[GPSCC-chat] Prop 37: dog food v. steak ad

[John Thielking]

Spencer and all,
 
With all due respect, I think that the movie balances out the misleading pro GMO and pro pesticide propaganda that is out there --- way out there it turns out after doing just a little research. 
 
As an example of pesticide industry propaganda vs real science compare the following two articles.  The first one is from Quack Watch, the site that specializes in "exposing" natural healers and so on as frauds.  This site makes the claim that I have heard repeated on mainstream news that there is no significant nutritional difference between Organic and conventionally grown food.  It also advances a rather perposterous "quantized theory" of plant growth that says that plants will only grow under conditions where when they reach maturity they have identical nutritional content between Organic and conventional crops. 
If there are nutritional deficiencies in the soil, the claim goes, the plants won't grow at all.
 
http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/organic.html
 
The second site summarizes results from a study of the mineral content of Organic vs conventional food done by the respected Rutgers University
 
http://www.organicnutrition.co.uk/whyorganic/whyorganic.htm
 
I would say that the Rutgers study backs up the claim made in the movie that GMO crops (and/or crops treated with pesticides) are mineral deficient.  Why the mainstream media continues to parrot the line that there is no significant difference in nutritional content between Organic and conventional food is a bit of a mystery to me. Thanks.
 
Sincerely,
 
John Thielking

--- On Sat, 11/3/12, Spencer Graves <spencer.graves at structuremonitoring.com> wrote:


From: Spencer Graves <spencer.graves at structuremonitoring.com>
Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Prop 37: dog food v. steak ad
To: "GPSCC" <sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org>
Date: Saturday, November 3, 2012, 10:31 AM



Hello, All:  


      The "No on 37" campaign is saying in part, "Dog food with meat requires a label, but meat for human consumption does not.  It makes no sense."  


      This is deliberately misleading.  A more understandable statement is, "Dog food with meat (and GMO corn or soy) requires a label, but meat for human (or animal) consumption does not." Now it makes sense.  


      Monsanto and others are spending over $1 million per day disseminating this kind of message, and Prop 37 (GMO labeling) may be defeated.  You can help pass GMO labeling by tweeting or emailing everyone you know in California with something like, "Confused by anti-Prop 37 ad? Dog food with meat (and GMO corn or soy) requires a label, but meat for human (or animal) consumption does not." (140 characters)  


      This corrects a deliberate deception on "www.noprop37.com".  (For a copy of this page with annotations, see "https://files.pbworks.com/download/djdB7SF1ui/occupy/60654211/No37.pdf".)  


      The movie "Genetic Roulette" was screened at the Peace Center last night.  On balance, I felt the movie was gross propaganda but not nearly as bad asthe "No on 37" campaign.  If the movie were true, accurate, and balanced, I think that the opposition to GMO foods would have been much greater much sooner, fewer GMO foods would actually be on the market, and the law would require GMO labeling.  


WIKIPEDIA AND SOCIAL CHANGE 


      In the month between Thanksgiving and Christmas last year, the Wikipedia article on SOPA got a million views:  Editing Wikipedia is potentially one of the highest leverage activities anyone can engage in.  


      I'd be happy to teach people how to edit Wikipedia -- both their markup language and their rules for appropriate content and editing.  (I've made over 500 edits.)


      If people are interested, we can schedule a place to meet and get to work.  


      For example, there is a huge gap between the Movie "Genetic Roulette" (http://geneticroulettemovie.com;  http://academicsreview.org/reviewed-content/genetic-roulette) and the information available on Wikipedia.  Whether Prop 37 passes or fails on Tuesday, the issue will still be active.  It would be good to check the sources cited in the Genetic Roulette book, see if they say what the book claims, find counter arguments, and describe both from a neutral point of view in appropriate Wikipedia articles.  Doing that could have a huge impact, I think.  However, I can't do it myself.  


      Best Wishes, 
      Spencer 


-- 
Spencer Graves, PE, PhD
President and Chief Technology Officer
Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc.
751 Emerson Ct.
San José, CA 95126
ph:  408-655-4567
web:  www.structuremonitoring.com

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----


_______________________________________________
sosfbay-discuss mailing list
sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org
http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cagreens.org/pipermail/sosfbay-discuss_lists.cagreens.org/attachments/20121103/523c1f83/attachment.html>