King Hazza,

An initial study by the government indicated that the cost of implementing labeling for GM products in Aus/NZ would be in the order of $3bn.

A subsequent study has shown it to be lower than this, but still more than $1bn. This is by no means chicken feed. This is all for a minority who want some information that is irrelevant to their health.

http://www.acci.asn.au/text_files/issues_papers/Genetically_Modified_Foods/GMF02.pdf

Please try to be informed before you babble.

Examinator, GM is by far the most stringently tested food on the planet. In spite of trillions of servings, not one credible case of harm has been recorded to any individual.

All food we eat has been genetically modified from its original form. What we call GM food has simply followed a different path.

Yes Shadow, "informed"- that article you posted (not the most neutral on the issue)) contained the same 'arguments' of expenses that you clearly cut-and-pasted your own from in your last post- that one I pointed out (and to an extent so did the article) required mechanisms already in place to address.

Nice try though.

King Hazza,

That was probably one of the most feeble replies I have ever seen. The article was from the Australian chamber of commerce, but the study it was commenting on was commissioned by the government intent on implementing the labeling.

I challenge you to provide any proof, link, etc that you have that this is a cheap and simple process to implement. So far you have provided Zip.

Otherwise I can only conclude that your sole weapon of debate is to nay say everything, which requires the IQ of a hamster.

Please prove me wrong.

SM,

you (deliberately?)misinterpreted my point. I said that the testing procedure is far from being beyond extraordinary corruptions.
One also needs to be careful in that the food industry often provides LEGAL (as opposed to moral) justification for Big Chem, Big Pharma.
Pelican's reference to Big tobacco is clear evidence of how corporations develop an attitude of amoral indifference to individuals.
They are well known for techniques of deliberately muddying (popular opinion)water and (ab)using dubious lobbing/marketing techniques to allow them to continue making profit. All this regardless of what they know or the consequences.

Likewise as I have said innumerable times 'self serving, amoral, gatekeepers on the essentials of life is unacceptable. The gatekeepers should in a democracy be the elected government. At least they can be (changed) with in 3 years. Corporate wise it takes 10 Plus i.e. Hardie industries et al.

Because we are such an internationally small market we have
limited power to force control. US multinational will simply enlist the US to bully us.

SM it is simply applying the "reduction to the ridiculous" (divide and conquer ) strategy to simply dismiss the other issues and argue only on one spun aspect. To do this devalues you argument to Political spin.

Out side a very high powered interference ridden system GM foods needs to be controlled so they don't adversely effect the people ...and I also mean their practices and there effects on a 'level' (joke) playing field.

Examinator,

I went down this line in an earlier thread. The testing labs are independent, and certified. The lapses in testing that the greens fervently point to are minuscule gaps in information not published as they were not required for certification.

If you would put your money where you mouth was and provide any proof of this you might have a leg to stand on.

As I said there have been trillions of servings of GM food and no instances of ill health resulting. The proof of the pudding is in the eating.

What do you mean "what evidence" shadow?
I gave it to you THREE TIMES.
It's the CURRENT PRICE we pay for foodstuffs
You listed all the "reasons" why adding a GM label would be more expensive- I described in detail the existing applications of ALL of these things, as we already apply the quarantining, invoice tracking, content/quality-analyzing and labelling to them.

Now freely try to prove that those things do NOT exist, and describe to me why GM is so different.

I can read a title thankyou very much- I also can't help but notice that the majority of the report was promoting GM and trying to portray people who only want LABELING as some kind of irrational NGO.

IQ of a hamster indeed- and integrity of Malcolm King to match by your poor attempts to obscure the basic points others have been making.
The point is labeling a product accurately of anything PAYING consumers may be concerned about, regardless of reason is a basic right- and your petty attempts to make it sound like an apocalyptic recession-causing policy is getting sillier.

All you have to do for me to apologize, is provide more concise data to contradict what I stated above next post- if not, I'll rest my case.