EU and GM

[Ae589]

The reasons for GM food maybe commercially based , as are medical advances , but who could argue against a drought resistant Sorghum , or pest resistant Maize for African farmers , easy to be self righteous from Europe of course.

I'm being self-righteous?

Monsanto has no responsibility to anyone but its shareholders. The checks and balances to prevent them causing damage in the pursuit of profit are being dismantled by lobbyists. That is not a good thing for anyone, possibly even monsanto shareholders.

 

[hammerntongues]

Producing sufficient food to feed the world, even at what I consider to be overhigh global poluation figures (including Britain), is not a problem - there is too much food being produced.

What leads to starvation (amongst other things) is poverty, and the dumping of subsidised food from the west onto the rest of the world, undermining local farmers and making their crop worthless, and stopping them from being able to buy food.

There is no need for GM, other than to cash in on the TRIPS (intellectual propert rights).#

If it aint brock don fixxit

You are correct in saying that the world is able to grow enough food to feed the world but it is in the wrong places and unless some Utopean fever breaks out in the developed countries it is not going to be freely distributed.

Of course poverty leads to starvation but in most cases and certainly large areas of the African continent poverty is solely caused by their inability to raise crops , do you not agree that being in control of providing for your own food needs rather than being dependent on imports or aid is preferable ?

Most African nations that are famine hit are not hit because of Western subsidised crops but the simple fact that nature has dictated that the soil they work is not capable of producing anything.

I wouldn`t waste a minutes breath defending Syngenta, Monsanto and the rest because they are commercially driven but what they are developing could be part (only part ) of a solution and to dismiss it outright as unwanted is blinkered.

I just want to remain openminded to the possibilities

 

[hammerntongues]

I'm being self-righteous?

Monsanto has no responsibility to anyone but its shareholders. The checks and balances to prevent them causing damage in the pursuit of profit are being dismantled by lobbyists. That is not a good thing for anyone, possibly even monsanto shareholders.

Yes I do think it is self-righteous for a us to say that the world doesn`t need GM crops whilst we each waste more in a day than some people get to eat in a week.If you and yours were faced with hardship and famine for generations I believe you may view things more sympathetically.

I`m not defending Monsanto or their motives

 

[TAE]

As far as I know GM crops won't help 3rd world farmers much because you cannot re-use the seed.



This EU issue seems to be the opposite of actual free trade to me.

If the EU collectively decides not to buy GM food, but to buy non-GM instead, then surely that is free trade in action - kind of.

Or is this about supermarket chains WANTING to import GM but the EU not allowing them?

 

[dormouse]

...Of course poverty leads to starvation but in most cases and certainly large areas of the African continent poverty is solely caused by their inability to raise crops , do you not agree that being in control of providing for your own food needs rather than being dependent on imports or aid is preferable ?

They won't be in control of providing their own food - Monsanto et al will be. They will be as dependent as they ever were. A captive market - lovely.

 

[Ae589]

Yes I do think it is self-righteous for a us to say that the world doesn`t need GM crops whilst we each waste more in a day than some people get to eat in a week.

a) I wasn't, I was talking about the EU... ie *me*
b) I can say that I believe GM crops are bad, and why, and still leave food on my plate. Trying to suggest I cannot criticise because I behave in certain ways is nonsense, and doesn't at all counter my argument. (for the record, I eat anything and everything on my plate... I ate some rotten feta last night. Tasted like stilton).
c) I am not convinced that GM foods will help third world countries -
Firstly because GM foods do not make it rain, do not stop war, do not stop corruption, and don't prioritise food over cash crops.
Secondly because a company will seek to maximise profits, not the welfare of the people - see Aids drugs and corporate patenting, Nestle's baby milk debacle for what I expect the outcome to be. They're not evil, but they have *no* moral imperative, which you are trying to insinuate here (in fact you are trying to imply that it is me who has no moral imperative).

 

[hammerntongues]

As far as I know GM crops won't help 3rd world farmers much because you cannot re-use the seed.



?

I believe it is only legal reasons that prevent the seeds being re-used , therefore it is not the seed itself at fault rather the companies that market them.

 

[hammerntongues]

They won't be in control of providing their own food - Monsanto et al will be. They will be as dependent as they ever were. A captive market - lovely.

you make it sound like the urban myth of giving free drugs to school kids to get them hooked.

The companies are not altruistic but the product they have to sell
" may " be part of a solution to famine.

open your mind

 

[hammerntongues]

a) I wasn't, I was talking about the EU... ie *me*
b) I can say that I believe GM crops are bad, and why, and still leave food on my plate. Trying to suggest I cannot criticise because I behave in certain ways is nonsense, and doesn't at all counter my argument. (for the record, I eat anything and everything on my plate... I ate some rotten feta last night. Tasted like stilton).
c) I am not convinced that GM foods will help third world countries -
Firstly because GM foods do not make it rain, do not stop war, do not stop corruption, and don't prioritise food over cash crops.
Secondly because a company will seek to maximise profits, not the welfare of the people - see Aids drugs and corporate patenting, Nestle's baby milk debacle for what I expect the outcome to be. They're not evil, but they have *no* moral imperative, which you are trying to insinuate here (in fact you are trying to imply that it is me who has no moral imperative).

As far as I can see you haven`t said why you think that GM crops are bad other than you believe that they are produced for profit , I don`t dispute this . What I do dispute is the fact that they might be for produced for the good

sadly war and corruption will be with us GM free or not and shouldnt really be in this discussion , however , drought resistant seeds could enable production of feed in previously unworkable environments.

I was was not accusing any individual of having anything other than best intentions but I still think that a black and white ITS WRONG is very narrowminded.

 

[gentlegreen]

I believe it is only legal reasons that prevent the seeds being re-used , therefore it is not the seed itself at fault rather the companies that market them.

I thought they had a "terminator gene" - quite possibly partly due to concerns that they would interbreed and the genes being propogated in the wild.

"Conventional" hybrid seed doesn't breed true in any case.

 

[hammerntongues]

I thought they had a "terminator gene" - quite possibly partly due to concerns that they would interbreed and the genes being propogated in the wild.

.

maybe my mistake , I thought it was purely down to patenting . Have to check it out.

 

[gentlegreen]

maybe my mistake , I thought it was purely down to patenting . Have to check it out.

http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache...ey.html+GM+save+seed&hl=en&gl=uk&ct=clnk&cd=3

Nope - I think you're right ....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/465222.stm

Not clear whether terminator genes will be used...

 

[Wilson]

Its a difficult question to really put an answer to you really have to look at so many different things and not make too many assumptions based on the BS printed in the press.

Famines can be caused by economic activity in terms of the local cost of food rising due to exports, land can become depleted through poor farming practices especially for cash crops.....

Gm grain is copyrighted by the manufacturer which actually could make seed saving illegal even though the original benifit of the Gm component hasnt been conferred in a usable way to the F2-> crop...

and its unlikely it would be...

even so the Gm is really only a quick short term fix to a problem which can only really be solved by changes in farming practice......

probably led from the top down...

You only really have to look to the 'green revolution' to see an example of the way misapplication of plant science in relation to the needs of subsistance farmers caused an utter fuck up then as this will/could now.

 

[dormouse]

you make it sound like the urban myth of giving free drugs to school kids to get them hooked.

The companies are not altruistic but the product they have to sell
" may " be part of a solution to famine.

open your mind

So how will 'buying their product' every year put countries

in control of providing for your own food needs rather than being dependent

??
I've been wandering round the internet looking at this and find that defra's GM Best practice document suggests that terminator genes could be used to minimise transfer of GM genes into the environment! As one of its critics says:

ACRE recommends using ‘genetic protection systems’ that engineer seed sterility to enforce corporate patents as a means of preventing gene transfer from GM crops. ACRE is either attempting to re-introduce a technology that even Monsanto corporation has abandoned as the result of universal rejection and condemnation, or else it is admitting that the transgenes and marker genes are unsafe, and have to be prevented from dispersal. The latter is surely a strong case for stopping GM crop development altogether...

from http://www.i-sis.org.uk/gmdesign.php

hmmm. My mind is open but nobody's yet convinced me that GM technology is safe and controllable. And I don't think 'let's just try it and see' is a very good idea.

 

[lostexpectation]

heres how to produce better drought resistent plants

research conventional and organic cropping more, GM isn't the only option... hammertongues is still basing his arguement on save the black babies!

I dunno Im finding it hard to justify absolutley no field reasearch but I guess you have to look at the whole industry not just one particular field trial and the industry is widely corrupted and forcing gm down peoples throats

although I found this article where this guy who conincendtally works for a thinktank associated with AEI equates gm-banners with creationists...

http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2006/02/irrational-fundamentalism-versus.html

any thoughts on non-food gm people (it still is a threat to the enviroment if not people directly)

 

[Ae589]

I still think that a black and white ITS WRONG is very narrowminded.

US/Canadian/Brazilian lobbyists dictate who takes GM in Europe - WRONG.

GM? Don't know, I'm not a scientist... Let's give the scientist in our countries the time they need to be sure that GM is okay, without these people breathing down their necks... *that* is what I am saying.

 

[hammerntongues]

research conventional and organic cropping more, GM isn't the only option... hammertongues is still basing his arguement on save the black babies!

I dunno Im finding it hard to justify absolutley no field reasearch but I guess you have to look at the whole industry not just one particular field trial and the industry is widely corrupted and forcing gm down peoples throats

although I found this article where this guy who conincendtally works for a thinktank associated with AEI equates gm-banners with creationists...

http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2006/02/irrational-fundamentalism-versus.html

any thoughts on non-food gm people (it still is a threat to the enviroment if

not people directly)

Of course GM is not the only option , but at least in your post you have acknowleged that is is AN option , the research into conventional cropping has had hundreds of years of practice and has progressed considerably but as yet not sufficiently enough.

I am basing my arguement on people dying of hunger , it just so happens that most are black , if Surrey ever suffers famine conditions I`ll happily let them use the technology.

I just don`t like the knee-jerk Luddite oppostition that the GM issue seems to attract , as your link points out , the available evidence so far indicates that GM foods are not harmful .