03-30-2009, 06:16 AM | #1 (permalink) | |
Eat your vegetables
Super Moderator
Location: Arabidopsis-ville
|
Geneticially Modified Food Crops
I'm a bit lost when it comes to the argument going on in Europe and the United States on genetically modified food. Here's an article that highlights the debate in Greece.
Quote:
I fail to understand the argument against genetic modification. So I decided to take it to the TFP for discussion. What is your opinion of genetically modified crops? Do you feel strongly one way or the other about their presence in American and European agriculture? Would you like to see GMO crops developed further? Do you have any fears about genetically modified crops? Do you feel your fears are substiated, or do you find them somewhat irrational? Do you have any favorite news articles or studies on the matter that you would like to share? ------------------------------------------------------------------------- What is your opinion of genetically modified crops? I see them as a means of increasing yield and decreasing susceptibility to disease. Do you feel strongly one way or the other about their presence in American and European agriculture? I would like to see more of them in agriculture. Would you like to see GMO crops developed further? Yes Do you have any fears about genetically modified crops? No. Do you feel your fears are substiated, or do you find them somewhat irrational? I don't fear vegetables. Do you have any favorite news articles or studies on the matter that you would like to share? I'll share more later. As a plant physiologist who actively works with genetic mutants, I attempt to actively follow popular opinion on genetically modified food crops. I also follow the pertinent scientific studies on the matter. I just don't understand the arguments against it. Perhaps I am experiencing a mental block - something subconcious that prevents me from seeing the other side in a clear light. Perhaps I subconciously don't want to discount my own research. Intentionally altering or inserting pinpointed genes in a given crop plant seems like a much more streamlined version of traditional selective cultivation. Please enlighten me.
__________________
"Sometimes I have to remember that things are brought to me for a reason, either for my own lessons or for the benefit of others." Cynthetiq "violence is no more or less real than non-violence." roachboy Last edited by genuinegirly; 03-30-2009 at 06:19 AM.. |
|
03-30-2009, 06:40 AM | #2 (permalink) |
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
|
at bottom, this is a political question, but a serious one that involves a conflict between the centralized monocrop industrial food system in the states and the more complex, decentralized models that operate in most european countries. there's something parallel in the ambivalences generated by the proliferation of supermarkets---i know how it plays out in paris, which is basically that folk have the option of supermarkets or older-school markets and that typically it seems folk shop for food from both, getting more generic items froma supermarket and produce, meat, cheese, etc. mostly from markets. the state plays a role in this as well...but at this point, it'd get kinda complicated and particular to talk about, so i'll leave it at that.
another matter, which is probably more important politically, is that what is called "globalization" in the states elsewhere has translated into forms of american economic domination. this point was made politically (again, using france to talk about things just because i know it better) by folk like josé bové, who directed much of his political agitation around a nationalist position wrapped up as a position about sustainable agriculture that took mcdonalds as the symbolic center of an american invasion of food. this resonates more than one might think: for example a similar donnybrook has been playing out in slow motion over wine. then there are the problems with how approval of gm foods was done--and these problems are real. the best outline of them that translates these questions into political matters in the process is the documentary "the future of food"--which does quite a job on monsanto, the scope of it's influence, the appalling revolving door that connects it to the fda and department of agriculture (via political appointments) and so forth. it'd be interesting to hear what you make of that film, gg, if you haven't seen it because you bring to the table a level of understanding about what's being rehearsed that i do not. that's a short version of an explanation for why this is such a political issue. personally, i find the politics of gm crops most compelling as raising questions of scale and sustainability in agricultural production in general.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite |
03-30-2009, 07:12 AM | #3 (permalink) |
Eat your vegetables
Super Moderator
Location: Arabidopsis-ville
|
Ah. Yes. Political issues. I honestly had not contemplated the political implications.
I have not seen this documentary. I will look for it.
__________________
"Sometimes I have to remember that things are brought to me for a reason, either for my own lessons or for the benefit of others." Cynthetiq "violence is no more or less real than non-violence." roachboy |
03-30-2009, 07:15 AM | #4 (permalink) |
Big & Brassy
Location: The "Canyon"
|
There's a lot wrong with GMO's
One is the the long-term effects. The long-term consequences of creating GMO's CANNOT be studied without actually growing the crops, feeding the planet and waiting to see what happens. Remember DDT? "Spray away! It's safe" they all told us... not so much. Remember asbestos? "Lasts forever! It's safe!" we were told... oops. Genetically modified foods may be wreaking unknown havoc on the human digestive system without our knowledge. For example... Corn flowers are a major source of food for the monarch butterfly, however genetically modified corn has created a new type of nectar within the flower, which the butterflies cannot digest. So even in the short-term GMO's threaten this species. Another aspect is the patenting of life. Major corporations hold patents to GMO seeds that are resistant to their herbicides. They sell the seed, they sell the weed killer. There are stories of farmers being sued and put out of business because this GMO seed is blowing into their field or cross breeding with their non GMO crops. And because they didn't purchase the patented seed from the owners, they are sued and lose their farm. The thing I don't understand is... what's wrong with traditional, natural farming?
__________________
If you have any poo... fling it NOW! |
03-30-2009, 07:21 AM | #5 (permalink) |
Junkie
Location: Near Raleigh, NC
|
How about the GM corporations sue adjacent farmers for patent infringement when bees take the pollen from their fields to the non-GM farmers fields, thus contaminating the non-GM fields and then charging them for use of patent infringement, because viola, the non-GM field now has the modified genes too. It happens here. That would be my biggest worry, if I were a small farmer in one of these countries.
Looks like we posted about the same thing.... It also looks like the non-GM farmers should have been able to sue the GM's for contamination, but money rules the law.
__________________
bill hicks - "I don't mean to sound bitter, cold, or cruel, but I am, so that's how it comes out." Last edited by Iliftrocks; 03-30-2009 at 07:23 AM.. Reason: simulposting |
03-30-2009, 07:34 AM | #6 (permalink) |
Eat your vegetables
Super Moderator
Location: Arabidopsis-ville
|
What pertinent arguments. Thank you Iliftrocks and Mister Coaster. These are the kinds of implications that scientists don't pause to consider.
__________________
"Sometimes I have to remember that things are brought to me for a reason, either for my own lessons or for the benefit of others." Cynthetiq "violence is no more or less real than non-violence." roachboy |
Tags |
crops, food, geneticially, modified |
|
|