Yes, yes, you were first to ban it. It's easy to ban something you never had in the first place. That does not mean you are right in everything you ban and, let's face it, comparing GMOs to slavery is a little weird, even for Vermont.
Nonetheless, “We’re first again,” gushes organic farmer Will Allen in The Economist, which makes the rest of the country wonder if it is the organic farming or the Vermont air that makes people goofy.
Vermont has just over 600,000 people so what they do in their state is basically irrelevant, in its bubble, just like states that restrict abortions to such a degree it is basically a ban aren't preventing abortions. If Vermont wants to be hypocrites and label GMOs but then exempt restaurants and booze and every deli counter and let cows eat GM feed but not have a label on their milk so it can be sold as organic, well, fine, that is what hypocrisy is.
But it isn't so simple. In order for GMOs to reach their potential in feeding the poor nations, they first have to be widespread enough among the rich ones that companies can afford to sell it cheaply or even give it away. That's just realty.
But by declaring science Frankenfood - ummmm, if you knew any science, you would know Frankenstein was not a GMO, he was a hybrid - activists are preventing widespread acceptance and dooming poor people. Even today, GMOs are the great equalizer. Let Europe be weird and protectionist and pretend it is about science, we know it is about not letting their former colonies compete in Europe. And then there's the kids.
The Economist puts it into a simple graphic:
Greenpeace, Union of Concerned Scientists and all the rest; when will you love kids more than you hate science?
Vermont Vs Science - The Economist
H/T Calestous Juma
Comments