On 24 Aug 99,, Roger Sleet wrote:
> I hold a BSc in Biological Sciences, including major units in Ecology. My
> final year thesis was "Biochemical Genetics of Phosphate Dehydroginase in
> Lumbricus terrestris" - good enough for you. I am broadly in favour of
> GM crops, but the current thrust in GM production is towards making US and
> European style "deserts of corn" approach to agriculture more efficient.
Your qualifications are A-OK, but that really wasn't the issue. Alot
of people (as demonstrated by me earlier) talk strait out of their
ass on this topic (apologies to those who I may of offended with
that lest statement).
Corn is the guinea pig of necessity. Most of the developing world
and 1st world have corn as a staple. In improving corm production,
one will feed billions eventually. As of yet, corn (Zea maize) has
proven a difficult plant to mainpulate as with most monocotyledious
plants.
Personally I would like to see bananas that don't rot, so when I go
to the fruit bowl I'm not faced with a half brown mushy banana. I
have no problem with corn tho.
> Small Third world farmers currently save seed from this years crop to sow
> next year. This will not work with GM crops. This forces the subsistence
> farmers to grow more cash crops, but the problem is they can't grow
> sufficient to both buy seed for next year and feed the family, so they
> don't buy GM seed. The big farmers do, they get bigger yealds and so food
> prices fall. The subsistence farmer can no longer get enough for his cash
> crop to buy the small quantities of fertiliser, new tools and other needs,
> so his crop falls further. If this isn't harming him, what is your
> definition.
This is my main gripe with Monsanto & Co. I know here at US
(Univ. of Stellenbosch) we've tried to improve corn for african use
without sterilty genes so small farmers can use it.
I find the use of sterilty genes, while good for population control,
counter productive in regard to feeding the world. I don't believe in
it.
> We are currently capable of producing sufficient food to feed the world
> 10 to 20 times over. The fact that we use the food to feed to cattle,
> pigs, poultry to raise cheap meat is the reason it doesn't seem that
> great. The main problem with world food shortages is inability to buy
> food, not lack of it.
If I quote correctly from some obscure source I have forgotten: "All
the world's food could be grown on the agricultural land of Texas."
Of course, politics being such the food would never leave Texas.
Money is of course another problem which is even harder fix.
> Neither is there any evidence that it is safe. There was no evidence for
> about 10 years after we started doing it that feeding sheep brains to cows
> was harmful, and look what happened there.
Indeed, but there are v.few if any deseases people can catch from
plants.
As for toxins produced from gen. engeneering: the plants are put
through stringent tests to make "sure" that these toxins don't exist.
Still when it comes to long term testing, can 10mil starving
Sudaneese wait? (yes, yes, their is political but I'm just trying to
make a point.)
On 24 Aug 99,, Y Jasperson wrote:
> When did scientists / researchers / students begin to claim
infallibility?
We don't and I don't. But untill some one proves me wrong I am
right. After all that is the deductive principle science is based.
And yes accidents do happen, and will regardless what is done so
it is not a valid risk to dismiss a whole project. Of course if we new
that some terrible disarster would happen that would be different.
The risk of not trying far out ways the risk of mass starvation etc...
As for the world ecology, we have enough to worry about with
global warming and deforrestation. Compared to the latter, GM
plants are of little threat since they are primarily restricted to farms
etc... Still accidents happen, like those minks released by all those
Green Peace fanatics back when ever that are now causing all the
trouble to the bird and small animal life in Brittain.
To close: I don't pretend to know everything or can foolproofly
predict anything but I do know that it is up to Science to save the
world. Politics has failed as has social structure.
GM plants are a well placed risk, and one which I believe will pay
off in the end.
Tyrone
***********************************************************
"Jesus is Lord! Creation's voice proclaims it!"
-David J. Mensell