07 Jul 14
Originally posted by DeepThoughtYou regard them as different solely because it suits your GM labelling scheme. The reality is that practically all egg farmers in the country must get their chicks from a one or two suppliers and cannot breed their own.
The chickens your sister gets are F1 hybrids, hybrid vigour lasts for one generation, they are F2 after that and tend to not be as good. Terminator genes prevent reproduction completely, so I'd regard that as different. I'm not suggesting it would be economic, but if there was some problem with the supplier you can't fall back on F2s.
Crop growers also have the option of getting less productive seed from elsewhere should the company selling terminator crop seed fail to supply.
The fact is that the situations are nearly identical, but you wish to label GM foods in general because some may have terminator genes, but have no such requirements for chickens. There can be no doubt that your reason for labelling is concocted.
I look at the country of supply and regularly see labels from Kenya in supermarkets.
For products that could be grown in the EU?
I agree with you about not dumping pointless surplus on the third world, it's just I don't think Britain could do that if it tried, we just don't have the productive capacity to.
So are you claiming that you have zero agricultural product exports?
07 Jul 14
Originally posted by twhiteheadThey are different, a GM crop with a terminator gene won't produce a second generation, F2 hybrids aren't as good as F1s, or in most cases the pure bred strains, but can be grown. My problems with GM go beyond the presence or absence of terminator genes. Food should be properly labelled including details of production, if the crop is GM then it should be labelled as such.
You regard them as different solely because it suits your GM labelling scheme. The reality is that practically all egg farmers in the country must get their chicks from a one or two suppliers and cannot breed their own.
Crop growers also have the option of getting less productive seed from elsewhere should the company selling terminator crop seed fail to ...[text shortened]... roductive capacity to.
So are you claiming that you have zero agricultural product exports?[/b]
For products that could be grown in the EU?I can't remember what they were, but they weren't particularly exotic, mange tout or something like that.
So are you claiming that you have zero agricultural product exports?See my post on the previous page, second to bottom. Britain is a net importer of food.
07 Jul 14
Originally posted by DeepThoughtBut thats an irrelevant difference. The important thing is the overall effect is identical. If you object to terminator genes then you should object to the chicken situation or give a valid reason why one is objectionable and the other isn't.
They are different, a GM crop with a terminator gene won't produce a second generation, F2 hybrids aren't as good as F1s, or in most cases the pure bred strains, but can be grown.
My problems with GM go beyond the presence or absence of terminator genes.
Which is what I said. So don't give terminator genes as your reason.
Food should be properly labelled including details of production,
Which details should be included and why?
if the crop is GM then it should be labelled as such.
Why?
See my post on the previous page, second to bottom. Britain is a net importer of food.
That doesn't answer my question. Most countries import some products and export others. What I asked was, does the UK have any agricultural products that it exports?
07 Jul 14
Originally posted by twhiteheadBecause european consumers want it to be labelled as such.
if the crop is GM then it should be labelled as such.
Why?
I want it labelled as such. If GM-information is hidden and it is labelled 'Made in USA', then I can assume that it is GM, and I will not buy it.
07 Jul 14
Originally posted by KazetNagorraThe data set it's all based on gives the "all foods" ratio as 60% so I remembered the correct figure. It's not that easy to switch land to food production, essentially the slack is land used for bio-fuel production.
If I understand the figures correctly it is not about what could theoretically be produced in the UK but what is at the moment being produced and imported. The UK could most certainly produce enough food domestically to feed its populace, although it would require a change of diet. Repealing the CAP (a good idea, in my opinion) would not be such a probl ...[text shortened]... , since it would hurt the most inefficient farmers (mainly in Southern and Eastern Europe) most.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/316223/trade-selfsuff-02jun14.xls
The CAP belonged to the age of protectionism and made sense when everyone was protectionist. It was just always too difficult to repeal for political reasons.
07 Jul 14
Originally posted by twhitehead
But thats an irrelevant difference. The important thing is the overall effect is identical. If you object to terminator genes then you should object to the chicken situation or give a valid reason why one is objectionable and the other isn't.
[b]My problems with GM go beyond the presence or absence of terminator genes.
Which is what I said. So don ...[text shortened]... and export others. What I asked was, does the UK have any agricultural products that it exports?[/b]
That doesn't answer my question. Most countries import some products and export others. What I asked was, does the UK have any agricultural products that it exports?Obviously, that is why I said net importer.
07 Jul 14
1 edit
Originally posted by FabianFnasSo whatever the consumers want, should be included on the label? What percentage of users should be required before such labelling gets enforced? Should this apply to any possible labelling a consumer can think up?
Because european consumers want it to be labelled as such.
I want it labelled as such. If GM-information is hidden and it is labelled 'Made in USA', then I can assume that it is GM, and I will not buy it.
Why would you not buy GM?
07 Jul 14
Originally posted by twhiteheadThe word "obviously" answered your question. Since you seem to want it spelt out, yes Britain exports some of her produce. Britain, however, imports more than she exports, which is supremely relevant, we can hardly be accused of dumping a surplus if we don't have one to dump.
Which is obviously irrelevant. Can you answer the question or not?
With labelling, for example, in the UK for eggs one sees - Battery (typically no information), Barn, or Free Range. Organic (this affects the amount of space per animal) and non-organic. They do not always, but should, say what the animal is fed on (with chickens one sometimes sees corn-fed). I would also like to see antibiotic usage policy mentioned - do they use antibiotics pre-emptively or only when the animal gets ill? Are the animals fed on antibiotic residue (the residue from antibiotic production contains large amounts of vitamin B12 and trace amounts of antibiotic). There are a variety of reasons for wanting this lot stated, the major two are animal welfare concerns and human health concerns (connected with antibiotic resistant strains of bacteria).
07 Jul 14
Originally posted by DeepThoughtYou seem rather confused about food. Do you seriously believe that because Britain imports more than it exports it can never have a surplus of any given product? You already admitted that it does export some products, which seems to contradict your stance. Why export when you don't have a surplus?
The word "obviously" answered your question. Since you seem to want it spelt out, yes Britain exports some of her produce. Britain, however, imports more than she exports, which is supremely relevant, we can hardly be accused of dumping a surplus if we don't have one to dump.
With labelling, for example, in the UK for eggs one sees - Battery (typically no information), Barn, or Free Range. Organic (this affects the amount of space per animal) and non-organic. They do not always, but should, say what the animal is fed on (with chickens one sometimes sees corn-fed). I would also like to see antibiotic usage policy mentioned - do they use antibiotics pre-emptively or only when the animal gets ill? Are the animals fed on antibiotic residue (the residue from antibiotic production contains large amounts of vitamin B12 and trace amounts of antibiotic). There are a variety of reasons for wanting this lot stated, the major two are animal welfare concerns and human health concerns (connected with antibiotic resistant strains of bacteria).
But nothing whatsoever about them being hybrids. Clearly, you don't think it is important, yet you do think terminator genes in crops are important. But strangely enough you are not advocating that products be labelled 'terminator genes included' instead you want them labelled 'GM' which does not really tell the consumer anything useful at all.
07 Jul 14
Originally posted by DeepThoughtWow, you can still get battery eggs? I haven't seen those in ages.
The word "obviously" answered your question. Since you seem to want it spelt out, yes Britain exports some of her produce. Britain, however, imports more than she exports, which is supremely relevant, we can hardly be accused of dumping a surplus if we don't have one to dump.
With labelling, for example, in the UK for eggs one sees - Battery (typica ...[text shortened]... re concerns and human health concerns (connected with antibiotic resistant strains of bacteria).
07 Jul 14
Originally posted by twhiteheadI'm aware of the point that we may have a surplus in some products, but it's hard to get the information and so I took the overall situation to be indicative. I'll dig into the information more deeply to see if I can get more answers.
You seem rather confused about food. Do you seriously believe that because Britain imports more than it exports it can never have a surplus of any given product? You already admitted that it does export some products, which seems to contradict your stance. Why export when you don't have a surplus?
[b]With labelling, for example, in the UK for eggs one ...[text shortened]... tead you want them labelled 'GM' which does not really tell the consumer anything useful at all.
But in answer to your assumption that exports do not happen when there is not a surplus, we have centuries old trading relations with our closest neighbours, the market is larger than one country. Further food is not a straightforward commodity like a metal, quality is a factor. So even if there is not a surplus food may still be exported, with lower quality stuff imported to feed the cheap end of the domestic market. An organic farmer in Britain may saturate local organic demand and export, with the deficit made up of non-organic production from outside. What determines these flows is established customer relationships and local consumer preference.
Breed is mentioned on some products. Sometimes there is a picture of the farmer. The variety of the plant, which tells you if it is a hybrid, is sometimes mentioned. My list was not exhaustive, I can think of other things I would want listed on the packaging, like the location of the farm but didn't think of it when I was writing my previous post.
07 Jul 14
I found some data. Britain exports coffee. I'm pretty sure we don't grow it here. So the data includes imports for processing which is then exported. I'm afraid the situation is rather more complex than you seem to think, certainly more so than I realised. This dataset includes information on imports from and exports to both EU and non-EU countries, both in value and tonnage:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/251969/trade-indigeneity-22oct13.xls