HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0393.268 2012-2014 Page 1 of 3
COLT
Murashige, Laura `Ar"II
From: Cris and Eric Lindborg [lindborgs @gmail.com] 2013 [EQV __y AN II: 52
Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2013 10:54 AM
To: Leinani Wessel; counciltestimony @co.hawaii.hi.us
Subject: Bill 113 GMO
Dear Council Member Kanuha,
As a medical professional reasonably informed in biology I write to convey my opinion that current
efforts to limit so-called GMO plants/agriculture on the Island of Hawaii are not supported by evidence
or prudent considerations of risks vs. benefits.
I suspect that you have already done a fair amount of study regarding this issue. A balanced summary
of the benefits and hazards of genetically engineered foods was recently included n Scientific
American, September 2013 ("Are Engineered Foods Evil?" by David H. Freedman) along with an
editorial ("Fight the GM Food Scare") .
I had planned to send a copy of the article with a letter but I note that there is not enough time for a
letter to arrive in time for upcoming Count Council discussions. I include excerpts from the articles:
"...[T]he benefits of GM crops greatly outweigh the health risks, which so far remain
theoretical. The use of GM crops `has lowered the price of food.' Silverman says. `It has
increased farmer safety by allowing them to use less pesticide. It has raised the output of corn,
cotton, and soy by 20-30%..."
"The European Union has funded 130 research projects, carried out by more than 500
independent teams... None of those studies have found any special risks from GM crops."
"The director of the biotechnology at the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a science-
based consumer-watch-dog group states "Current GM crops are safe to eat and can be grown
safely in the environment."
"The American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Medical
Association, and the National Academy of Sciences have all unreservedly backed GM crops.
The US Food and Drug Association, along with its counterparts in several other countries, has
repeatedly reviewed large body of research and concluded that GM crops pose not unique health
threat. Dozens of review studies carried out by academic researchers have backed that view."
The prime argument that anti-GM advocates can legitimately invoke is the "precautionary principle",
which holds that interventions or technologies should not be undertaken unless there is evidence of
absolute safety. The article notes:
"But as medical researchers know, nothing can really be `proved safe'. One can only fail to turn
up significant risk after trying hard to find it—as is the case with GM crops.
If one were to apply the same precautionary principle in medical science we would not be able to
introduce any new medications whatsoever and we would never have developed joint replacements.
I would further argue that the current resolution that includes exceptions for the GM plant ban reflects
Comm. No. 3 92. 4P8
11/4/2013 Ref.To: f l44nc1
Ref. Date NOV 5 2013
Page 2 of 3
contradiction. If GM plants were a menace then the crops that are most prevalent and already present
would be the most problematic. If the risk evidence is strong enough then ban all GM plants.
A final observation. Even if the resolution is ill-advisedly approved, there is the major monitoring and
regulatory effort to be undertaken in validating presence or absence of GM plants. This is an effort that
the county is not equipped to perform. If there is to be GM crop regulation this would be most
appropriately done at the state or federal level.
Not a single verified case of illness has been attributed GMO alterations. Nor is there a credible theory
about how such illness might be mediated. Support for the current resolution is based more on ardent
ideology rather than evidence. I encourage the Council to base decisions on evidence and common
sense. The resolution should be rejected.
Thanks for your consideration.
C. Eric Lindborg MD
PO Box 96
Kailua-Kona HI 96745
808-756-8008
11/3/2013Begin forwarded message:
From: "Leinani Wessel" <Iwessel @co.hawaii.hi.us>
Subject: RE: GMO testimony address
Date: October 29, 2013 7:57:07 AM HST
To: 'Cris and Eric Lindborg"' <Iindborgs @gmail.com>
Good Morning,
Yes, please mail to:
25 Aupuni Street,
Hilo, HI 96720
Please address it:
Hawai'i County Council Chair and Members
And please include what the testimony is in regard to, for example re: bill 113 GMO
Mahalo,
fe//lalll li/ s s'el
District 7
Council Aide to Council Member Dru Kanuha
(808) 323-4267
lwessel@co.hawaii.hi.us
11/4/2013
Page 3 of 3
From: Cris and Eric Lindborg [mailto:lindborgs @gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 8:31 PM
To: Wessel, Leinani
Subject: Re: GMO testimony address
Thanks, Is it possible to mail something via US mail?
On Oct 28, 2013, at 10:48 AM, "Wessel, Leinani" <lwessel(a>,co.hawaii.hi.us> wrote:
Aloha,
Per your request, please see below for the information.
Email testimony address: counciltestimony @co.hawaii.hi.us
Deadline for emailed testimonies is 12 noon the day before the meeting.
Faxed emails: 961-8912
If we can be of further assistance, please email or call us.
Mahalo,
leinani Vessel
District 7
Council Aide to Council Member Dru Kanuha
(808) 323-4267
lwessel@co.hawaii.hi.us
11/4/2013