Recent comments by: bagheera
Grain of Truth
Thank you for your response to our comments.
"how long out do we have to go with proving something is safe?"
I think we need to look at the history of the Tobacco industry for this one. In reality, nothing is safe in foods and medications unless it has been tested as such by credible independent bodies. There was a time when smoking was good for you - because having TB was much worse! But long term usage has proven otherwise and I strongly believe that GM will prove the same.
Nothing is absolute in nature - I think you are obfuscating natural vs man-made.
There is one other point that should be made:
"GM foods have been available in America for 20-odd years, and if they were as dangerous as has been made out, wouldn’t people be dropping dead everywhere by now? "
Anecdotal and sweeping statements like these are VERY BAD science and demonstrates the opinion of someone who is possibly to not qualified to make such a statement.
While there are many mitigating factors for heatlh and obesity, to exclude GM as a possible causal factor is irresponsible and obstructive to scientific enquiry.
While your raise good points regarding labelling and independent testing - but not by OGTR or FSANZ since they are hardly independent bodies - you missed several others.
1) Compensation for non GM growing farmers, whose crops have been contaminated at any point in the growth or supply chain. This compensation must be paid by Biotech companies in full and be adminstered by an independent ombudsman with binding powers to stop producers facing massive legal costs.
2) An end to calls for "adventitious" GM contamination in non GM products by Biotech companies. GM free means 100% GM free.
A brilliant example of tabloid journalism at it's very worst.
Unresearched, biased, agenda driven and utterly moronic.
It's articles like these that prove conclusively that The Land is an embarassment to the Fairfax stable.
Why don't you go over to the SMH or The Age and learn how real journalism is done? Or do only communists and agrarian socialists deal with facts and truth?
So The Land is calling for FACTUAL AND UNBIASED journalism?
Perhaps The Land might like to lead by example?
No doubt in future for every pro GM article you print, you will also print one each for conventional, sustainable and organic farming methods ??
And no doubt to redress the pro live export agenda in this article you will interview the anti-live export side in an unbiased and factual manner and allow the readers to make up their own minds on the live export debate?
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/pol itics/sometimes-it-takes-a-troll- to-know-one-20120913-25v40.html
So a blogger named Amy hurt your feelings?
Well considering how often you've insulted your readers' intelligence with your opinion pieces, we might consider ourselves somewhat revenged.
Firstly, the kelpie paradigm is irrelevant, the animal has been purchased to work and the owner has a vested interest in its welfare.
Cattle are there to be slaughtered, and it behoves exporters to Third World countries to stipulate humane conditions for transport and slaughter.
Keep your opinions to yourself and stick to factual reporting.
Agribuzz with David Leyonhjelm
DL seems to put forward a disingenuous argument that we should not move to lower intensity egg production because these methods are not optimised. He should well know that with market share increases come efficiencies.
if had we applied his kind of logic to the model T Ford we'd still be riding horses since they were the proven technology. Its time for the egg industry to embrace change in an open minded and mature manner.
http://www.politifact.com.au/trut h-o-meter/statements/2013/sep/13/ david-leyonhjelm/did-howards-fire arms-reforms-have-impact-gun-deat h/
So we sell all our land to foreign interests so THEY can feel more secure?
>>bizarre conspiracy theories
You should talk. Or don't you remember your shark jumping column on Fabian Socialists?
BTW since when is some Tea Party trash ex vet from DRUMMOYNE an expert opinion on rural matters?
I think you should also write an article about the immorality of subsidising any business with taxpayers' money. And the immorality about subsidising private education and private health with public money.
Tony Abbott's idea of paying polluter's not to pollute is immoral. They should be trading carbon credits on the free market.
"Free speech goes too – they want advertising of “junk” food to children banned, without telling us what junk means."
My understanding is that advertising is commercial speech, not free speech David.
And you don't know what the term "junk food" means? Really? Have you tried Google?
"I’d say it might depend on whether it is sold by a large American company."
And you have the facts to support that?
So David I'm confused, are you saying you support harming children's health through unfettered junk food marketing targeted at kids???
Having walked extensively over the so called National Parks in England, and in Canada and the US, it is plain to see that David has no idea what he is talking about and that the comparisons are irrelevant.
The drongo element, having wrecked its own farms with poor land and businesss management will leap upon his suggestions as if destroying pristine wilderness will deliver them profits.
So it's David's considered opinion is that it's OK to engage in deceptive marketing practices?
>>the animal rights faction
** LURKING ** in the ACCC
And his well researched analysis leads him to conclude that farming is under personal attack by communists? And the ACCC is infiltrated by Vegans and Fabian Socialists?
(I am beginning to think these articles are supposed to be satirical.....)
>>the ACCC could go back to doing things that actually matter.
Protecting consumers from liars and spivs is doing things that actually matter.
Whining, self serving BS from DL, served hot from the microwave.
" issue of noxious weed control on my farm"
"The fault is not specifically with the local council"
No, the fault lies with the property owner. That would be you.
Shame on the editor who permitted this guff to be printed.
David proves himself to be a complete ass, yet again.
Yet another self serving article by David.
The connection made was based on the style of propaganda, lies, one-eyed relentless attack on those who don’t agree and failure to see the eventual broader effects of their actions....
Yeah, it does. It's the kind of fascism promoted by Libertarians, psychotic shock jocks and the Murdoch press.
If you had said that AA behaved like Alan Jones you might have been more accurate.
Why don't you write an op-ed on how agenda driven advertorial, biased and unfactual jounalism is destroying democracy?
Offensive and ignorant article.
Sam, I didn't realise that AA was rounding up people and sending them to the gas chambers.
Thanks for clarifying that.
Women could go further in every field of endeavour if only they wore blue ties.
"Because it’s produce that will keep us alive, not the environment."
So we don't need oxygen? We don't need water?
Where do you think these resources come from?
We're just going to farm these are we?
An ignorant statement which puts greed before scientific reality.
You don't seem to understand that without a healthy environment you won't have healthy agriculture.
In fact as a species we won't exist.
The environment and agriculture are not separate entities.
Has it ever occured to you that broad acre monocultures may not be the way to feed humanity?
"I think JC was a leftie"
That society should perceive Jesus Christ and his message as being "Left Wing" is a fair indication of how the churches have failed their communities.
No wonder people are leaving.
Another good article Sam
"Our brand doesn’t fill our consumers with confidence, pride or faith. "
You can thank agricultural corporatisation for that.
Coles is not culturally rich, nor does it have much of a value system, unless screwing over producers and customers alike is a value system.
" makes us vulnerable to activist groups and alike."
When animal cruelty like sow stalls can be justified as an economic necessity; when intensive lobbying to have "free range" mean 20k birds/ha, Ag undermines its own credibilty and exposes itself to well deserved ridicule.
As a proud supporter of Australian produce I welcome all calls for clearer labelling of foodstuffs. I have no problem calling companies to determine the exact country of origin.
It goes without saying that products containing GMOs should also be clearly labelled. It is our right as consumers to know what and where our food comes from.
Btw Good on Choice!
A matter of opinion
Tell me, whose "idealism" caused the shutdown in the US? The tree huggers' or the Libertarians'?
You never seem to trouble to get the other side of the story in any conflict. Why don't you interview the protesters, maybe they have something legitimate to say.
You could then write an unbiased and factual article and let the readers make up their own minds.
All in the name of good journalism :)
I would also suggest the industry work with leading chefs to develop a good quality product if you want to reach out to consumers.
Asinine king of the donkey votes first act is to rip off the taxpayers.
Btw DL is NOT a liberal, he's a LIBERTARIAN. Ripping off taxpayers should be expected from any Ayn Randian flack.
What is the easiest way to dismiss someone's legitimate claims?
Claim that they are extremists!
to every farmer who voted in abbott, as you sow, so shall you now reap.
Big Biotech and Agrichemicals wanting to support biodiversity seems a lot like Big Tobacco wanting to support respiratory health initiatives.
Feeding the world is not a single solution; population control, preventing urbanisation of farmland, stopping rampant food wastage, pollution and run off, water conservation, replacing inefficient monocultures with other crop types or technologies plus many other issues all have to addressed first.
"good growth plan"
Good *sales* growth plan.
I like! Plus any policy that educates consumers on food provenance is a good one as it will teach consumers to understand and respect what goes into producing their food.
The Greens should introduce a referendum on GM foods and let the people choose for themselves.
It's called dumping the carbon economy.
And Big Biotech is all about compassion. If you think Monsanto gives a damn about the poor and their vitamin deficiencies then more fool you.
This is all about patents on staple crops to further rob the poor.
Most famines in Africa are caused by civil unrest and political incompetence. Not from a lack of suitable bananas.
If the Cass and others would like to follow Em's suggestion, this might be a start
Brilliant video, clear and concise. This should be the subject of a national television campaign educating consumers about the impacts of their choices.
I am sure consumers want to do the right thing by dairy producers and once they can see what the duopoly are doing to rural families many will modify their purchasing behaviours accordingly.
Consumers have a right to know and support local producers as much as possible.
Food producers must, as a priority educate consumers that price is a poor metric when making food purchases.
We should be eating less and better.
Quality, seasonality and taste are more important. Regional and seasonal variation should be embraced.
Why do the French have a regional appellation system and not us?
"little of Australia's total milk volume goes into its cheap house-branded bottles."
That's because Coles brand milk would be largely water and permeate. One doesn't get quality for $1.
A huge win for consumers and dedicated producers alike.
A terrible blow for The Land, of course. After all you took it upon yourselves to try and shove 20k hens/ha down consumers' throats and to serve up such utter garbage as this:
http://www.theland.com. au/blogs/agribuzz-with-david-leyo nhjelm/we-know-what-egg-consumers -want/2633808.aspx
Maybe a NEUTRAL and FACTUAL position might suit you better next time.
Or better yet, act as a real conduit to bring city consumers and farmers together.
Having been banned in a major economy, the accelerated push of GM in other countries is reminiscent of Big Tobacco and Big Pharma dumping obselete product into less protected countries.
Good on the EU for standing by its citizens and putting its sovereign rights before Monsanto's profits.
To the suckers who plant GM crops:
It's good to see what has been observed anecdotally in Organics is now being backed up by science.
"CropLife Australia CEO Matthew Cossey said the anti-GM advertising material was “false, misleading and deceptive”. "
The pro GM lobby have been engaged in false and misleading advertising of their product for decades.
It's natural they should be upset when another group steals their moves.
Hilarious troll Daw. 100 dams with no rainfall because of climate change to fill the rivers that feed them!!
Ha ha ha ha love it!
"The experience with canola in this country is a good case study of giving the market freedon to chose- choice to grow and choice to eat"
MonnE60, exactly how were consumers given the choice to eat?
Because GM contaminated mayonaises etc were not labelled as such, that's how.
Consequently the consumer did not know what they were eating and were denied their choice.
Put some labels on the GM stuff and then see how the consumers exercise their choices.
Agree with Meaning above. You need to identify clearly the the percentages GM/non GM in your article.
Consumers have an absolute right not to eat GM contaminated foodstuffs and have a right to know how much of each is being grown.
Pro GM schmucks spouting the same religious bilge about the "benefits" of GM
Good for the environment? WRONG!
Monarch butterflies have suffered severe declines in populations due to the wholesale use glyphosphates on milkweed and the toxic contamination of Bt corn pollen.
Reduced herbicide use?
http://www.sc iencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/1 21002092839.htm
WRONG! Now we have superweeds. But that's more money for Monsanto.
http://www.guardian .co.uk/science/2005/jul/25/gm.foo d
BTW where is this increased GM yields data coming from?
This article proudly sponsored by Bayer CropScience.
Can we have the links to the 300 independent studies cited by Monsanto?
Here are some pics shown in the DT
http://www.dailytelegraph. com.au/news/france-to-probe-cance r-link-to-genetically-modified-co rn/story-e6freuy9-1226477704690
"the State government re-wrote the rules in the miners' favour"
My understanding is that State Liberal did that.
http://www.smh.com.au/n sw/economy-trumps-environment-in- new-mining-guidelines-20130729-2q u4i.html
Good to see the sceptics still can't tell the difference between climate and weather.
I for one am tired of sceptic BS "oh the weather's fine in my backyard - AGW must be false".
Ignorami like Mott cause more problems than they are worth.
No straw man Ian, you, like your creationist buddies, consider real science to be a consipiracy against the free thinking. You and the creationists both have secret access to the Real Information, which no one else on the planet seems to be able to observe, measure or reproduce, except those same hysterical organizations who promote these kinds guff.
As for Bill P - a primer. Read it before you resort to shrieking insults which demostrate the paucity of your arguments.
http://www.csiro.a u/en/Outcomes/Climate/Understandi ng/Climate-is-changing.aspx
Have another graph from the same source.
http://nsidc.org/arct icseaicenews/files/2000/12/Figure 3.png
Ian Mott, given that scientific fact doesn't seem to work for you, have you thought of working in PR for the Christian Fundamentalists?
You know: flat earth, 4000 years old, baramins, whole universe created in 7 x 24 hr days etc etc
You'd be a natural!
Ian Mott, if you want people to think that you are an uncouth fool, then you are certainly going the right way about it.
As for the article, this, if successful, is some of the smartest thinking I've seen for a while. The use of wild fish stocks as feed in tuna et al fattening tanks is riduculous and should be replaced asap with some kind of product from a cradle to grave land based industry.
Thanks for the article.
Please, it is in everyone's interest to have a healthy Murray - Darling river system. After all Biodiversity = Productivity.
The river is not there to support unsustainable farming practices. If you have been lead on before by unsustainable water allocations, you have all my sympathy. However if you grow crops in areas that have to have high inputs, maybe you are growing the wrong crop for the location.
It's time to take a reality check and work with the environment and not against it.
Thank you Mr Kinnear for this excellent rebuttal to Mr Leyonhjelm's silly, inaccurate and falsely emotive article.
Mr Leyonhjelm, consumers who exercise their democratic rights not to eat GM food does not make us selfish.
"An increasing number of Australians prefer a less chemical world" Then an increasing number of Australians are demonstrating their ignorance. Everything is a chemical. Every single thing."
Spare us the sophistry.
Oh come on!
Politicians will never acknowledge anthropegenic climate change because then they would HAVE TO DO SOMETHING.
We've already had two previous anthropogenic environmental problems researched and dealt with in a global effort - CFCs and sulphur emissions - why can't we kick over to green energy and do something about CO2?
Spain's baseload solar energy station is a beauty! And this technology will only get cheaper over time.
http://www.forbes.com/s ites/tonyseba/2011/06/21/the-worl ds-first-baseload-247-solar-power -plant/
GM + bananas = filth
"World's eighth most important crop in terms of production and value"
What it's really about.
"climate change is going to have a massive impact in the future"
Gee isn't AGW a lie propagated by organic communists?
The social benefits of GM? What might they be?
Yet another example of snake oil salesmen telling lies to make a buck
Bill Gates would not be involved if he couldn't make a buck from this.
It's not about health, it's all about food patents.
"Part of this could be put down to the Queensland University of Technology’s (QUT) open research policy, and inclusion of the industry. "
So "open research" means excluding the consumer?
Productivity gains to be had by working with the soil and not against it?
MPs and Ag Depts should be demanding greater farmer education when it comes to not killing the soil with fertilizers, herbicides, insecticides etc
More power to Ian and Jodi for thinking outside the box.