The Ying and Yang on genetically modified "Golden Rice." I watched

Sandy, you can probably guess where I fall on this issue! I believe GMO foods are designed to sell

more and more chemicals (i.e. roundup, on which they are dependent) and to make it possible to patent and profit from the world's food supply. In my opinion, even if there are short-term benefits, they lead to soil depletion, erosion, increased carbon emissions, collapse of ecosystems and bee die-off.

I also believe that if Mother Nature wanted rice to have beta-carotine she would have made it that way.

We do not have a food production shortage in the world but rather a food distribution problem. We grow more food than we can consume. If instead of bio-engineering crops to grow in bad soil we concentrated on renewing soil worldwide (something that is quite doable) we would be investing in the future.

This is a favorite National Geographic article I refer people to often about the present and future state of the earth's soil:

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/09/soil/mann-text

 
I've done a total 180 on this issue. I agree 100$(%)

it is all about money and politics and we and our children are paying the cost with their health. I believe that it should be illegal world wide to patent any food or plant. The same types of "open source" that works successfully in software can work just so or more in agriculture.

Aside from that, empowering local people to more effectively grow and sell their own crops will be much more effective than 1 or 2 companies controlling the world's food supplies. Companies like Nestle are doing the same thing with our water supplies btw...

 
Here here!!! Don't even get my husband started on this...we are trying to go totally GMO-free

 
There are instances of patenting that make sense--hybrid roses, fruit trees, etc.

that are produced by conventional breeding and then propagated from cuttings or grafting. But even those patents expire over time, and the patent doesn't apply to seeds--just "clones" made from cuttings.

GMO is so far removed from that that it's hard to even grasp what they're up to.

 
Joe, thanks for enlightening me on this subject. I had no idea. I just read the entire

National Geographic article and find it all fascinating like this excerpt “- - - Indeed, Lehmann and two colleagues have argued that humankind's use of fossil fuels worldwide could be wholly offset by storing carbon in terra preta nova.”

I'll never forget the terrace farms in Madeira. Of course their soil is very rich, but it just goes to show that you can actually manage poor dirt in most types of terrain if done the proper and environmentally correct way.

http://www.madeira-web.com/pagesuk/agric-uk1.html

http://www.thetravelword.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/madeira-CaboGir%C3%A3o.jpg

 
On the ballot for fall? Mandatory GMO labeling in Seattle. So happy that initiative went through.

 
as a famous epicure was fond of saying

I'll gladly pay you Tuesday...

 
I'm so glad you read it. It's true, switching to soil-building practices would absorb carbon

from the air--but only for about 150 years before it is at full capacity. By then we would have to no longer be using fossil fuels.

Again, entirely do-able!

 
I'm hoping there will be great momentum for it, coming on the heels of the plastic bag ban last year

 
My city of Long Beach passed that 2 year ago. LA is next. I see less garbage in the channels now.

The GMO labeling was a CA statewide measure--maybe it should have been done on a more local level.

 
Here we have an advantage. Seattle makes up 60% of the votes in our state. What passes here

generally passes for the entire state. Which is cause for some riffs because Seattle is very liberal. It should be interesting to see what Monsanto's plan of attack will be. They should be very worried.

 
They outspent supporters 10 to 1 here, and convinced enough people that the labeling

would raise their grocery prices. As if companies don't change labels all the time!

 
problem with hybrid roses is, there is no scent! I'll take the old roses any day smileys/smile.gif

 
I hate it when they lump cross breeding of existing species to improve crops etc

with GMO. If Farmer A likes the size of Farmer B's wheat and borrows some stalks and tries to pollinate his to develop a better crop, that is nature. GMO is splicing in genes that don't belong, such as the Frankensalmon, all Montanto pesticide ridden crops and who knows what else.

I am very disappointed in California for not passing our GMO labeling bill but it was a start and it will continue to be lobbied to come into law as time goes by.

Meantime, one wonders how all of this human experimentation is going to come out?

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top