Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast
Results 201 to 250 of 311

Thread: Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)

  1. #201
    AR Activist Roxy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    South Australia
    Posts
    4,977

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    Quote scorpy
    I have yet to hear anything close to nice about Monsanto. And yes, they are thoroughly exploiting farmers in developing countries. I have started writing to people there to avoid/stop using their crap. I need to speed up the process. Thanks for the reminder
    Monsanto are pure evil. I base this on everything that I have read about them.

  2. #202
    Jon Cousins
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Glastonbury UK
    Posts
    18

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    I'm with you Roxy, but where are the Vegan Society?

    Jon

  3. #203
    cross barer
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    melbourne
    Posts
    661

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    I don't see how anybody who eats anything other than 100% organic food can consider non-animal soucred GM food as not vegan. The issue is exactly the same as the use of pesticides/herbicides/fungicides... they are tested on animals and are bad for the environment.

    Unless you only ever eat certified organic food you are supporting the pesticide industry, companies like *gasp* Monsanto .
    So does that mean that anyone who ever eats out is not vegan? I think not. If the vegan society endorses food that is not 100% organic, they would be hypocrites to not endorse GM foods that contain no animal genes.

  4. #204
    Ex-admin Korn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    4,830

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    Quote Michael Benis
    Why not?

    I'll try and set one up now.

    Cheers

    Mike

    PS: Well that was a disaster: I went into the Polls section, but couldn't figure out how to do it! Duh....
    Just post me the questions, and I'll set it up for you.In some cases it might be a good idea to discuss the reply options in a thread first (I normally do that) - we have a long history of polls with either missing or confusing reply-options!
    I will not eat anything that walks, swims, flies, runs, skips, hops or crawls.

  5. #205
    Jon Cousins
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Glastonbury UK
    Posts
    18

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    "So does that mean that anyone who ever eats out is not vegan? I think not. If the vegan society endorses food that is not 100% organic, they would be hypocrites to not endorse GM foods that contain no animal genes."



    I am, at best, trying to be vegan.



    I am part of a car share scheme, and when I drive, insects, flies, etc., will be killed. My only truly vegan form of transport are my vegan powered limbs, which I use as far as possible.



    I only buy soil association organic, local fruit and veg form small scale suppliers - as a vegan this seems to be my only option. This is very difficult, and GMOs are making life even more difficult, Bio-tech businesses are making my vegan life really difficult.



    Unlike my transport situation, where I have a choice to use my vegan alternative, I am VERY concerned that my vegan diet is in extreme peril from GMOs and the companies that produce them.



    Surely this is one Pandora's Box vegans must fight to keep closed. Our way of life is under threat!



    I want my vegan life to be easier. This is why I am so upset with the Vegan Society's GM Policy.



    Like splitting the atom, or heating up the environment, this is a once only situation. NO GOING BACK. Unlike splitting the atom or heating up the environment - GMOs will directly affect what I can eat as a vegan.



    If we don't make this a priority issue, ALL OUR FOOD WILL BE CONTAMINATED WITH ANIMAL GENES. These businesses aren't interested in our vegan way of life, how could they be with the dreadful things they do? Last year 62,000 mutated animals were born in the UK as a result of gene experiments, many with added human genes. Human genes have been added to cows, pigs, rabbits, sheep and fish.

    As a vegan I am begging you as vegans to wake up! PLEASE!

  6. #206
    Michael Benis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Brighton, UK
    Posts
    195

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    Quote Korn
    Just post me the questions, and I'll set it up for you.In some cases it might be a good idea to discuss the reply options in a thread first (I normally do that) - we have a long history of polls with either missing or confusing reply-options!
    Thanks, Korn. I'd propose rewording Jon's original question as follows:

    Would you support [vote Yes or No] asking the Vegan society to change its statement about GMOs, which currently reads:

    "In keeping with its vegan ethic, the Vegan Society is totally against the use of animal genes or animal substances in the development and production of GMOs.
    The Vegan Society believes that all foods that contain, may contain, or have involved GMOs should be clearly labelled.
    In addition any product must also meet the Society's Criteria for Vegan Food. Products carrying the Society's trademark can contain GMOs, but must be clearly labelled and comply with the definition above."

    changing the last sentence and adding a further sentence as follows:


    "Products carrying the Society's trademark cannot contain GMOs. Genetically Modified products or products containing Genetically Modified ingredients are not acceptable to the Vegan Society because the Society believes it is impossible to guarantee that such products are completely in accordance with the Society's vegan principles."

    Any other proposals before Korn does his usual hard work?

    Cheers

    Mike



  7. #207
    Stormypagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    The beautiful Cumbria in the U
    Posts
    58

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    To me the VS's policy on GM food is yet another acceptance of Gm food, the more people that U turn on it, the more it will become mainstream. It's like many things, the media goes mad on it's faults, and supermarkets etc pick up on it, and follow suit, and then it goes quiet, people forget, and slowly but surely these scary things become normal.

    Yes, I agree about the organic side of things to a degree but actually you would have to eat veganic food and there are few farmers that grow veganically (organically with no use of animal products) either way unless you eat veganically, you are stuffed for being 100% vegan. Just plain organic food is still grown using chicken manure and other animal products.

    But I guess we do what we can do, to be vegan as much as possible, I don't think its possible to be 100% vegan unless you are a naked hermit, with no pocessions, that lives in the wilderness eating only what nature provide free!!! Even then I am sure there would be something non vegan about that!! Wow, I am on a negative tonight :0/

    Love and light
    Xxxx Stormy xxxX

  8. #208

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Uk, Reading, Emmer Green
    Posts
    133

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    I think we need to break the problem down a bit to understand what the issues are. This may be a bit long winded but I've tried .....

    What is the Vegan Society here for?

    * To eliminate animals from the human food chain and to seek the removal of products that contain animal material or have been tested on animals.

    I expect we all agree on that.

    The next question is:

    What is vegan food or a vegan product?
    Such items do not contain animal material, are not tested on animals and have not directly required any animal materials for their production.

    I expect we all generally agree with that, but the word directly is troublesum - ALL products will have a contribution from another product or service that has used animal materials, only if it is the breakfast of the guy that maintains the road that the delivery truck MUST use to get the product to the shop. It is always a question of how far back we take the principle. For pragmatic reasons we say directly.

    The next question is:

    Why do we want to do the above? Why is being vegan good?

    * Because it reduces harm to other animals.
    * It is kinder to the environment.
    * It has a positive on human health.

    These are not the definition veganism, they are the consequences of it - you need to appricated the difference.

    It does not follow that a particular vegan product will be kinder to the environment nor that it will have a positive effect on human health. (I'm sure you can all think of examples), but it will still be vegan as it does not use animal materials. It also does not follow that a particular vegan product will be the kindest or the most positive. There maybe an animal product that perform better in certain circumstances.

    So, we get to GMOs. Firstly a bit of DNA is not a bit of animal or a bit of plant, its just a bit of DNA, in the same way a bit of calcium is just a bit of calcium. But we may be concered of where it came from. The same piece of DNA may come multiple sources.

    Taking DNA from plant is no different, from a vegan perspective, then a whole leaf, it is just more difficult. Any derived product would contains no animal products. That product may have terrible consequences for the eniviroment, but being good for the enviroment is not the definition of a vegan product.

    I, personally do not like GMO products, not because I dislike the science, but because I do not trust the motivations of those developing the technology and the products.

    I would like not to see GMOs in Vegan Society trademarked products but it would not be because of my vegan principle, it would be because of my enivironmental principles.

    The next question is, and it is the BIG one:

    Should the VS have policies on it trade mark that are not related to the definition of veganism?

    (For example, if Ford requested the trademark for a vegan car, would we disallow it because we don't like cars and their enviromental impact, which is much much much much bigger than GMOs?)

    Before we can answer the GMO question or the Ford question, we need to answer the BIG one .....

  9. #209
    Michael Benis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Brighton, UK
    Posts
    195

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    The vegan society already excludes contact lenses, for example, from the Animal Free Shopper because their development involves animal testing.


    Does that answer your question? it means a precendent has already been set in this respect, making it clear that the society's stance isn's just a matter of ingredients, but of development.

    Also, a bit of DNA is not a bit of DNA any more than flesh is just a lump of carbon compounds. The origin comes into this, too, as does any linked suffering. That's what the ethics is about.

    Cheers

    Mike

  10. #210

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Uk, Reading, Emmer Green
    Posts
    133

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    Hi Micheal

    Quote Michael Benis
    The vegan society already excludes contact lenses, for example, from the Animal Free Shopper because their development involves animal testing.
    Does that answer your question? it means a precendent has already been set in this respect, making it clear that the society's stance isn's just a matter of ingredients, but of development.
    It does not say "development", it says testing, p70 of 7th edition. One could happily argue that the testing is part of the development, but I think the distinction is made to allow us to use safety belts, plasters, anything that uses satellite technology and medical books etc and this is the reason I went on about "directy". No doubt all vitamins supplements have been tested on animals, at some point. Its a difficult one and it is the vegan compromise to live in our current society. How pure should/can we be?

    The development of GMO does not imply the use animals. All GMO science required for plants could have been done purely on plants. I know of a vegetarian GMO scientist who has never used animals, beetroots mainly.

    Also, a bit of DNA is not a bit of DNA any more than flesh is just a lump of carbon compounds.
    A piece of DNA can exist outside of animal, and piece of DNA can be removed with no harm, (your keybaord is convered with it), an identical piece of DNA can come from a plant or an animal (in some cases). A piece of flesh has none of these attributes, it IS the animal.

    The origin comes into this, too, as does any linked suffering. That's what the ethics is about.
    Granted.

    What about the final question I posed? Where do you stand on that? There have been attempts in the past to bring spirituallity, abortion issues etc into the core of the Society .... I know some have even tried to have a non-wind farm stance.

  11. #211
    Michael Benis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Brighton, UK
    Posts
    195

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    Hi Stevie,

    Your big question is quite right, namely "Should the VS have policies on its trade mark that are not related to the definition of veganism?"

    Historically and for a variety of reasons, mostly to do with keeping polemics to a minimum and keeping as broad a "church" as possible, the answer has been no, and that's been a wise choice on the whole. But if we go back to your answer and Jon's original question we find they have two things in common: "GMOs may not have anything to do with animals" is essentially what you are saying, while John's position is the mirror image of it, namely that it is impossible to guarantee that GMOs comply with vegan principles (related to the definition of veganism). That being the case, it would seem to me to be logical that the society does not put its symbol on them or act in a way enabling any other form of endorsement to be inferred.

    Cheers

    Michael

    BTW, as I understand it the animal testing involved in contact lenses regards their development (and that of associated fluids) in particular, rather than their production.

  12. #212

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Uk, Reading, Emmer Green
    Posts
    133

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    Quote Michael Benis
    Hi Stevie,
    namely that it is impossible to guarantee that GMOs comply with vegan principles (related to the definition of veganism).
    Then the problem is how "pure" do we make our veganism? The examples I gave of other technologies that have used, but were not required to use , animals is vast. For example, safety belt systems used animals for testing before the universal adoption of crash test dummies? If we have a general principle of "impossible to guarantee" then we should equally apply the rules to everything, not just to the hot subject of the moment. As I said, I do not like GMO's but I would also not want to go down a road that would allow, philosophically, the introduction of labeling a large number of every day items as being non-vegan.

    If the VS was to introduce such a policy, it would need to clearly state it was for potential environment concerns, not vegan ones. This would not be a problem if it were taken under a broader statement of its own Enviromental Policy, - (green electrics, recyling) which I think we would all welcome. But such a policy would not enter the Articles of Association.

    How would that sound?

  13. #213
    Jon Cousins
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Glastonbury UK
    Posts
    18

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    Vegan is an Ideal.

    Ideal Vegans do not eat honey. I have met many people claiming to be vegans who do eat honey who are members of the Vegan Society. That is their choice.

    Ideal Vegans do no use leather products. I have met many people professing veganism who do wear leather, use leather who are members of the Vegan Society. That is their choice.

    Ideal Vegans would not use products tested on animals. I know too many people who claim to be vegan who smoke, use seat belts, use paints, perfume, etc., etc., who are members of the Vegan Society. That is their choice.

    These vegans ARE vegans. Just like me - they are people trying to achieve an Ideal.

    My personal vegan ethics, way of life, thoughts and actions have nothing to do with anyone else's definition.

    Fortunately, the Vegan Society is not a human being. It has aims and objectives that are beyond the capacity of people (that is why the wording 'as far as is possible and practical' is included). But it does stand for an Ideal.

    It stands "to further knowledge of and interest in sound nutrition".
    It stands for "increasing the potential of the earth to the physical, moral and economic advantage of mankind".

    These things it stands for are through veganism and the vegan method of agriculture.

    The Vegan Society already sees DNA from animals as non-Vegan. GMOs are an issue because the Society already has a GMO policy.

    My question is simply: why not develop that policy to include all GMOs?

    Then, Ideal Vegans would not consume or use products containing GMOs. And I would still meet many people calling themselves Vegans who would continue to consume and use products containing GMOs. That would be OK. That is their choice.

    What would be different is that the Vegan Society would not endorse GMOs. Still leaving the final choice to individuals as it does now.

    If the final choice is down to us, what harm could their be in the Vegan Society being the best it can be. Standing for (as always) an IDEAL!

  14. #214

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Uk, Reading, Emmer Green
    Posts
    133

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    Quote Jon Cousins
    The Vegan Society already sees DNA from animals as non-Vegan. GMOs are an issue because the Society already has a GMO policy.

    My question is simply: why not develop that policy to include all GMOs?

    Then, Ideal Vegans would not consume or use products containing GMOs. And I would still meet many people calling themselves Vegans who would continue to consume and use products containing GMOs. That would be OK. That is their choice.
    What I've tried to establish here is what is the general principle we are using to reject GMO from trademarked goods and why that principle would not be applied to other goods we are happy use.

    That principle would have to state why a practice was not compatible with veganism - what things were compatible and which were not. It can not be along the line of just barring something we don't like for other reasons.

    So far, the issue of GMOs, in principle, is no worse than many of things we accept, from a vegan perspective regardless of how much I may dislike them. Why not enforce fair trade as well?

    On a different and practical issue, how would this new policy on GMOs effect the income generated by the trademark for the Society? We may lose so many trademark holders that it would impact the good the Society does.

    Companies like the VeganStore, use many American goods which are very likely to have GMOs in them.

  15. #215
    Jon Cousins
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Glastonbury UK
    Posts
    18

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    I couldn't agree more - Fair Trade organic seems to be the most possible and practical ethical choice for me.

    "On a different and practical issue, how would this new policy on GMOs effect the income generated by the trademark for the Society? We may lose so many trademark holders that it would impact the good the Society does."

    This is something I have wondered about. "When the money starts rolling in you don't ask how."

    Very interesting point you are making:

    Loss of revenue Vs a philosophy and a way of living that seeks to exclude - as far as possible and practical - all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to animals, etc.

    As for the principle - why not the same as that for animal testing? Why not try this question - "The feeding of animals GMOs (from whatever origin); is it exploitation or cruelty?"

    Or does it become a separate issue from veganism if the Society suffers loss of revenue.

    What next? endorsement of animal products that come from creatures which have died of natural causes? I could very easily argue for that one if my motivation was income... Seems a bit dodgy to me.

    Surely the Society stands for the highest principles "for the benefit of humans, animals and the environment." I can not believe that the use of non-animal GMOs is a vegan-suitable animal-free alternative.

    If the Society endorses 'animal-free alternatives' that are detrimental, exploitative, and dangerous to humans, animals and the environment where does that leave us?

  16. #216

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Uk, Reading, Emmer Green
    Posts
    133

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    When I mentioned Free Trade, I meant it to an example of the next possible thing we burdon the trademark with - so it has to be vegan, GMO and FreeTrade - ops there goes Redwoods and Alpro and ....

    If the Vegan Society was to have more and more added to the definition of what was regarded as vegan, we would have no trademark holders and no members! We would have a never ending list of "ethical" standards to which the poor trademark holders would have to abide by, and us vegans would be obliged to follow also.

    How about, they must use a green energy source, they must have union respresentation, they must have creche facilities, they must have a representive proportions of ethnic races in their employment, they must not use cars, they must, nor their suppliers, be involved in any form of animal abuse (this includes the guy who drives the trunk would like tuna fish sandwiches), they must use recycled materials, they must be a not-for-profit organisation, they must be pro/anti abortion, they must be Christain/Muslim/secular, they must vote Green/Anachists, they must produce whole food products, they must have minimal packaging, the food must be raw, they must not be living in sin, they ....... just add what you think is a virtue.

    As I've said, unless you can state a principle that you are making the decisions on, then it just becomes a wish list.

    All of you would have had the "you must be even more vegan" argument but against you. It goes, "well, if you don't eat animals, well you shouldn't drive a car because that squashes flies etc". Do we wish to do the same to the Vegan Society - must it carry every virtue, while Company X has none? As was said, veganism is an ideal - should the VS have to carry them all, or should we be using other organisations to fight those other causes? If you want a Vegan GMO-free product should you not just be looking the VS trade mark and the Organic trademark?

    Concerning principles and revenue - it would be easy to take that argument to its logical conclusion and make us all unemployed.

  17. #217
    Jon Cousins
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Glastonbury UK
    Posts
    18

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    I don't believe adopting a GMO policy that could be worded like this:

    "Genetically Modified products or products containing Genetically Modified ingredients are not acceptable to the Vegan Society because the Society believes it is impossible to guarantee that such products are completely in accordance with the Society's vegan principles."

    would open up the flood gates to banning products where "the guy who drives the trunk would like tuna fish sandwiches" - even though I personally don't like the thought of the truck driver doing so - or any of the other things StevieP suggested.

    It hasn't done for the Vegetarian Society, so why should it for the Vegan Society?

    So why not follow the Vegetarian's lead?

  18. #218

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Uk, Reading, Emmer Green
    Posts
    133

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    Quote Jon Cousins
    because the Society believes it is impossible to guarantee that such products are completely in accordance with the Society's vegan principles.
    Perhaps the whole problem lies in "impossible to guarantee"?

    Assuming that principle is "containing or directly using animal products", what we need to understand if the impossibility is true or not, and I guess we need someone on the forum with more technical knowledge than I to asses that. Then we need to understand, if that same level of "impossible to guarantee" is also applicable to other products we are quiet happy with.

    So, do we need to actual state organic as a vegan requirement?

    Concerning the Vegetarian Society. I think you will find that many vegetarian do not abind by the free range, or vegetable renet cheese requirements, let alone GM.

    You may also be interest to know that the Vegetarian Society DOES support GMOs:

    "The Society will continue to endorse cheese developed using genetic engineering. Approximately 70 - 80% of UK produced cheese is now suitable for vegetarians. Vegetarian cheese was developed over ten years ago and has been commercially available since 1991. "

    Their justification for their stance is also unclear:
    "The Society finds unacceptable any form of genetic engineering that has a detrimental effect on the environment, on the health of individuals or on the welfare of animals. "

    Which is not the same as "The Society finds unacceptable any form of genetic engineering". That being so, any GMO that does NOT have a detrimental effect is OK.

    Furthor more, the principle the Veg Society is using is: "The Society finds unacceptable X that has a detrimental effect on the environment, on the health of individuals or on the welfare of animals. ", where X is the product or service under scrutiny. In that case X could be cars, or tourists, alcohol, coke etc.

    Do we really want something as sloopy as this for the Vegan Society? Don't get me wrong, I think its fab the Vegetarian Society does not like GM, but its reasoning is wrong and has nothing to do with vegetarianism, ( anything more than many other products).

    Regardless, it does make something correct to do just because someone else has.

  19. #219
    Michael Benis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Brighton, UK
    Posts
    195

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    Stevie,

    I'm not sure where you're going with this.

    Absolutely no one in this thread has advocated "bolting-on" other ethical concerns to the Vegan Soc. mark or eligibility for inclusion in the Animal-Free Shopper.

    Likewise, although your examples of, say seat belts, are intersting, they overlook the fact that the AFS can only provide information, whereas the mark is an endorsement and therefore needs to be risk-free. Of course there are grey areas of compormise - we can't help that in a sick society and we go along with it - otherwise not only would we not wear contact lenses and seat belts, but we wouldn't drive cars or put tyres on our bicycles or accept blood transfusions.

    But it's worth exploring the difference between something in AFS and something with the VS mark. Let's take Tofutti products as an example. I do not believe they should be included in the AFS because the company explicitly states (in their website FAQ - and all kudos to them for being honest) that they cannot guarantee whether the sugar they use is refined using bone charcoal or not. So there's a risk. Some may consider that risk of animal abuse to be acceptable and others not. Some may defend keeping Tofutti products that contain sugar in AFS. On the other hand I would hope there is a much broader consensus against these products having a VS mark (which they don't, although that is not - as far as I am aware - the result of any application by Tofutti or any refusal by the VS).

    But let's not forget the great work that many of the founders and early members of the Vegan Society fought to have cosmetics that were not only free of all animal ingredients, but also not tested on animals. That is the same principle the society continues to apply to contact lenses and lens solutions, which are made entirely of animal-free ingredients.

    I don't think we should be taking steps backwards so as to avoid causing problems regarding products made by companies that use GMO products. Irrespective of whether certain GMO ingredients contain no animal-derived products, it is a fact that it is impossible to guarantee that the development, testing and production of these products in general doesn't involve cruelty to animals, particularly since GMO practices are not transparent and not regulated in the same way as additives (e.g. E numbers).

    If it were possible, I would be in agreement with you and not oppose the VS position although I am opposed to GMOs.

    I hope that makes my position clearer.

    Cheers

    Mike

  20. #220
    Michael Benis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Brighton, UK
    Posts
    195

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    Quote StevieP
    Assuming that principle is "containing or directly using animal products"
    I think it would be more accurate to assume that the principle also includes tested on animals...


    Cheers

    Mike

  21. #221
    Jon Cousins
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Glastonbury UK
    Posts
    18

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    Quote StevieP
    Do we really want something as sloopy as this for the Vegan Society? Don't get me wrong, I think its fab the Vegetarian Society does not like GM, but its reasoning is wrong and has nothing to do with vegetarianism, (anything more than many other products).
    I couldn't agree more. I wouldn't want to support GM cheese for any reason

    I'm not happy with GM for many reasons. Not all of them to do with the food I eat, BUT...

    I am concerned around the endorsement of non-animal GMOs by the Vegan Society because these products are part of an on going mass expliotation of animals. If we profess to be against animal farming, how can we endorse (in any way) the 'test by fire' that is already going on with non-animal GMO 'Round-up Ready Soy' soya and 'Bt' maize in animal feed? The resulting 'no ill effects' on these animals is and will be used by Bio-tech companies to prove the safety of their product.

    In addition these plants have been modified to either withstand deadly poison whilst other surrounding plant and animal life is killed, or to kill animal life by producing poison.

    This stuff will (has already!?) end up in our food if we do not stand against it!
    What is not vegan about this?

  22. #222

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Uk, Reading, Emmer Green
    Posts
    133

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    Hi Jon,

    It may seem that I'm just a being a bit award over this, but, the objections you raise, I'm sure, can be rallied against normal pesticides and the VS does not have a policy on that - if we want organic, maybe we just look for the Organic label.

    It is for these reasons I think the VS should drawn up an ethical policy on its environmental beliefs, a bit like the COOP has, not just a one off pronoucement on GM and NOT use vegan arguments to support it, just enviromental ones, if we were to go down an anti-GM route.

    And as I said before, a block on GM may do the organisation (and hence all vegans) more harm than good. What if the VeganStore went under because its products were not deemed to be vegan?

    It would be interesting to know how many trademark products would survive such a policy change on the trademark. If the VS lost its biggest income producer (the trademark), would it survive? I would say no. Would we want to see the VS trademark on 1000's of vegan products that may have some GM influence, or on just a handful of vegan/organic products.

    These are the sort of issues we must consider before raising the Vegan bar too high.

    If I can see the weak thinking behind the Vegetarian Society's position, and it was copied by the VS, then those who are pro-meat and pro-GM will just have an easy time picking holes in us. The message comming out of the VS has to be well reasoned.

    I wish there was a simple answer.

  23. #223
    Michael Benis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Brighton, UK
    Posts
    195

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    Quote StevieP
    And as I said before, a block on GM may do the organisation (and hence all vegans) more harm than good. What if the VeganStore went under because its products were not deemed to be vegan?

    <snip>

    These are the sort of issues we must consider before raising the Vegan bar too high.
    Stevie,

    you still seem to be ignoring the animal-testing side that both Jon and I have repeatedly referred to. No one is proposing raising the bar higher. It is already there. It's just the position on GMOs that is ambivalent.

    In addition, I am not at all certain that many if any products would be excluded from the vegan mark. Most vegans are against GMOs as are most consumers in Europe. It is simply bad marketing to include GMOs in products intended for vegans. Most are clearly labelled as GMO-free including those of US origin, where GMOs are more widely accepted.

    Also, to be perverse, even more money could be raised if the VS backtracked on animal testing of cosmetics, eyecare products etc. etc. not to mention honey and so on...

    The question remains: can any company supplying foods containing GMOs guarantee that they are vegan, that is to say that do not involve any cruelty to animals used either in their ingredients or in their testing?

    You haven't answered that one.

    Cheers

    Mike

  24. #224
    I eve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    2,210

    Default Re: Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)

    Scientists study bee GM risk, 20/09/2005

    With canola flowering across much of Australia's grain belt, researchers are watching the activity of honeybees. They are trying to determine whether bees could carry herbicide-resistant pollen, or GM material to other canola crops.

    Dr Janine Baker from the Cooperative Research Centre for Weed Management says the research project stems from the global move towards GM crops. She says results so far show it is a problem than can be managed, because bees do not move large distances and tend to work single varieties of canola. "So if there are concerns about what's happening with bees, we can look at what sort of buffer zones we have to have in place and those sort of issues".

    There must be an incredible variety of issues that haven't even been thought of yet.
    Eve

  25. #225
    Jon Cousins
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Glastonbury UK
    Posts
    18

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    I have been trying to come up with a suitable question around the Vegan society's GM policy, that could be the basis for a poll about the issues on the Vegan Forum.

    The biggest problem is keeping the GM policy the centre of the question, whilst allowing a range of useful answer options.

    I guess my initial idea of a simple "do you think..." / 'yes' or 'no' poll isn't sophisticated enough.

    Any suggestions?

  26. #226

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    189

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    Quote Michael Benis
    Most vegans are against GMOs as are most consumers in Europe. It is simply bad marketing to include GMOs in products intended for vegans.
    Absolutely. If I saw a product containing GMOs that was endorsed by the vegan society I wouldn't buy it. I don't want GMOs full stop. We vegans are good at boycotting things we find unacceptable

  27. #227

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Uk, Reading, Emmer Green
    Posts
    133

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    Hi Mike,

    Quote Michael Benis
    Stevie,

    that is to say that do not involve any cruelty to animals used either in their ingredients or in their testing?
    I agree with this, but again, this is what the trademark already states. We do not, therefore, need a specific clause about GM.

    What you want to argue is this :

    "that do not involve any cruelty to animals used either in their ingredients or in their testing" = VEGAN

    "that do not involve any cruelty to animals used either in their ingredients or in their testing" != GM

    therefore GM != VEGAN.

    But the grey area is here:

    Quote Michael Benis
    can any company supplying foods containing GMOs guarantee that they are vegan
    The can is a question not a statment and as yet, no one on this list, at least, has clarified the can bit - this is the sticking point. The assumption you are making is that th can is really a can not.

    So we get:

    "that do not involve any cruelty to animals used either in their ingredients or in their testing" = VEGAN

    ( "that do not involve any cruelty to animals used either in their ingredients or in their testing" != GM OR

    "that do not involve any cruelty to animals used either in their ingredients or in their testing" = GM )

    therefore (GM = VEGAN OR GM != VEGAN).

    Until someone with more expertise than I, and I expect you , steps forward with an answer to this can question, (and any level of testing we may find is not comparable to other forms of animal use we do accept), then I don't think we are in a position to argue this point any further. If things are as I have shown above then the current trademark stance is adequate to protect us from non-vegan products.


    I'm not disagreeing with your general objection to GM, just whether it is the interest of the Vegan Society, (who campaign on vegan issues and that is what is members pay for) and is consistent and fair.

    I am a member of FotE and Green Peace and support their campaigns against GM.

  28. #228

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    189

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    The Vegan Society statement on GMOs is more detailed in the Animal Free Shopper than on the website and there seems to be some contradiction between the two.

    From the website:

    "The Vegan Society's Policy on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs)

    On 13th June 1999, the Vegan Society Council reviewed the Society's GMO policy and adopted the following position with regards to genetically (modified organisms)

    In keeping with its vegan ethic, the Vegan Society is totally against the use of animal genes or animal substances in the development and production of GMOs.
    The Vegan Society believes that all foods that contain, may contain, or have involved GMOs should be clearly labelled.
    In addition any product must also meet the Society's Criteria for Vegan Food . Products carrying the Society's trademark can contain GMOs, but must be clearly labelled and comply with the definition above."

    From the Animal Free Shopper:

    Of concern to the consumer wishing to avoid genetically modified organisms (GMOs), because of possible long-term effects on health or the implications of their release into the environment, is the presence in the UK food supply of GM soya containing genes derived from a bacterium, a virus and a petunia. Soya is found in around 50% of all processed foods.

    So far there has been very little research to access the health and safety implications of GMOs. The insertion of foreign genes can have many harmful unexpected effects: for instance the insertion of a Brazil nut gene into soya resulted in a reaction in people allergic to nuts. There is also a risk of increasing antibiotic resistance in bacteria. Critics warn of unexpected and irreversible effects on agriculture and boidiversity. They condemn the immorality of 'patenting of life' - transgenic animals, plants and seeds. From a vegan perspective, even if no animal gene was used during the modification process, it is likely that animal-derived enzymes were employed.

    GM material can cross species barriers to other crops and weeds, and once released it is impossible to clean up any unforseen consequences. Plants designed to kill 'pests' can kill beneficial insects as well and stimulate the development of resistance in the pests. Plants engineered for herbicide resistance will encourage increased use of chemicals. Most American farmers who have turned to GM crops seem to be getting yields no better than farmers growing traditional varieties. They also appear to be using similar quantities of pesticides.

    The Soil Association believes that genetic modification has no place in the production of safe and healthy food. Organic farming systems aim to produce food with care for human health, the environment and animal welfare.

    In keeping with it's Vegan ethic, The Vegan Society is totally against the use of animal genes or animal substances in the development and production of GMOs. The Vegan Society believes that all foods that contain, may contain, or have involved GMOs should be clearly labelled, and has signed up to the five year freeze campaign for a moratorium on genetic engineering and patenting in food and farming.

    No mention of products containing GMOs carrying the society's trademark there and an admission that even if no animal gene was used during the modification process, it is likely that animal-derived enzymes would be employed.

    So why the difference? The latest edition of The Animal Free Shopper has only just been published, has the society changed it's position on GMOs and just hasn't updated the website?

    I think we should be told

  29. #229

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Uk, Reading, Emmer Green
    Posts
    133

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    Thanks for pointing that out.

  30. #230
    I eve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    2,210

    Default Re: Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)

    In the heart of the Alsace wine region, researchers have planted France's only GM vines in the hope of finding a way to battle the damaging "court noue" virus afflicting a third of the country's vines. GM vines worry French winemakers

    Many local winegrowers fear the plants will contaminate their vineyards and ruin the reputation of France's wine sector. "It makes me angry because this is imposed on everyone without us being informed about the risk," Pierre-Paul Humbrecht, a maker of bio-wines, said. "If there's a problem, it concerns us all. We fear for our vines."

    In France, resistance against GM food is fierce. Farmer and environmentalist Jose Bove shot to national fame for ripping up modified crops. INRA stopped its first tests on GM vines in the Champagne region in 1999 following protests.

    A prison-style fence was requested by environmentalists, who wanted to prevent animals and human intruders from carrying parts of the plants outside the enclosure.
    Eve

  31. #231
    Jon Cousins
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Glastonbury UK
    Posts
    18

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    I may be a little dim here, but why can't the Vegan Society have a GM Policy that is anti all GMOs?

    This is an issue that the Society has felt neccessary to make a separate Policy for, so I am puzzled why it is OK to have a policy that is anti animal based GMOs (for which the standard vegan principal already exists!), but not anti all GMOs (which I feel this thread has highlighted several times as being a form of animal exploitation what ever the gene source of the GMO! for which the standard vegan principal already exists)

    The Vegan Society made this an issue by separarting out animal based GMOs and non-animal based GMOs, one it won't, and one it could endorse.

    If - as StevieP points out - all GMOs are unlikely ever to be endorsed (for animal testing/exploitation or whatever) - why have a separate GM policy?

    My basic thought is if the Vegan Society have made this an issue worth a policy, why not make that policy make sense - surely the only useful GM Policy is one that is anti all GMOs?


  32. #232
    Kevster
    Guest

    Default Re: Vegan Society GM Policy?

    In the animal free shopper 7th edition p.9.

    'Genetically Modified Organisms
    The development and/or production of gmos must not have invoilved animal genes or animal-derived substances. Products put forward for registration which contain or may contain GMOs must be labelled as such.'

    Thus the consumer gets to make up their mind. It may be convenient for people wishing to avoid GMOs to have things labelled vegan which automatically means GMO free, in this case perhaps go for organic products. For me this is enough, i avoid GMO products by buying mostly organic. I don't feel the vegan society trademark is an endorsement beyond the fact that something is vegan, it may be vegan but may not necessarily be good for you for other reasons.

    This is not the vegan anti GM society.

    Though it is pretty good that they seem to outline the reasons that the soil association give for their anti-gm stance. Just some thoughts, but i don't reckon this is such a big deal for the vegan society. It may be a big deal for some of its members.

  33. #233
    I eve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    2,210

    Default Re: Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)

    The Independent Environment Editor reported today that startling new government research shows GM crops contaminate the countryside for up to 15 years after they have been harvested.

    The findings cast a cloud over the prospects of growing the modified crops in Britain, suggesting that farmers who try them out for one season will find fields blighted for a decade and a half. Financed by GM companies and Margaret Beckett's Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the report effectively torpedoes the Government's strategy for introducing GM oilseed rape to this country.

    Ministers have stipulated that the crops should not be grown until rules are worked out to enable them to "co-exist" with conventional ones. But the research shows that this is effectively impossible. The study, published by the Royal Society, examined five sites across England and Scotland where modified oilseed rape has been cultivated, and found significant amounts of GM plants growing even after the sites had been returned to ordinary crops. It concludes that the research reveals "a potentially serious problem associated with the temporal persistence of rape seeds in soil."

    Last night Pete Riley, the director of GM Freeze, said; "It is becoming clearer and clearer that it is going to be impossible to grow GM crops in Britain."
    Eve

  34. #234
    cross barer
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    melbourne
    Posts
    661

    Default Re: Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)

    Quote eve
    oilseed rape
    that's no typo I bet

  35. #235
    Gliondrach
    Guest

    Default Re: Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)

    These people, who want to plant GM crops, say that they won't contaminate adjacent crops as long as there is enough distance between them. If pollen can stay active for long enough ( I don't know if it goes 'off' quickly ) and the crops are pollinated by the wind, then it is impossible to prevent cross polination. I have on two or three ocassions had sand from the Sahara covering my car. Sand is much heavier than pollen and can be blown thousands of miles.

  36. #236
    I eve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    2,210

    Default Re: Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)

    A former agricultural adviser to US presidents says the failure of a GM field pea trial should act as a warning for future GM crop testing. The 10-year Australian CSIRO trial was abandoned when tests found the peas were making mice seriously ill.

    Dr Charles Benbrook, who advised presidents Carter, Bush senior, Reagan and Clinton says the field pea trial failure shows current GM crop testing is grossly inadequate. "I don't believe that this new study proves that all GM food is posing a great threat to people but it certainly confirms the need to go back and look at the major food crops," he said.

    He has called for changes to the Gene Technology Act, which is currently under review, to tighten GM crop regulation and increase scientific scrutiny of potential commercial varieties.
    Eve

  37. #237
    Kevster
    Guest

    Default Re: Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)

    I've probably gone on about this before somewhere *yawn* but i came across this particular article while looking for something else...

    ''GM animal feed - the story so far

    Last edited: 20-01-2006

    The UK campaign to get GM out of our food has been really successful. Due to public pressure, supermarkets and food producers have removed GM ingredients from their products and no GM crops will be grown in the UK in the foreseeable future.

    However, one loophole remains - GM animal feed. The GM that was going into our food is now being dumped on the animal feed market.

    One area is particularly problematic - dairy cow feed. [...]'

    http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/content...TOKEN=31686718

  38. #238
    Kevster
    Guest

    Default Re: Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)

    Here's what i was looking for:

    'Press Release

    European Commission objects to anti GM contamination policies from 10 member states

    Mar 10 2006

    The European Commission is opposing legal measures aimed at protecting their conventional crops from GM contamination by 10 member states because they "create obstacles to the free movement of goods", an official EC report reveals today [1].

    The report summarises progress made by European Member States in putting in place measures to control GM contamination of conventional and organic crops - so called `coexistence' - and details the European Commission's response. [...]'

    http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/press_..._10032006.html

  39. #239

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    824

    Default Re: Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)

    I hope you manage to get all GMs out of your country. Despite public outcry and the majority of Americans desiring the labeling of GM food, the U.S. government sold us out to the food industry a long time ago. Most americans are unaware that they eat GM food on a daily basis and have no idea which foods have been "modified" thus far. Newspapers (corporate owned) and television news stations (also corporate owned) won't report on it for fear of losing advertising dollars or getting into law suits. Some states have laws against stating negative comments about a food group that could result in loss of profit.
    Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds. - Albert Einstein

  40. #240

    Default Re: Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)

    DV you are so right. I am afraid to eat anything that is not organic now. Those of us in America just have no other recourse if we want to avoid GMOs. I worry alot about the cross contamination of crops though. Happened with corn already I believe.

  41. #241
    I eve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    2,210

    Default Re: Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)

    Governments at the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) have, on 31/3/05, unanimously upheld the international de facto moratorium on Terminator technology - plants that are genetically engineered to produce sterile seeds at harvest.

    The 8th meeting of the CBD ended in Curitiba, Brazil.

    "The CBD has soundly rejected the efforts of Canada, Australia and New Zealand - supported by the US government and the biotechnology industry - to undermine the moratorium on suicide seeds," said Maria Jose Guazzelli of Centro Ecologico, a Brazil-based agro-ecological organization.

    "Terminator seeds are genocide seeds," said Francisca Rodriguez from Via Campesina, "We have pride in being one more step forward in our struggle but we will not stop until Terminator is banned from the face of the earth."

    And so say all of us!
    Eve

  42. #242

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    824

    Default Re: Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)

    That is great news.
    Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds. - Albert Einstein

  43. #243
    veganblue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    South Australia
    Posts
    530

    Default Re: Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)

    Quote DianeVegan
    That is great news.
    I have to agree!
    "if compassion is extreme, then call me an extremist"

  44. #244
    I eve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    2,210

    Default Re: Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)

    Conservation groups are opposing moves to step up trials of genetically modified cotton in northern Australia.

    The groups, including Environs Kimberley and The Environment Centre in the Northern Territory say commercial cotton growing involves massive land clearing and could lead to river pollution. Two companies, Bayer CropScience and Monsanto have applied for licences which could mean the extension of trials of GM cotton in the Ord River Irrigation area.

    The Environment Centre's Gary Scott is urging the Gene Technology Regulator not to approve the applications.

    "The Office of the Gene Technology Regulator rejected a previous application by Monsanto a few years ago because of the potential for GM cotton to become a weed. We think that's still an issue," he said.
    Eve

  45. #245
    vegan1969
    Guest

    Default Re: Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)

    I just jumped in and didn't read all the post. This is what is on Morningstar Farms website:
    Question:

    Are Morningstar Farms&#174;, Worthington&#174;, Loma Linda&#174;, or Morningstar Farms Made with Organic Soy&#174; products made with non-GMO ingredients?
    Answer:

    The ingredients we use have been approved by the appropriate regulatory authorities and all of our products comply with food labeling requirements in markets where they are sold throughout the world. Nevertheless, we recognize that our consumers may prefer foods that do not contain biotech ingredients. While our products are not considered biotech-free, we use non-biotech sources for ingredients containing soy protein isolates and textured soy concentrates. We will also continue to consider non-biotech versions of minor ingredients as they become commercially available. http://www.kelloggs.com/cgi-bin/bran...msfarms;id=808
    ---------------------------------
    It's true, they do use gmo. I just wrote Boca to see if they are the same.

    Ok, I just got a reply from Boca:

    Thank you for visiting http://www.bocafoods.com/.
    Boca products appeal to a variety of consumers and we are committed to providing all of our consumers with great-tasting products made with the highest-quality soy. Given the fact that much of the soy grown in the United States has been enhanced through biotechnology, Boca's traditional line of soy-based products may contain ingredients that have been genetically engineered.
    At the same time we realize that biotechnology is a concern with some of our consumers. That's why we introduced a line of products made with organic soy to meet those consumers' preferences.
    We make every reasonable effort to ensure that our organic product line does not contain genetically engineered ingredients. We use only organic ingredients that have been certified by reputable certifying agencies that require identity preservation programs. However, we cannot - and do not - make the claim that our organic products are 100 percent free of genetically engineered ingredients.
    At Boca we are committed to bringing you a variety of great tasting meatless products that make you feel good about what you're eating. If you're interested in further information about Boca, please read the package label or visit our website at www.bocafoods.com.
    Also ,I'm delighted to hear that you're happy with our product.
    We strive to maintain high quality products and to create a variety of new products that offer our consumers important food choices.
    It's gratifying to learn that our efforts have been successful.
    I will pass your comments on to the appropriate departments.
    If you haven't done so already, please add our site to your favorites and visit us again soon!
    Kim McMiller
    Assoc Director, GCR Consumer Services

  46. #246
    Kevster
    Guest

    Default Re: Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)

    Interesting article in The Independent today:

    'Farmers use as much pesticide with GM crops, US study finds
    By Steve Connor, Science Editor
    Published: 27 July 2006

    One of the major arguments in favour of growing GM crops has been undermined by a study showing that the benefits are short-lived because farmers quickly resort to spraying their fields with harmful pesticides.

    Supporters of genetically modified crops claim the technique saves money and provides environmental benefits because farmers need to spray their fields fewer times with chemicals.

    However, a detailed survey of 481 cotton growers in China found that, although they did use fewer pesticides in the first few years of adopting GM plants, after seven years they had to use just as much pesticide as they did with conventional crops.

    The study found that after three years, the GM farmers had cut pesticide use by 70 per cent and were earning over a third more than conventional farmers.

    But, by 2004, the GM cotton farmers were using just as much pesticide as their conventional counterparts and were spending far more because GM cotton seed is three times the price of conventional cotton seed. [...]'

    http://news.independent.co.uk/enviro...cle1199339.ece

  47. #247
    veganblue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    South Australia
    Posts
    530

    Default Re: Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)

    It is to be expected - something is likely to have a resistance to the introduced toxin in the plant (the original deterrent) and with alll that resource at hand that nothing else can eat - is likely to rapidly multiply.

    GM of plants with novel toxins is no point unless you can keep varieties ahead of the natural mutation rate in predator populations. You would think that they would consult an ecologist about the possibility - but then, genetics courses contain population dynamics sections now... Who knows why they go ahead anyway.

    Maybe next time they will try companion planting... something old fashioned.
    "if compassion is extreme, then call me an extremist"

  48. #248
    I eve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    2,210

    Default Re: Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)

    In today's "Weekend Australia" there is an article about GM grass designed to improve golf courses that has caused alarm in the US after escaping into the wild. It has spread up to 5km outside a test site in Oregon. Apparently this GM grass is impervious to glysophate so golf course managers can really go to town spraying large areas to kill off weeds without harming the grass.

    Are they mad? The US Dept of Agriculture has ordered a full environmental audit of this of the impact to wildlife etc.
    Eve

  49. #249
    Ex-admin Korn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    4,830

    Default Re: Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)

    Are they mad?
    I have feeling that they are. But 'everybody' aren't mad: http://www.non-gmoreport.com/

  50. #250
    I eve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    2,210

    Default Re: Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)

    interesting website and articles there. must say some of the articles reveal that consumers in the US appear to be unaware how widespread gm foods are.
    Eve

Tags for this thread (If you see one or more tags below, click on them if you're looking for similar threads!)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •