What do you think of Tsai's Go South policy?

Politics Taiwan Politics
81

The better pesticides are designed to break down entirely within 10 days of being exposed to air and water, thus safe by the time the food is harvested. But there are some controversial ones (most famously, DDT) which were notable for lasting for years, which is why DDT was banned. The ban was entirely called for - DDT was turning up in women’s breast milk, among other places it shouldn’t have been.

But funny that you should mention corn and soybeans bought by Taiwan. Almost all corn and soybeans grown in the USA are now GMO crops. For that reason, they are banned in Europe, and a number of other places. Taiwan is under extreme pressure to buy US-grown corn and soybeans, and has kept quiet about the GMO issue, but it hangs over trade negotiations like a guillotine. From what we’ve been able to learn from the top-secret classified TPP documents on Wikileaks, one of the conditions that the USA wants to impose on TPP members is that they not only cannot ban GMO crops, but cannot even label them. So much for “let the free market decide.” “Consumer choice” is just a slogan.

Anyone with a serious interest in this should watch the documentary “The World According to Monsanto.” I don’t need to provide a link, it’s on Youtube and easily found.

82

At least in Taiwan, plain soya bean products such as tofu are labelled as GMO or non-GMO. In the US the large food companies have spent millions and millions to lobby against and prevent GMO labelling. So much for consumer choice.

83

We agree more than we disagree. Remember that I’ve been a vegetarian for maybe 5 years at this point… There’s a reason for it. I support tests because right now we have very influential people arguing that there are no adverse health issues related to it, and a number of people resisting and arguing the opposite. Why not resolve the issue through science instead of through trade and diplomatic pressure?

84

We agree more than we disagree. Remember that I’ve been a vegetarian for maybe 5 years at this point… There’s a reason for it. I support tests because right now we have very influential people arguing that there are no adverse health issues related to it, and a number of people resisting and arguing the opposite. Why not resolve the issue through science instead of through trade and diplomatic pressure?[/quote]

Sorry, I didn’t mean to imply at all that your were not concerned with animal welfare. I just don’t see how more science, more testing, really help. Facts really just don’t matter any more, especially for industries that have a lot of lobbying powers. Despite what fred may think, the oil industry, like everyone else, actually knows global warming is happening and they tell their contractors to build rising sea levels into plans for offshore platforms. Yeah, think about that. Doesn’t stop them from then lobbying against regulations to the practices that are causing the warming in the first place.

If US pork producers want to sell racto-pork they will find plenty of politicians who will be sympathetic to them and hostile to the science.

Like I said, personally I think the evidence is already there that we shouldn’t use the stuff.

85

Since this has turned into a US food safety discussion, I agree with MM that more science will not help, because at least in the US food science and testing has been seriously compromised by the revolving door between FDA, USDA and Big Food, Monsanto, etc. Besides that the FDA takes the food industry’s word for the safety of 1000s untested additives that the food industry labels GRAS (generally regarded as safe). For me I try to stick to Michael Pollan’s motto “Eat food (non-processed), not too much, mostly plants.”

86

:thumbsup: Me too. Pretty much the only meat I eat is Alaskan salmon, small fish like anchovies and sardines from certified sustainable fisheries, and the occasional kampung chickenand eggs.

87

Oh, I didn’t mean for the US market. My understanding is the Codex whatever it’s called… the world food safety body… OKd Ractopamine with a difference of just one vote. That raises alarm bells, and the UN and WTO, or the EU, or any number of bodies could conduct their own tests for the sake of local laws. It makes a lot more sense to go to the negotiating table with evidence of something than to say “well, I strongly believe…”

PS, I don’t know how the FDA is with food, but I can tell you from first hand experience with drugs they are brutal (and that’s a good thing, mostly).

88

Not related to ractopamine . . . I wonder what kind of policy elements that a Go South approach for Taiwan could have. It would seem to me that a transfer of the current Taiwanese approach to China, even if it could be reproduced in SE Asia and other places would not be desirable. Setting up low cost factories to make contract electronics for someone else just doesn’t seem like it will lift Taiwan’s economy much. Moreover, in another 20 years those low costs areas will likely have developed such that it no longer makes as much economic sense.

I’d hope Taiwan can develop a kind of cachet or brand appeal among its enterprises such that Taiwanese firms can prosper by selling their own goods and services in these economies irrespective of where the product is made. Similar to they way Korean products and formerly Japanese products had a cultural appeal that drove their desirability, I’d hope that Taiwan can do the same in SE Asia. Irrespective of whatever political outcome happens with China, from a branding perspective I think Taiwan needs to emphasize its Taiwanese-ness and not its Chineseness (which will always be largely owned and drive by China). Korean products enjoy a cultural cache of being hip, fashionable, good looking, modern and sufficiently Asian to be comfortable and Western to be cosmopolitan. What distinguishes “Brand Taiwan”?

89

[quote=“Hokwongwei”]
PS, I don’t know how the FDA is with food, but I can tell you from first hand experience with drugs they are brutal (and that’s a good thing, mostly).[/quote]

How many decades ago was your “first hand experience?” I can believe that once upon a time, the FDA cared about consumers, but things have changed. The FDA no longer even tests drugs - that function has been “privatized.” Usually it’s the manufacturer that does the testing, and then submits the invariably positive results to the FDA for approval. This has resulted in some huge scandals where drugs that are both ineffective and dangerous get approved.

Read the Wikipedia page on Vioxx (Rofecoxib): en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rofecoxib

I’ve also had my own “first hand experience,” when it was suggested that I use the drug doxazosin to control my blood pressure. To quote Wikipedia:

In March 2000, the Antihypertensive and Lipid Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) study stopped its arm of the trial looking at alpha blockers, because doxazosin was less effective than a simple diuretic, and because patients on doxazosin had a 25% higher rate of cardiovascular disease and twice the rate of congestive heart failure as patients on diuretics. Pfizer, aware of the results before publication, launched a marketing campaign in early 2000, and sales were largely unaffected, despite the dangers highlighted by the study.

There are some other notable cases where the manufacturer knew of the problem and went forward with marketing anyway, and the FDA remained mute:

drugwatch.com/actos/

drugwatch.com/yaz/recall.php

drugwatch.com/accutane/recall.php

If the FDA is being “brutal” when it comes to drug approvals, then I assume that means brutal towards consumers rather than the drug manufacturers.

Getting back to Taiwan, I understand that part of the super-secret TPP agreement is to limit the ability of governments to regulate prescription drugs. A company whose drugs get banned because of safety or efficacy issues can sue the government in question for “lost profits” - the decision on the government’s “guilt” and the financial penalty gets decided by a secret corporate tribunal. Known as the ISDS (Investor-State Dispute Settlement) process, it strips government’s of any sovereignty in environmental, health and safety regulation:

New trade pacts create secret, pro-corporate tribunals

And remember how everyone was outraged about the secrecy in the now-defunct Services Trade Agreement with China? And yet the DPP and KMT are equally committed to signing the TPP without reading it.

90

I’m in the industry now. The way the FDA works for manufacturers is like the IRS with taxes. Your submissions are assumed to be accurate, but when that audit invariably comes around (once every two years or so I think for us), you are in huge trouble if you can’t support what you’ve submitted.

91

I’ve been eating ractopamine meat for 15 years, apparently. As have all my fellow meat eating Americans. We seem fine.

92

Yes, Americans are “fine.” No doubt the healthiest people in the world.

93

Nobody denies obesity is a problem. Prove that it’s caused by Ractopamine. Correlation absolutely does not mean causation.

94

In my opinion, people in Australia and New Zealand have similar diets to the US. In fact they consume even more meat then people in the US.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of … onsumption

OZs and kiwis love their dairy products as well. With all the fish and chips, I think they love the fried stuff and bad carbohydrates like potatos equally too.

So explain why obesity is more of a problem in the US by 10 percentage points.

95

There is literally an uncountable number of reasons that may be the case. We mentioned earlier in the the thread that Americans consume an immense amount of sugar. (I have family members who “don’t drink water” and only have soda instead!) You’d have to show me conclusive data on exercise, diet, and genetic makeup to convince me that Ractopamine is at fault here.

I’m not denying Ractopamine is bad for human beings – I’m just asking for proof. MM’s argument that it’s terrible for animals and therefore is probably bad for people is a reasonable one. The claim that Ractopamine is the main culprit behind the obesity epidemic, when it is not considered as such by the current body of research, is a grand claim that needs evidence to be at all legitimate.

96

helgilibrary.com/indicators/ … per-capita

actually New Zealand and Australia consume more sugar per capital than the US as well. So it’s not the amount of dairy, sugar, fat, meat or fried stuff. What else do you think is the reason for obesity in the US that isn’t just as bad or even worse down under?

97

dailymail.co.uk/health/artic … e-you.html

With 2015 data, Saudi Arabia has just as many people who are obese by % of population. They don’t allow American (ractopamine) beef in their country.

98

[quote=“Zhengzhou2010”]Not related to ractopamine . . . I wonder what kind of policy elements that a Go South approach for Taiwan could have. It would seem to me that a transfer of the current Taiwanese approach to China, even if it could be reproduced in SE Asia and other places would not be desirable. Setting up low cost factories to make contract electronics for someone else just doesn’t seem like it will lift Taiwan’s economy much. Moreover, in another 20 years those low costs areas will likely have developed such that it no longer makes as much economic sense.

I’d hope Taiwan can develop a kind of cachet or brand appeal among its enterprises such that Taiwanese firms can prosper by selling their own goods and services in these economies irrespective of where the product is made. Similar to they way Korean products and formerly Japanese products had a cultural appeal that drove their desirability, I’d hope that Taiwan can do the same in SE Asia. Irrespective of whatever political outcome happens with China, from a branding perspective I think Taiwan needs to emphasize its Taiwanese-ness and not its Chineseness (which will always be largely owned and drive by China). Korean products enjoy a cultural cache of being hip, fashionable, good looking, modern and sufficiently Asian to be comfortable and Western to be cosmopolitan. What distinguishes “Brand Taiwan”?[/quote]

20 years too late, the ‘Taiwan’ brand simply is not even on the map anymore, especially with consumer goods, but even in things like media, they are only popular with some ethnic Chinese. Remember people keep voting in the KMT who don’t want anything much to do with Taiwan, rather they emphasis republic
Of China …China. Taiwanese owned factories still produce much of the worlds goods, but few ever jumped up to the next
level. Some high profile firms like HTC and Acer
And Asus enjoyed success but have largely failed to make profits and compete in the 2010s. Poor software and understanding of marketing has done them in along with competitive pressures.
They should have gone for more niche markets but always struggle with the coolness factor.

Now Chinese firms are establishing their brands and Taiwanese companies just get
Confused with them mostly. Brand Taiwan is not exactly
Going to give you much cache anyway is it?

99

I’d like to point out obesity prevalence also is the wrong metrics to use when we are talking about morbid obesity, because it doesn’t take the degree of obesity into account. While we don’t want someone to be 6 feet tall but weighs 229 lb. However, a person with the same height weighing 300 lb is a lot more worrisome. According to National Institutes of Health, 6% of Americans have a BMI over 30.

100

[quote=“Dirt”]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2920219/How-fat-country-nations-highest-obesity-rates-new-maps-surprise-you.html

With 2015 data, Saudi Arabia has just as many people who are obese by % of population. They don’t allow American (ractopamine) beef in their country.[/quote]

You know that obesity is much more common amongst female than male in those countries, which is against the global trend? Something about not being allowed to see the light of day does that to ya.