I take issue with your most recent pro-GMO piece, this time by your editorial board: “Our View: No reason Maine should speed up GMO labeling” (Jan. 26).
You state that ” … the science is pretty clear … GMOs are perfectly safe, according to numerous credible studies.”
Your “numerous credible studies” reference is linked, online, to a 2013 review article titled “An overview of the last 10 years of genetically engineered crop safety research,” by Alessandro Nicolia et al. (http://tinyurl.com/zt59zv7).
I would suggest that the science is not so “pretty clear” and that your editorial board is in need of some education from sources other than Big Ag proponents. I suggest you read the following three publications:
• “GMO Myths and Truths. 2nd Edition, Version 2.0,” by John Fagan, et al. (http://tinyurl.com/odicycm). Section 2.3 of this 2014 article specifically debunks the above 2013 review article.
• “Evaluation of five organophosphate insecticides and herbicides,” World Health Organization: International Agency for Research on Cancer Monographs Volume 11, March 20, 2015 (http://tinyurl.com/psn8dps).
This article notes that “the herbicide glyphosate and the insecticides malathion and diazinon were classified as probably carcinogenic to humans (Group 2A). The insecticides tetrachlorvinphos and parathion were classified as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B).”
Glyphosate is the main active ingredient in Monsanto’s herbicide RoundUp. Despite Monsanto’s protestations, the International Agency for Research on Cancer has not withdrawn these carcinogenicity assessments.
• “Monsanto’s RoundUp Linked to Cancer – Again,” by Jeff Ritterman, M.D., Oct. 6, 2014 (http://tinyurl.com/npbofea).
The above information should begin to make it clear to you why the majority of the U.S. population is clamoring for GMO labeling.
Edmond Paré, Ph.D., MST
Wells
Send questions/comments to the editors.
