Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0393.426 2012-2014 Page 1 of 3 CC+ iy CI r Murashige, Laura Co!" Y From: Jack Adam Weber[jackadamweber @gmail.com] 2013 NOV 1 3 PM 4. 00 Sent: Monday, November 04, 2013 11:57 AM To: counciltestimony @co.hawaii.hi.us Subject: Support for Bill 113 Attachments: GMO Bill 113 testimony.docx Dear Council Members, please find attached, and copied below, my testimony for strong support of Bill 113. Thank you, Jack Adam Weber ******** Thank you council for hearing our testimony again. I am a physician living in Puna, and like many Puna residents am disappointed that our representative Greggor Ilagan does not support Bill 113, when most everyone I know in Puna favors the bill. Two weeks ago I created a petition in support of Bill 113. The petition-letter, linked here, now has almost 800 signatures. I imagine there are thousands more who would sign it who have not yet seen it. Several of us have sent this letter to Mr. Ilagan and have heard no response to any of the content of the letter. Mr. Ilagan, why do you not support Bill 113? Have you read our letter? We'd appreciate a reply along with a statement as to why you do not support this bill, and one you are willing to defend with evidence and good science. In my testimony today I will highlight the main points of my my letter to Mr. Ilagan as well as address some of the false claims made by some pro-GMO testifiers at the last hearing. We must consider not only the inherent and as of yet unknown hazards with GMO food-stuffs, but also consider GMO industry in light of the most serious issue to ever face humanity: climate change. Not only have GMO products been scientifically shown to pose serious harm to humans, to the soil, and to the ecosystem at large, but they are not part of the solution for reducing carbon emissions and avert runaway climate change. If you do not know the latest consensus regarding climate change, I encourage you to learn about it quickly. Some key links to videos by leading change climate scientists are in my testimony letter to Mr. Ilagan, which is linked above. Every economic, environmental and moral decision we make must be made in light of climate change and identified as either part of the solution or part of the problem. Our human species faces near-term extinction in the next 30-50 years if we do not make radical changes. GMOs must be evaluated not only for their inherent problems, which are many, but also in light of the larger picture of climate change. Every way you look at it, pesticide-dependent GMO crops are part of the problem, not the solution. In my petition letter I provide several dozen links to the scientific studies demonstrating GMO harm, from the food-stuffs themselves to the glyphosate-based RoundUp and other pesticides used in GMO farming. This science has been echoed by many testifiers already, including Jeffrey Smith, the physician from Waimea, and Dr. Valenzuela from University of Hawaii Tropical Ag department. Comm. No 393. 4o26 Ref. To: 1`71 cou'll/ Ref. Date '�''Q V 1 9 2013 11/13/2013 Page 2 of 3 We must seriously curb our dependence on fossil fuels, which means ceasing dependence on chemical fertilizers, chemical pesticides, and the import-export model of commerce, all of which are petroleum- intensive and emblematic of GMO agriculture. GMOs are a farce industry, created and touted to sell more pesticides. To do this the GMO industry has had to justify why GMO crops are better than organic or conventional crops. They claim that GMO products yield more product and create less pesticide use. But this untrue. With the growing issue of superbugs and superweeds, now present on over 50% of US farmland, more spoilage and more and more pesticides need to be applied. This creates what is known in the industry as the toxic treadmill, which is described in my letter to Mr. Ilagan. Peer-reviewed studies identify the pests that have developed resistance to GMO-specific pesticides. Peer-reviewed studies also demonstrate decreased yield for GMO crops. All these studies are also cited in my letter. In the longest study to date, the Cornucopia Institute, in addition to other studies cited in my letter, have identified organic farming as the way forward for humanity, and especially for a humanity threatened by climate change and an epidemic of degenerative chronic illnesses, many of which are now evident on Kauai. Another study in Russia showed that local-based organic farming that does not require obscene amounts of petroleum is more productive and beneficial to every part of the ecosystem than centralized, chemical intensive agriculture. This study is also linked in my petition letter to Mr. Ilagan. How can any council member look at what is happening on Kauai and not support Bill 113? Just last week we learned that bill 2491, which would protect our ohana on Kauai from the toxic GMO industry, was vetoed by Mayor Carvalho, despite an overwhelming majority vote in council and dire testimony by many health professionals. Mayor Carvalho is a disgrace to the heritage of Hawaii and the good people and children of Kauai. It is our hope that mayor Kenoi decides to take a different tack than Mr. Carvalho on Kauai and not veto our bill 113 should it pass hearing today. We will not vote for you, Mr. Kenoi, if you veto this bill, and thousands of us will spread the word far and wide. We also hope that Mr. Ilagan and Mr. Onishi look with open eyes at the abundant evidence of the harm of GMO farming. The rainbow Papaya industry is exempt from bill 113; the small fees and registrations required are no justification for the influx of devastating GMO industry and keeping this bill from becoming law. As I also mention in my petition letter to Mr. Ilagan I will personally donate money to help any GMO Papaya farmer offset registration fees. And I will also commit to creating a support group of organic farmers who can help and educate GMO farmers how to grow food safely for the present and our future. On my small organic farm, I produce beautiful, tastiest non-GMO papayas with no pesticides of any kind and natural fertilizers. One testifier at the last hearing said that the anti-GMO movement is based in emotion and not fact. Sir, You need to do some research. As I offered last time, please call me and I will provide to you hundreds of studies showing the appalling harm by the GMO industry. Additionally, the proverbial "300 studies" frequently referenced by GMO advocates, as well as the EU statement supporting GMOs are mischaracterized and flawed studies for many reasons, including invalid credentials for toxicology determinations, irrelevant study parameters and results that do not measure health safety, and conveniently overlooked results that actually show harm from GMOs. In fact, the more one studies the facts, the more outraged and saddened one becomes. So to characterize opposition to GMOs as based in emotional appeal seems more likely to indicate that you have not 11/13/2013 Page 3 of 3 gleaned the disturbing facts of GMO pollution, or you might be more emotional as well.. Other testifiers mentioned that GMO crops and non-GMO crops can compliment one another and co- exist. We know from many field studies that pollen drift and well as seed persistence in soil contaminate non-GMO varieties. So this is not a viable option. GMO farming takes away the choice of others to grow organic. In sum, I supplicate you Mr. Ilagan to be brave and vote in favor of Bill 113 and for you, mayor Kenoi to sign this Bill into law. Thank you. Sincerely, Jack Adam Weber Jack Adam Weber, L.Ac., Dipl. C.H., Poet PO Box 2130 Pahoa, HI 96778 www.PoeticHealing.com * Writin4s Keep it outwardly simple, inwardly rich. 11/13/2013 Thank you council for hearing our testimony again. I am a physician living in Puna, and like many Puna residents am disappointed that our representative Greggor Ilagan does not support Bill 113, when most everyone I know in Puna favors the bill. Two weeks ago I created a petition in support of Bill 113. The petition-letter, linked here, now has almost 800 signatures. I imagine there are thousands more who would sign it who have not yet seen it. Several of us have sent this letter to Mr. Ragan and have heard no response to any of the content of the letter. Mr. Ilagan, why do you not support Bill 113? Have you read our letter?We'd appreciate a reply along with a statement as to why you do not support this bill, and one you are willing to defend with evidence and good science. In my testimony today I will highlight the main points of my my letter to Mr. Ilagan as well as address some of the false claims made by some pro-GMO testifiers at the last hearing. We must consider not only the inherent and as of yet unknown hazards with GMO food-stuffs, but also consider GMO industry in light of the most serious issue to ever face humanity: climate change. Not only have GMO products been scientifically shown to pose serious harm to humans, to the soil, and to the ecosystem at large, but they are not part of the solution for reducing carbon emissions and avert runaway climate change. If you do not know the latest consensus regarding climate change, I encourage you to learn about it quickly. Some key links to videos by leading change climate scientists are in my testimony letter to Mr. Ilagan, which is linked above. Every economic, environmental and moral decision we make must be made in light of climate change and identified as either part of the solution or part of the problem. Our human species faces near-term extinction in the next 30-50 years if we do not make radical changes. GMOs must be evaluated not only for their inherent problems, which are many, but also in light of the larger picture of climate change. Every way you look at it, pesticide-dependent GMO crops are part of the problem, not the solution. In my petition letter I provide several dozen links to the scientific studies demonstrating GMO harm, from the food-stuffs themselves to the glyphosate-based RoundUp and other pesticides used in GMO farming. This science has been echoed by many testifiers already, including Jeffrey Smith, the physician from Waimea, and Dr. Valenzuela from University of Hawaii Tropical Ag department. We must seriously curb our dependence on fossil fuels, which means ceasing dependence on chemical fertilizers, chemical pesticides, and the import-export model of commerce, all of which are petroleum-intensive and emblematic of GMO agriculture. GMOs are a farce industry, created and touted to sell more pesticides. To do this the GMO industry has had to justify why GMO crops are better than organic or conventional crops. They claim that GMO products yield more product and create less pesticide use. But this untrue. With the growing issue of superbugs and superweeds, now present on over 50% of US farmland, more spoilage and more and more pesticides need to be applied. This creates what is known in the industry as the toxic treadmill, which is described in my letter to Mr. Ilagan. Peer-reviewed studies identify the pests that have developed resistance to GMO-specific pesticides. Peer-reviewed studies also demonstrate decreased yield for GMO crops. All these studies are also cited in my letter. In the longest study to date, the Cornucopia Institute, in addition to other studies cited in my letter, have identified organic farming as the way forward for humanity, and especially for a humanity threatened by climate change and an epidemic of degenerative chronic illnesses, many of which are now evident on Kauai.Another study in Russia showed that local-based organic farming that does not require obscene amounts of petroleum is more productive and beneficial to every part of the ecosystem than centralized, chemical intensive agriculture. This study is also linked in my petition letter to Mr. Ilagan. How can any council member look at what is happening on Kauai and not support Bill 113?Just last week we learned that bill 2491,which would protect our ohana on Kauai from the toxic GMO industry, was vetoed by Mayor Carvalho, despite an overwhelming majority vote in council and dire testimony by many health professionals. Mayor Carvalho is a disgrace to the heritage of Hawaii and the good people and children of Kauai. It is our hope that mayor Kenoi decides to take a different tack than Mr. Carvalho on Kauai and not veto our bill 113 should it pass hearing today. We will not vote for you, Mr. Kenoi, if you veto this bill, and thousands of us will spread the word far and wide. We also hope that Mr. Ilagan and Mr. Onishi look with open eyes at the abundant evidence of the harm of GMO farming. The rainbow Papaya industry is exempt from bill 113; the small fees and registrations required are no justification for the influx of devastating GMO industry and keeping this bill from becoming law. As I also mention in my petition letter to Mr. Ilagan I will personally donate money to help any GMO Papaya farmer offset registration fees. And I will also commit to creating a support group of organic farmers who can help and educate GMO farmers how to grow food safely for the present and our future. On my small organic farm, I produce beautiful, tastiest non- GMO papayas with no pesticides of any kind and natural fertilizers. One testifier at the last hearing said that the anti-GMO movement is based in emotion and not fact. Sir, You need to do some research. As I offered last time, please call me and I will provide to you hundreds of studies showing the appalling harm by the GMO industry. Additionally, the proverbial "300 studies" frequently referenced by GMO advocates, as well as the EU statement supporting GMOs are mischaracterized and flawed studies for many reasons, including invalid credentials for toxicology determinations, irrelevant study parameters and results that do not measure health safety, and conveniently overlooked results that actually show harm from GMOs. In fact, the more one studies the facts, the more outraged and saddened one becomes. So to characterize opposition to GMOs as based in emotional appeal seems more likely to indicate that you have not gleaned the disturbing facts of GMO pollution, or you might be more emotional as well.. Other testifiers mentioned that GMO crops and non-GMO crops can compliment one another and co-exist. We know from many field studies that pollen drift and well as seed persistence in soil contaminate non-GMO varieties. So this is not a viable option. GMO farming takes away the choice of others to grow organic. In sum, I supplicate you Mr. Ilagan to be brave and vote in favor of Bill 113 and for you, mayor Kenoi to sign this Bill into law. Thank you. Sincerely, Jack Adam Weber