the purpose of certification. It specifies the method of packing, marking and labelling and conditions for grant of certificate for authorization. The standards of AGMARK are
voluntary.
In the matter of admissibility of antibiotics in honey, safety standards in India are similar to those in European Union, Codex Alimentarius and USA where they are completely prohibited.
When visually inspected, the honey shall be free from any foreign matter such as mould, dirt, scum, pieces of beeswax, the fragments of bees and other insects and from any other extraneous matter.
The colour of honey vary from light to dark brown. Standards for honey have been prescribed under Prevention Food Adulteration (PFA) Rules, 1955 as under.
(a) Specific gravity at 27OC Not less than 1.35
(b) Moisture Not more than 25 per cent by mass
(c) Total reducing sugars Not less than 65 per cent by mass
(c-i) for Carbia colossa and Honey dew Not less than 60 per cent by mass
(d) Sucrose Not more than to 5.0 per cent by mass
(d-i) for Carbia colossa and Honey dew Not more than 10 per cent by mass
(e) Fructose-glucose ratio Not less than 0.95
(f) Ash Not more than 0.5 percent by mass
(g) Acidity (Expressed as formic acid) Not more than 0.2 per cent by mass
(h) Fiehe's test Negative
(i) Hydroxy methyl furfural(HMF),
mg/kg Not more than 80
If Fiehe's test is positive, and hydroxy methyl furfural (HMF) content is more than 80 milligram/kilogram, then fructose: glucose ratio should be 1.0 or more.
Rule 44 D provides for restriction on sale of Carbia Callosa and Honey dew. Carbia Collosa and Honey dew shall be sold only in sealed containers bearing AGMARK seal.
Rule 45 specifies that food resembling but not pure honey cannot be marked as honey. No person shall use the word „Honey‟ or any word, mark, illustration or device that suggests „Honey‟ on the label or any package of, or in any advertisement for, any food that resembles honey but is not pure honey.
Violation of the provisions of PFA Act/Rules attracts penal action.
No pesticide residues or antibiotics are allowed in honey.
The maximum limits of heavy metals in various foods are prescribed under PFA
Rules, 1955. Rule 57 of PFA Rules prescribes the limits of contaminants under category
“Foods not specified” (which includes honey) as follows:-
1. Lead Not more than 2.5 ppm
2. Copper Not more than 30.0 ppm
3. Arsenic Not more than 1.1 ppm
4. Tin Not more than 250.0 ppm
5. Zinc Not more than 50.0 ppm
6. Cadmium Not more than 1.5 ppm
7. Mercury Not more than 1.0 ppm
8. Methyl Mercury Not more than 0.25 ppm
Standards of Honey under AGMARK
The Department of Agriculture and Cooperation has laid down standards of honey under the Grading and Marking Rules (AGMARK), which lays down the grades, designation of honey as Special, Grade–A and Standard to indicate the quality of honey for the purpose of certification. It specifies the method of packing, marking and labelling and conditions for grant of certificate for authorization. The standards of AGMARK are
voluntary.
In the matter of admissibility of antibiotics in honey, safety standards in India are similar to those in European Union, Codex Alimentarius and USA where they are completely prohibited.
Sunday, November 7, 2010
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Ban genetically modified crops: Greenpeace India
New Delhi, Oct 19 (IANS) A Greenpeace India delegation Tuesday met the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Agriculture and demanded a ban on Genetically Modified (GM) crops, saying that they were a threat to the country's agriculture, food safety and environment.
The delegation made a presentation before the standing committee and presented evidence and credible publications outlining the threats posed by GM crops.
'We want the committee to make recommendations that will ensure a sustainable future for our farming and act against such false promises like GM crops,' said Rajesh Krishnan, manager of Sustainable Agriculture Campaign, Greenpeace India.
The issue of GM food was included in the 31-member parliamentary committee's agenda after large-scale public interest was built around the Biotech seed industry's attempt to get approval for the first GM food crop Bt Brinjal. However, facing public opposition and scientific opinion going against it, the government suspended it indefinitely.
'It is heartening to see that the standing committee on agriculture has understood the concerns people of this country have regarding GM food and taken a matter so crucial to India with the seriousness it deserves,' Krishnan added.
source: http://sify.com/finance/ban-genetically-modified-crops-greenpeace-india-news-default-kktuEwbbcaf.html (Last Visited on October 20th, 2010)
The delegation made a presentation before the standing committee and presented evidence and credible publications outlining the threats posed by GM crops.
'We want the committee to make recommendations that will ensure a sustainable future for our farming and act against such false promises like GM crops,' said Rajesh Krishnan, manager of Sustainable Agriculture Campaign, Greenpeace India.
The issue of GM food was included in the 31-member parliamentary committee's agenda after large-scale public interest was built around the Biotech seed industry's attempt to get approval for the first GM food crop Bt Brinjal. However, facing public opposition and scientific opinion going against it, the government suspended it indefinitely.
'It is heartening to see that the standing committee on agriculture has understood the concerns people of this country have regarding GM food and taken a matter so crucial to India with the seriousness it deserves,' Krishnan added.
source: http://sify.com/finance/ban-genetically-modified-crops-greenpeace-india-news-default-kktuEwbbcaf.html (Last Visited on October 20th, 2010)
Monday, October 18, 2010
GM Trial
Crop specialists in Kenya and Uganda have laid the groundwork for confined field trials to commence later this year for new varieties of maize genetically modified to survive recurrent droughts that threaten over 300 million Africans for whom maize is life.
Daniel Mataruka, executive director of the African Agricultural Technology Foundation (AATF), who noted this at the World Food Prize Symposium recently, said there is preliminary evidence that the Water Efficient Maize for Africa (WEMA) varieties, which were developed through a public-private partnership, could provide yields between 24 and 35 percent higher than what farmers were now growing.
According to him, scientists working with AATF believe it was important to explore the potential of biotechnology to maintain and increase food production in Africa, given the large number of families dependent on maize, and warnings that maize yields could drop dramatically as climate change increased drought frequency and severity across the continent.
The process for testing the WEMA varieties has been informed by a series of “mock trials” conducted in 2009 in Kenya and Tanzania. These trials carefully simulated field conditions, procedures, and regulatory oversight that will occur in the actual trials.
“The mock trials have provided an opportunity for researchers working on the WEMA project to fine-tune the procedures of carrying out the actual transgenic trial in 2010,” Mataruka said. “There have already been positive gains made in drought tolerance using traditional breeding methods by our partners,” said Mataruka.
“WEMA is working to further increase those gains in drought tolerance in hybrids adapted to eastern and southern Africa through both advanced breeding techniques and biotechnology.”
“Everything we have seen in the simulated trials shows that we can safely test transgenic maize varieties in carefully controlled and confined field trials in Africa and evaluate their potential to produce high yields in drought conditions,” said Dr. James Gethi, the WEMA-Kenya country coordinator.
Drought is the most important constraint to African agricultural production, and its effects are particularly severe on maize, which is the most widely-grown staple on the continent. For millions of small-scale farmers who rely on rainfall to water their crops, risk of crop failure from drought is a major barrier to the adoption of improved farming practices.
A more reliable harvest could give farmers the confidence to invest in improved techniques that could further boost their yields and incomes. The push to develop drought-tolerant varieties has been given added urgency by threats likely to come from climate change.
A study by scientists at the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) warns that by 2050, climate change could make droughts more frequent and intense, potentially causing maize yields to drop by 20 percent or more in parts of East Africa, including northern Uganda and southern Sudan, and semi-arid areas of Kenya and Tanzania.
The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) has acknowledged biotechnology as a powerful tool in the effort to develop drought-tolerant crops. The drought-tolerant WEMA varieties are being developed under a partnership involving AATF, the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), Monsanto, and the national agriculture research systems in Kenya, Tanzania, Mozambique, South Africa and Uganda.
CIMMYT has provided high-yield maize varieties adapted to African conditions, while Monsanto has provided proprietary genetic resources (germplasm), advanced breeding tools and expertise, and drought-tolerant transgenes developed in collaboration with BASF.
According to AATF, experience has shown that the gains possible through advanced breeding and biotechnology are greater and faster than those that can be achieved through breeding alone. If the transgenic corn is found to be safe and successful, the new varieties will be made available to smallholder farmers royalty-free.
source:http://business.peacefmonline.com/news/201010/94362.php (Last Visited on October 19th, 2010)
Daniel Mataruka, executive director of the African Agricultural Technology Foundation (AATF), who noted this at the World Food Prize Symposium recently, said there is preliminary evidence that the Water Efficient Maize for Africa (WEMA) varieties, which were developed through a public-private partnership, could provide yields between 24 and 35 percent higher than what farmers were now growing.
According to him, scientists working with AATF believe it was important to explore the potential of biotechnology to maintain and increase food production in Africa, given the large number of families dependent on maize, and warnings that maize yields could drop dramatically as climate change increased drought frequency and severity across the continent.
The process for testing the WEMA varieties has been informed by a series of “mock trials” conducted in 2009 in Kenya and Tanzania. These trials carefully simulated field conditions, procedures, and regulatory oversight that will occur in the actual trials.
“The mock trials have provided an opportunity for researchers working on the WEMA project to fine-tune the procedures of carrying out the actual transgenic trial in 2010,” Mataruka said. “There have already been positive gains made in drought tolerance using traditional breeding methods by our partners,” said Mataruka.
“WEMA is working to further increase those gains in drought tolerance in hybrids adapted to eastern and southern Africa through both advanced breeding techniques and biotechnology.”
“Everything we have seen in the simulated trials shows that we can safely test transgenic maize varieties in carefully controlled and confined field trials in Africa and evaluate their potential to produce high yields in drought conditions,” said Dr. James Gethi, the WEMA-Kenya country coordinator.
Drought is the most important constraint to African agricultural production, and its effects are particularly severe on maize, which is the most widely-grown staple on the continent. For millions of small-scale farmers who rely on rainfall to water their crops, risk of crop failure from drought is a major barrier to the adoption of improved farming practices.
A more reliable harvest could give farmers the confidence to invest in improved techniques that could further boost their yields and incomes. The push to develop drought-tolerant varieties has been given added urgency by threats likely to come from climate change.
A study by scientists at the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) warns that by 2050, climate change could make droughts more frequent and intense, potentially causing maize yields to drop by 20 percent or more in parts of East Africa, including northern Uganda and southern Sudan, and semi-arid areas of Kenya and Tanzania.
The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) has acknowledged biotechnology as a powerful tool in the effort to develop drought-tolerant crops. The drought-tolerant WEMA varieties are being developed under a partnership involving AATF, the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), Monsanto, and the national agriculture research systems in Kenya, Tanzania, Mozambique, South Africa and Uganda.
CIMMYT has provided high-yield maize varieties adapted to African conditions, while Monsanto has provided proprietary genetic resources (germplasm), advanced breeding tools and expertise, and drought-tolerant transgenes developed in collaboration with BASF.
According to AATF, experience has shown that the gains possible through advanced breeding and biotechnology are greater and faster than those that can be achieved through breeding alone. If the transgenic corn is found to be safe and successful, the new varieties will be made available to smallholder farmers royalty-free.
source:http://business.peacefmonline.com/news/201010/94362.php (Last Visited on October 19th, 2010)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)