Author: Kent

[From Connect Column Archives]
The General Accounting Office, which is a non-partisan investigative arm of the Congress of the United States, has repeatedly asked President George W. Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney for more details about the meetings convened by the administration which resulted in the formulation of the Bush-Cheney national energy policy. Cheney has formally refused to comply with these requests claiming certain details are none of the GAO’s business. The GAO office inquiry was prompted by a request from two House Democrats.
There is a problem here. It is understandable that Bush and Cheney would resist attempts by Democrats to make political hay from information provided to the GAO. This type of maneuvering is the same old monotonous story of politics as usual. If this is the motive behind the request from the Democrats: shame on them.
However, even if it is the motive, that does not excuse the position taken by the Bush-Cheney administration. It is not OK to withhold information about how what may turn out to be one of the most important policies in the history of this country was formulated. It is not OK to hold in secret the names and backgrounds of meeting participants or of other contacts and discussions that took place. It is not OK for the public not to be able to decide for themselves whether the people involved were acting in the best interest of the nation or in the best interest of themselves and the companies they represent.
Holding information in secret always raises suspicion. As a general principle in this country, the citizens have a right to know all that is going on in government unless there is some very, very good immediate national security reason to do otherwise. These energy policy formulation meetings and contacts clearly do not fall into that category. The nation’s business is best carried on in a glass house, not behind closed doors.
The Bush administration promised openness, frankness, and bi-partisan compromise in its campaign promises. It is time for the administration to clearly lay out for the public who participated in what meetings and when as it made the decisions about the energy future of this nation. If it does not, we urge the GAO to exercise what ever powers it may have to require the administration to do so. The decisions about our energy future are much too important for it to be otherwise.

[From Connect Column Archives]
There has been much said about human embryonic stem cell research. Now that President George W. Bush has taken a position against spending federal tax dollars for embryonic stem cell research except with existing cell lines, it is time to try to understand what really has happened.
There is an enormous misconception about what scientists are saying to us. Part of this misconception is because scientists speak in different words than most folks understand. When people hear the word, “stem”, the first thing that may come to mind is the stalk of a plant. Well, that isn’t it.
Others may associate the words, “stem cells”, with the brain stem in humans, a particular region of the brain. I read an article in one newspaper that said scientists wanted to “create human embryos ….for the sole purpose of killing the baby and harvesting stem cells from his or her little brain”. This is totally inaccurate, too.
So, what are the facts? When a human egg cell is joined by a sperm cell, fertilization occurs. The sperm and the egg are alive before fertilization, at fertilization, and together as one cell after fertilization. The moment the sperm and egg join is conception. This is the moment many have chosen to say a new human being exists. Only one cell exists at that time. That single cell is about the size of the period at the end of this sentence.
Almost immediately, things happen. The one cell divides to become two cells. The two cells divide to become four cells. Four become eight, and so on. In eight cell divisions, the number of cells goes from the original one to 256. Even so, the physical space occupied by the 256 cells is still about the size of a period.
If one looks at these cells under a microscope, they are clumped together in a little ball and they all look alike. These are the magical embryonic stem cells. Try as you may, no matter how high the power of the microscope, one cannot see a miniature human being there. These cells are the cells whose descendents later develop into highly complex tissues, organs, bone, blood, and all the other things that make up a human body. They have not become different one from another, but each has the potential to become anything one finds in a human body.
These cells with their unlimited potential are what scientist believe hold the secrets to cures for many of the most heart wrenching diseases and conditions in human beings. These are the cells that scientists want to explore and understand. Most scientists believe these cells, which have never been any specialized tissue, offer the most promise as opposed to ‘adult stem cells’ which have specialized to some degree. It is believed once a cell or its descendents start down the path of becoming a special cell like a heart or nerve cell, there is no turning back. The trip is one way.
So, with the President’s policy statement, where are we? If you hold the religious belief that a new human life begins at conception and that using embryonic stems cells for research kills a human being, that is it. If doing stem cell research is in the same category as abortion, no embryonic stem cell research is acceptable. Period.
There seems to be considerable inconsistency with this position, however. Most who are against embryonic stem cell research do not oppose fertility clinic procedures that result in deep freezing and, if unused, disposal of many, many more embryos created in a glass dish than ever find their way into a woman’s womb. By their standards, it is OK for many embryos to be ‘killed’ so that one or two may be born. This looks like blatant rationalization. Consistency demands being against both if against one.
If you hold a more flexible view, a clearer understanding of the President’s position becomes more important. The President wants us to believe he has taken a middle road on the embryonic stem cell issue. He has not.
The President gave the green light on supporting embryonic stem cell research on the “60 existing cell lines”. More facts will unfold in future weeks, but at present it is not at all clear where “60”came from. Many believe the number is significantly less, that the cell lines that do exist are held mostly by private enterprises world wide who may not want to share them with others, and that many embryonic cell lines are either defective or not viable for the long term.
If new cell lines cannot be created, significant and concerted embryonic stem cell research simply will not happen in the United States. Federal research dollars are vital to the creation of a research effort of size in our universities and public research centers. These are the institutions that share knowledge which advances science at the highest possible rate. Private research does not do that. Private research is more concerned with profits to the enterprise doing the research and then, if at all, the sharing of information.
The President’s decision, if upheld, condemns literally millions to unnecessary suffering and/or early death who may have been able to lead longer and better lives if the promise of embryonic stem cell research is realized. It condemns family and friends to years of anguish, frustration, and sorrow.
Scientists want desperately to understand how stem cells work. If they do, they will be able to cure diabetes, Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s disease, ALS, and cancer. They will be able to grow skin tissue for burn victims and cardiac tissue for damaged hearts. They will be able to repair nerves damaged by strokes and spinal-cord injuries. The list goes on.
The United States is currently the world leader in biology. Placing severe limitations on human embryonic stem cell research in this country opens the door for other nations to take the lead. They will.

[From Connect Column Archives]
As I thought about this column, the sun was just peaking over the trees. The words of a song loved by my grandchildren came to mind:
“Mr. Sun, Sun, Mr. Golden Sun, Please shine down on me!
These little children are asking you to please come out so they can play with you.
Sun, Sun, Mr. Golden Sun, Please shine down me.”
This is the way things were when I was growing up, too. We loved the sun and all it did for us. We took for granted it would always be that way. Even now, when I step outdoors on a bright day, the sun’s warm energy on my skin brings a smile to my face and an uplifting to my spirit. Only occasionally do I think of the sun being one continuous nuclear explosion over 93 million miles away.
We have difficulty imagining that kind of power. Without this energy, there would be no life here. The planet would be dark and cold. Thankfully, there are no signs we have to worry about the sun being extinguished any time soon. It is what we cannot see that we need to worry about.
High above us — invisible and silent — is one of the miracles of our planetary home. It is a clear gas layer called the ozone layer. It was there before mankind, before the dinosaurs roamed the planet, and even before the first living cell on Earth.. It engulfs the entire planet in a protective cocoon as we move through the blackness of space on our endless journey around the sun.
Through this entire time it has been there protecting life on Earth from harm. Thanks to modern science, we know it stops a particular part of the sun’s energy from reaching the Earth’s surface. This ultraviolet energy, when too much, destroys. It causes cancers. It stops plants from capturing the energy they need to make their living. We know too much ultraviolet energy reaching the surface of the planet has the potential to kill the biological processes we depend upon.
Less than a century ago, mankind learned to create chemicals that, when released into the air, would find their way up to the ozone layer and begin to destroy it. We loved these chemicals. They gave us air conditioning, refrigeration, and provided the ‘psssssst’ in our hair sprays, deodorants, insecticides, whipped cream cans and a variety of other aerosols. They were used in industrial processes of many kinds. At first, we didn’t realize we were doing anything except making life easier for ourselves.
Then, the bad news came. A few decades ago, scientists discovered the ozone layer was getting thinner. The thinner the layer, the more damaging ultraviolet radiation reaches the Earth’s surface. The layer even developed large holes in it around the North and South Poles at times. Now we hear about holes in the ozone layer that appear over where people live in Australia and northern Canada. We get ‘burn’ indexes along with our daily weather reports. We are warned by the Environmental Protection Agency to ‘save your sight — wear sunglasses, do the lotion motion — apply sunscreen, lose your shadow — seek shade, top off your day — wear a hat, and stay out of prolonged exposure to the sun’.
We can put on sunglasses, sunscreen, and all the rest; but, what about the plants? What about the trees, and grasses, and green algae in the waters of the world that release into the air the oxygen we breathe. What about them? What about the plants we depend upon for food?
In the short span of a few years, humans have managed to damage a vital link in what supports life on this planet. If we, world wide, totally stopped today manufacturing ozone layer damaging chemicals, it would be decades before we know the final consequences of our actions. These harmful chemicals hang around continuing to do damage for a long, long time.
Many corrective steps have been taken, but more are needed. In the United States, we no longer power aerosols with these harmful chemicals. Our air conditioning and refrigeration systems are being changed to other, safer, chemicals. But, we and others around the world continue to manufacture and/or use chemicals harmful to the ozone layer.
Just last week, the National Aeronautics and Space Agency (NASA) announced it would no longer be able to provide monitoring of the ozone layer due to current budgetary constraints. Scientists are worried.
The ozone layer is our friend and protector. It has been there for all of life for eons upon eons. We need to be vigilant as its friend and protector for the benefit of life to come.

[From Connect Column Archives]
Chalk up a victory for common sense. The United States Senate this past week acted wisely when it voted to block oil drilling activities in the ANWR wildlife area. If drilling activities had been allowed, the primary economic beneficiaries would have been the oil companies and the State of Alaska. The price would have been the sacrifice of one of the most pristine natural areas on the planet. The long term energy gain from extricated oil would have been negligible. Enhancement of national security and reduction of dependence upon foreign oil would have been zip. The wisest choice was made, but it is not clear that it was made with full consciousness of the right reason.
Most political pundits see the battle over ANWR drilling as one between political parties, each trying to gain the advantage over the other. Granted, President Bush had the ANWR issue at the center of his energy policy effort. One has to have more than a little suspicion about this given his and his colleagues’ relationships with oil company folks. The Republicans have pushed the arguments of national security, energy independence and creation of jobs. The Democrats on the other hand have tried to gain the upper hand by adopting the arguments about saving the environment and minimizing the potential impact of the supply of oil that ever could flow from the ANWR area.
Now that the Senate has blocked drilling (at least for the time being), it is time for both parties to get on with taking a real look at the facts of the long term energy needs of this country and the real reason their vote was the best one. It is crystal clear that as long as the United States of American depends upon oil as its primary energy source, it will be dependent upon foreign oil. There just are not oil resources enough, currently exploited or not, in North America upon which to base an energy gluttonous economy. Period. That is a geological fact of life. The oil reserves of the planet are located primarily in countries that are not particularly friendly to the USA and likely never will be. We are presently locked in a rather sick economic dance with those countries in a way that we are dependent upon them and they upon us…… and we upon them and they upon us ….. etc.. As long as that dance goes on, the United States will be vulnerable to the choices of others. We must find a new dance. This will take courage.
It is time for our political leadership to get the backbone to lead us to real energy independence. It is time to revisit legislation about automobile and other gasoline/oil powered vehicle efficiency and raise the standards for future performance. It is time to pass legislation that would provide real economic incentives for energy conservation and innovation. It is time to have the guts to add a few cents tax to a gallon of gasoline with all of the derived revenues being invested in energy research and development. It is time to promote maximum development rates of energy production through wind and tidal generation, through solar energy capture, through energy fuel cell generation, through biomass ethanol production, and, yes, even through nuclear energy generation provided the very serious issues around current safety and waste disposal are fully and properly resolved. The ultimate goal of all of this effort is to convert the entire United States energy system to one based upon hydrogen rather than petroleum. Accomplishing this goal would totally solve all energy independence issues as well as all issues about greenhouse gasses and planet climate warming. It would solve all issues about air pollution from fossil fuel combustion. The fact is that hydrogen burns cleanly with the only byproduct being pure water.
The road to a hydrogen economy and energy independence will not be an easy one. The first foes to defeat are the oil companies themselves and those in the administration and Congress who beat the drums for them; you know, the folks who are driven by short term economic greed rather than long term good for this country and the planet as a whole.
The people of this country have the imagination and technological talent to create all that is needed. The challenge is to find the political leadership that will provide the national vision and the encouragement. We did it when we decided to put a man on the moon. We can and must do it again.

[From Connect Column Archives: published several years as the SuperFund site was being cleaned. This serves as a reminder to not let guard down. More recently, there is ground water pollution from an unknown source for wells that serve the Indiana American Water company’s wells for Kokomo.]
Millions have been spent to clean up the environmental catastrophy left behind by those who managed, owned, and operated the Continental Steel Corporation plants on the nearly 200 acre site at Markland Avenue and Phillips Street. Millions more will be spent over the next decade according to IDEM spokespersons speaking at a meeting to review the project. The bottom line is that there remains surface soil contamination, lagoon sediment contamination, PCBs, PAHs (polyaromatic hydrocarbons), ground water contamination and all the rest. IDEM and the EPA have cleaned up the worst of it, but what remains at the site and all along the Wildcat Creek corridor from the Continental Steel main site to past Dixon Road is presently at contamination levels that are unacceptable.
Another major site of contamination with toxic compounds is the old quarry at the corner of Markland Avenue and Brandon Street. Eye witnesses can attest to the fact that all sorts of waste products from Continental Steel were dumped there over a long period of time. IDEM has already removed barrels and other debris from this old quarry site, but a huge amount of work remains.
Another possible site of Continental Steel dumping has only recently emerged and that is the old quarry location just south of South Side Lumber on South Washington Street. There are many Kokomo citizens that remember when this location was a big hole in the ground partially filled with water. They, also, remember trucks that looked like slag trucks backing up there to dump their loads over the years. If one drives by that site today, one sees a chain link fence with barbed wire on the top protecting what appears to be a level piece of ground. One must wonder why the fence. More than likely, IDEM would like some details about that place from folks who lived close by over those many years of dumping.
The folks at the meeting this past week with the IDEM representatives learned also that the funding structure for the Superfund was buried by the current administration along with a lot of other environmental protection programs. The tax that funded Superfund projects was eliminated. Now, each year the EPA must go before Congress and ask for funds from the general fund to pay for clean up projects. Seems rather a strange way to do business to me. This means that the burden is being born by the common taxpayer rather than by the industries that leave toxic compounds in the environment. So, IDEM has no idea from year to year if they will be able to complete the job started at Continental Steel. They have to do the best they can to attack the worst first and work their way to a point of stopping when money is no longer available regardless of whether or not the job is done.
The irony of this whole situation is that those responsible for the decisions and actions that have cost already millions to clean up with millions more to be spent have skated. They have no liability whatsoever. And many made a lot of money from the wheeling and dealing that took place in the end years of Continental Steel. I need not remind you of what happened to the pension funds for the employees that devoted their lives to that place. In my considered opinion, there is no way that the decision makers could not have known what they were doing at the time, both financially and environmentally. This is a perfect example of why those who run companies for profit must be watched carefully by elected representatives pledged to work for the common good. If not, another Exxon or Enron or Continental Steel will be just around the corner.
Heck, the administration might help them. Interesting to note that Mr. Bush through the EPA just this week made it easier for public utilities and industry to pollute the air.

[From Connect Column Archives]
My morning ritual several years ago was to get out of bed, half stumble down the stairs, put on the coffee, and head for my home office to check email. There was a window close by that gave me clear view of the outside world. I checked out the weather, watched the birds, squirrels, and a black and white cat that visited most every morning. I saw, too, the old, tin roof of a neighbor’s garage that once was home for a carriage and horse. That tin roof caused me to think about how life must have been in this neighborhood when that building was built about 100 years ago. That tin roof took me back in memory to my own growing up days in this town.
I think about how things have changed over the years. I think about the absolutely wondrous scientific and technological innovations that have become a normal and expected part of our lives in the last seven and one half decades.
My earliest memories though are of Victory Gardens and Block Wardens and of a father gone off to war. They are of milk being delivered to our home by the Med-O-Bloom Dairy horse-drawn milk wagon and of the fresh homemade butter, eggs, and vegetables coming directly to our door. And of the doctor making a house call from time to time when we were sick. They are of times of racing home after school to gather by the radio to hear programs that stimulated the imagination like ‘The Lone Ranger’, ‘The Green Hornet’, ‘Inner Sanctum’, ‘The Shadow Knows’ and ‘Tennessee Jed’. They are of times when children just old and tall enough to put money into the bus coin box could travel downtown to Kresge’s or Woolworth’s or Penny’s or to see the movie serials each week and be safe.
Everyone walked to school. No problem. It seemed the adults in our town looked after each other and any children around. Even the dogs and cats were friendly and free. Most folks did not lock their homes when going off to shop or work. I ask myself whether we have really made any progress in our quality of life here in these past 75 years? Certainly, there is bigger and more of everything, but is it better?
Things were not all roses over those years, though. Racism and religious prejudice were pretty ingrained in our society in those days. We have not gotten through those even yet.
We did some pretty stupid things, too: things that we were told were wonderful and harmless at the time. I remember going to the dentist again and again to get a cavity filled. As a reward, the dentist would give me a gel-capsule filled with mercury. I loved holding that marvelous, liquid metal in my hands and using it to polish coins by rubbing the mercury and coins between my fingers. Today we would say, “Mercury in you hands! Are you crazy?”
I remember going to Eby’s Shoe Store to get new shoes. To check the fit, the store had a wonderful machine into which one would insert a foot with a new shoe on it, push a button, and see how the shoe fit. Gosh, you could see all the bones in your foot, too. The machine was an X-ray machine. I often have wondered what happened to Mr. Eby and the other employees of the shoe store.
I remember the hot summer days in our neighborhood. Sometimes the bugs, particularly mosquitoes, were kind of bothersome, but there was a fix for that, too. The city would send around the truck to take care of the bugs. We looked forward to it. It was great fun to ride our bicycles in the cloud coming from the truck. The DDT smelled pretty good. We were told this miracle chemical had saved the world from malaria and from being over run by insects. We believed it, because the chemical companies said so.
We are now in a time when science and technology are moving much faster than then. It is important we learn from our past, take the best from the past and move on. This means carefully examining change and innovation to be sure they lead in directions good for people and the planet. One huge lesson is not to be so quick to believe all that is new and claimed to be so wonderful, particularly if the message is coming from those who stand to make money or gain politically from whatever the message conveys. We have been fooled before. There are those who would fool us again and again and again.

[From Connect Column Archives]
We have an attitude problem; an attitude problem toward the idea of growth. All of our lives, we have been handed the message that all growth is good. From the day we were born, our parents told us to eat our food so we would grow big and strong. As we grew, family and friends told us about how tall we were getting or that we were becoming a ‘big boy’ or ‘big girl’ now. We have heard this all of our lives.
In our culture, we have been told that growth and development are good things, always. Growth and development bring more money into our community. They bring more jobs, goods, and services to the people here. We measure our progress by the number of people who live here. Heck, we even get state and federal money for schools, highways, and other projects based upon how many people are here. We get representation in the United States Congress that way as well. So, growth and development have to be good. Right?
Then a question came to mind. What is the end of this process? Is there ever a time when we have had enough growth and development? Even the human body at some point reaches maturity and grows physically no more. We transition to devoting our time and energy to personal and internal growth in the realms of the spiritual, psychological, and creative aspects of our lives and leave physical enlargement behind; at least most of us do. Could this same process be the healthy and maturing one for a community?
Is our ultimate goal to become the size of Indianapolis or Chicago or even New York? Is our goal to bring more and more people to our community without limit? Is our goal to bring more and more industry and business here, forever? Is there ever a time when enough is enough? Is there a time when it is time to concentrate our energy on the quality of life in our community rather than quantity?
Globally, we are in a real mess. Global gets global by adding up all of the small pieces like Greentown, Tipton, Logansport, Kokomo, Indianapolis, Chicago, New York, Paris, London, Tokyo, Mexico City and so on and so on. When Jesus Christ walked the planet 2000 years ago, it has been estimated there were around 130 million people on the whole earth. That is about half what is in the United States alone right now. In 1999, we passed 6 billion worldwide or almost 50 times the number when Jesus lived. And we are growing in numbers at an astounding rate. We are adding 216,000 people a day to our planet. Population scientists tell us that we are on our way to 12 billion or more in the next few decades.
Such growth cannot continue because the planet cannot support it, period. Just as cancer cannot grow indefinitely in your body without eventually killing you, so humanity cannot continue to grow in numbers unchecked in the biological world without killing it.
What does this mean to us who live in central Indiana? Maybe it means thinking about what kind of community we want in the end. Maybe it means understanding more about a quality of life and less about more and more all the time. Maybe it means taking a look at how we are using water and land and air in our town and around our area; and understanding we have physical limits on resources. Maybe it means a thorough discussion about what our community goals are and then doing some tough planning.
From a state and national standpoint, maybe it means talk about population matters including immigration policies. The United States of America takes in more immigrants annually than all other nations in the world combined. And what about all of the illegal immigration? As the world becomes more and more populated, the pressure to bring more and more people to the USA will only increase. Are there limits?
Maybe it means, too, that a re-examination of the policies of our federal government toward supporting family planning is needed. This does not mean we have to come to agreement regarding the hottest of issues: abortion. It does mean, though, that some intelligent decision should be reached concerning the education of women world wide about other reproductive options and health. The current policies of our federal government are questionable at best. We have quit supporting several major family planning programs.
We can affect global results on growth of all kinds by doing our part in our own community to think and act in responsible ways. We are not now doing that. The resources of planet Earth are limited. It is essential for the survival and quality of life of our children and grandchildren for us to become acutely aware of this. It is time for the taking of concrete steps toward a sustainable society. It is time for an attitude adjustment.

[I bumped into four Monsanto sponsored benches in Greentown, IN, this week. The letter below is what was sent to the Greentown Town Council]
To the Council:
I was in Greentown yesterday. What caught my eye were the four benches at the corner of Main and Meridian Streets; the ones sponsored by Monsanto. I found this disturbing.

Monsanto is the company that has given us DDT, Agent Orange, PCBs, Dioxin, and most recently, Roundup. We know the impact of the first four on people and the environment. Dioxin is likely the most toxic substance ever created by man. Agent Orange has caused devastating damage to the health of our veterans. PCBs cause cancer. DDT has been banned due to its incredible environmental damage.
Most recently, Roundup (glyphosate) has been determined to be a “probable human carcinogen” by the World Health Organization: International Agency for Research on Cancer. This is the highest designation for cancer cause possible for testing on animals. In short, it causes cancer. And Roundup is everywhere sprayed on genetically engineered corn and soy beans in our part of the world.
And a word about the genetically engineered corn and soy beans: there now is sound scientific evidence, mostly from testing in countries outside of the USA, that GE crops pose health risks to both humans and livestock.
I am reminded of the history of the tobacco industry. It was filled with deception, denial, secrecy, and lies even when testifying before Congress. And Monsanto, et al are doing their very best to deny people knowing whether the food they eat is genetically engineered or not. Some 64 countries worldwide require labeling or ban GE foods. The USA does not.
One has to wonder why the expected life span for men in the USA is last when ranked with 17 industrialized countries. For women, they rank 16^th out of 17. Food?
I urge you to consider whether you really want to promote Monsanto with benches on your corners.

Representative Todd Rokita has betrayed you, again! On May 12^th, he signed on as a co-sponsor for HR 1599, a Congressional bill that would effectively block required labeling of foods that contain genetically engineered ingredients. A labeling requirement on such foods exists in 64 countries worldwide.
This is not a new story. Rokita signed on as a co-sponsor of the same bill introduced by Rep. Mike Pompeo of Kansas in the last session of Congress. Pompeo is a darling of big chemical/seed and big food corporations. It appears Rokita wants to be one as well.
HR 1599 carries the name, “The Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act”. It is far from that. Those of us that believe the public has a right to know how food is produced and what is in it call the act, “The Deny Americans the Right to Know Act” (DARK). Take a look at food labels now. There is a great deal of information on them, but big chemical/seed and food corporations want no one to know if genetically engineered components are a part of the food you eat. Secrecy is the word.
Contrary to claims about the safety of GE or GMO foods, there have been no long term human health safety tests. Tests on laboratory animals, mostly outside of the United States, have shown all sorts of health concerns with measurable damage to digestive systems, liver, and other organs. In the United States, GE foods were simply declared safe by government decree under the George H.W. Bush/Dan Quayle administration. The decision was political and not based in sound science. The scenario continues. People have become the laboratory test animals without their knowledge or consent.
There is a new reason now for even greater concern. Glyphosate (RoundUp, typically) pesticide has been declared a “probable human carcinogen”; that is, causes cancer. This comes from the World Health Organization: International Agency for Research on Cancer. This designation is the highest possible through laboratory animal testing.
The primary reason for genetically engineered corn and soy beans to date has been to enable them to withstand massive doses of glyphosate pesticide and live. All vegetation around them is to die. It is known pesticide residues follow the crop to the dinner table. Now we know there may be an increased risk for cancer. But, you are not supposed to know that.
I am taken by the parallels I see between the tobacco industry and the present day big chemical/seed and processed food industries. Secrecy and lies dominated the tobacco industry.
So, here we are with a Representative that prefers to keep you in the dark. He does not want you to know if the foods you feed your family contain genetically engineered ingredients or have been dosed with a cancer causing pesticide. He does not want you to be able to make informed decisions for yourself, but rather have the big federal government make them for you. He wants all power to rest with federal agencies like the Food and Drug Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency that have failed to protect you in the first place. He wants to take all power away from states to be able to make decisions and act for their respective citizens.
I, for one, fail to understand this kind of reasoning unless it again is yet another case of follow the corporations, lobbyists, and the money. It certainly is not to protect the interests or health of Indiana citizens.
Nice going, Representative Todd Rokita. You are one for the books.

[There is an article in the March 2015 issue of National Geographic magazine that caught my eye. The article, “The Age of Disbelief”, by Joel Achenbach describes several scenarios wherein the common public does not believe what science tells. The part that got me was that about genetically engineered foods. It was false. My letter to the National Geographic editor is below.]
As a holder of a masters degree in aquatic toxicology and a doctorate in genetics, I want to call your attention to what I believe to be a grossly erroneous statement in Joel Achencach’s article, The Age of Disbelief, concerning foods containing genetically modified ingredients. He said, “…. there’s no evidence that it isn’t (safe) and no reason to believe that altering genes precisely in a lab is more dangerous than altering them wholesale through traditional breeding”. This statement is blatantly false.
Point one: the genes are NOT altered PRECISELY. Genes are inserted via gene gun, microinjection, or via bacteria or viruses infection. There is no precise insertion but rather random mass insertion into the host genome. There is no measure of damage or alteration to the host genome which can happen in dozens of ways. And there is an abundance of evidence of serious health consequences in laboratory animals in studies conducted outside the United States. Read the literature.
Point two: genetic modification or engineering cannot in any way be compared to traditional breeding. Traditional breeding respects biological barriers that have developed over millions of years. Genetic engineering grossly violates those barriers with unknown consequences. The resulting plant or animal on the molecular level is total different than the original plant or animal. There is a significant difference and there is always the potential of rogue proteins appearing.
Point three: to date the primary reason for genetic modification has been to create plants able to withstand massive doses of glyphosate (most commonly in RoundUp) and live with all vegetation surrounding those plants dying. Now one sees the development of super weeds and the recent determination by the World Health Organization that glyphosate is a “probably human carcinogen”. This is the highest designation possible with lab animals. Pesticide residue follows these crops to the dinner table.
So, Achencach did not do his homework. He swallowed the tale told by big chemical/seed and big processed food corporations. National Geographic is supposed to be a truth teller. In this case, readers were fed a story that puts them at risk.
Regards, Kent Blacklidge PhD