The Useful Duck!

Contribute to my Vacation, please...

Sunday, November 2, 2014

Idiots for measure 92

Oregon is voting on an initiative which will require labeling of "genetically modified foods."

I started out in favor of 92 because I believe you should be able to make choices when you buy food. After seeing all big environmental money promoting 92 and realizing it will increase government regulations I am opposed.

I have also now decided that most people opposed to GMO don't even know what they are opposing and are easily manipulated paranoid idiots...

Here are two of the resolutions which were taken from the "Read the Initiative," website posted by Oregon Right to know.

(15) Requiring that foods produced through genetic engineering be labeled as such will create additional market opportunities for producers who are not certified as organic and whose products are not produced through genetic engineering. Such additional market opportunities will also contribute to vibrant and diversified agricultural communities.
This is a lie. Labeling will require certification which will benefit the sort of farmers who love regulations and have the money to pay for the extra certification. Labeling will also benefit environmental groups which can promote their favorite grant supported farms. If you want to know what is in your food then develop a relationship with your local farmer. I'm not going to certify my chicken/pig feed. It is made of barley, peas, flax, and the occasional filbert. If you want certification buy it somewhere else. I don't like to answer my phone anyway.
(16) The cultivation of genetically engineered crops can have serious effects on the environment. For example, in 2013, 93 percent of all soy grown in the U.S. was engineered to be herbicide resistant. In fact, the vast majority of genetically engineered crops are designed to withstand herbicides, and therefore promote indiscriminate herbicide use. As a result, genetically engineered, herbicide resistant crops have caused 527 million pounds of additional herbicides to be applied to the nation’s farmland. These toxic herbicides damage the vitality and quality of our soil, harm wildlife, contaminate our drinking water, and pose health risks to consumers and farmworkers. Further, because of the consequent massive increase in the use of herbicides, herbicide-resistant weeds have developed and flourished, infesting farm fields and roadsides, complicating weed control for farmers, and causing farmers to resort to more and increasingly toxic herbicides.
This is the big one, the whole point of the genetic modifications was to REDUCE herbicide use. Of course the commercial on TV says, "pesticides," which is a lie to make it sound more scary. I suppose they are talking about insect resistance in corn but again, THAT REDUCES THE use of pesticides. 
It does not promote "indiscriminate herbicide use."  It promotes use of ONE herbicide at the rate suggested on the LABEL. If the weeds become resistant then you go back to the herbicide we used before we had the LESS TOXIC herbicide that every one is now afraid of.

People are idiots. They are incapable of basic reasoning skills, they are purposely uniformed and purposely stupid. AND they are dishonest. 
If you are afraid of "Frankenfood" then argue this issue on the dangers of playing GOd with nature. I'm a little afraid of that myself. I use NON genetically modified seed when ever possible. I don't like paying the technology fee, I don't like Monsanto, and I have many more reasons which I could go on for at least an hour...


  1. The mis information out there is just staggering and I really get tired of trying to explain to people with the little bit of knowledge and personal experience I have growing GM crops. I really wish somebody would come up with incontrovertible evidence that GM foods are harmless to us (which I believe to be true). I don't have a problem with Monsanto. Not crazy about the tech fees but its free enterprise and they will charge what the market will bear. Wish we could do that with the crops we grow

    1. incontrovertible evidence that they are either harmful or not harmful. However, people WILL believe what they want to believe so it won't actually change anything.

  2. I voted against 92 for many of the above reasons, but also because it just opens the door for more litigation and would create more governmental bureaucratic interference in our lives. If people don't want to eat food with gmo history in it's origin, they will by food labeled non-gmo, as the folks selling non-gmo will, and are labeling it already, due to the higher price it brings in the market. Like you say: "People are idiots". If they become afraid to eat anything unless they grow it themselves, or it is willingly labeled non-gmo by the producers, is that a bad thing? There may be a market for an ebola-free certified forehead label to sell to the same knee jerk idiots that brought us ethanol in our gas.

  3. Personally, I'm against GMO's, and it IS partly the playing God aspect, and the Frankenfood thing. I'm not sure that more laws is the best way to help, but I DO believe that consumers should have the information available to make informed decisions, if they want.

    1. 1. Being against Genetically modifying plants and in favor of the traditional hybrid breeding program is ok by me. I tend to agree with you.
      2. See Muddy Valley's post above. If consumers want GMO labeling then they will get it, without government regulation. In fact they are getting it without regulation.

  4. Just stopped in to say Hey!!!

  5. If Measure 92 passes, corn and soybeans would appear to lose while wheat and rice win. But what if consumers shrug off the "Genetically Engineered" label, which will presumably have to be stamped across wide swaths of the grocery store?


Please leave a comment even if you are bored or angry

Please leave comments! It is really easy!

You just type your comment in the text box below the post. You can be anyone you want.
And...Would the joker who keeps clicking "offensive" please leave an explanation ?!