Adopting wide-scale use of GMO's
Location
main
"Failure to adopt wider use of GMOs…amounts to "one of the great societal tragedies of the past quarter century."
--Henry Miller of the Hoover Institution at Stanford University
“If they think this is the way to go we will end up with millions of small farmers all over the world being driven off their land into unsustainable, unmanageable, degraded and dysfunctional conurbations of unmentionable awfulness then you count me out. I think it will be an absolute disaster.”
–Prince Charles
What do you think? Which one's the tragedy?
Comments
“Small farmers in North East Spain are achieving environmental benefits and higher yields, better quality and increased income by growing genetically modified maize (Bt Maize).”
--Mr. Graham Brookes of Brookes West consultancy and Director of PG Economics Limited
"We have 10,000 years of evidence that our maize is good for our health. To contaminate it with transgenics is a crime against all indigenous peoples and farming communities who have safeguarded maize over millennia for the benefit of humankind."
--Baldemar Mendoza, an indigenous farmer from Oaxaca
What proof is there that either statement is correct?
2 THINGS: http://www.changemakers.com/en-us/node/53988 & http://www.snagfilms.com/films/title/the_future_of_food/
1) Thanks for asking...the question. But, we're not sure if 'correct' would be the thing that i'd focus on...and proof would only make their statements, that much more valid & harder to refute after hearing MANY more 'perspectives' about an issue that is three dimensional. Why? Well, with only two dimensions, we could assume [with-3-syllables] that consumers and producers are the only people who are interested in their comments. Notice the last subject matter each speaks of/uses to drive a point home:
----->Brookes; "...and increased income by growing genetically modified maize (Bt Maize).” ----->Mendoza; and farming communities who have safeguarded maize over millennia for the benefit of humankind." ----->Is it clear, that the proof is in the pudding; if so, does that make the pudding correct? And for whom...? We've got 'how many' people/friends/members on this website? Let's open things up...connect it more...and then we can really heal 'humankind'!
2) How can we connect (possibly with some type of tag lines/words) group/forum topics, comments &/or discussions happening in "two" different places. I'm certainly glad i was directed here by the Internet Gods? And there must be Internet Gods...even if they've created the net then got busy somewhere else, with some other creation or...whatever Gods do when they're not helping their 'self initiated' creations, grow more, function better & communicate &/or collaborate easier? What if this was a serious matter? What would happen if it were...?
i apologize for my directness (not sarcastic humor) but isn't it becoming tiresome, forums, blogs, 'face' this way 'book' mark that way... What actually gets done? I personally know that some [man] kind of good comes from Changemakers.com giving away money & LOTS of people are doing good around the world, because of it, but what about connecting the groups, that's all i'm really saying. And then maybe, i wouldn't wait for interaction, in an incorrect place. It's misleading Changemakers.com. This is a very huge world, this website. Thanks. Peace~! a.
http://www.snagfilms.com/films/title/the_future_of_food/
It is clear that GM is not about helping the farmers or the consumers but about making profits for the multinationals.
There is clear evidence that GM has major health issues and more scientific facts are coming out everyday detailing this and yet this is being ignored by most governments.
Farmers are worse off when they plant GM as there are lies given before they planted that GM does not contaminate enough to be of concern, they will increase their yield by double, they will earn more money and it will feed the world.
Case in point Argentina where within 4 years their GM seed increased (once fully contaminated) 5 fold. Other countries are the same. Initial GM seed was just a tiny bit cheaper but once full contamination occurs, the GM companies increase dramatically. They also increase the pesticide that is needed to use the GM seed.
Within one year there is contamination to all as the GM companies own the seed companies. They are in cahoots with the silos that hold the grain who do not segregate GM from non GM in this country (Australia).
There is not a dramatic increase in yield (and those that say there is are directly linked to Monsanto) in fact there is a decrease in yield reported. They do not earn more money with GM in fact farmers are walking off the land because they can no longer afford the seed. This in time will directly influence everyone as there will be major unemployment in the cities from farmers. You may not think this will influence you and yet there will be an increase in unemployment. Your health will suffer and your tax will increase to cover not only your health problems but also other problems like food shortages associated with the greed of these multinationals.
It is a con game that will influence your life.
Hi Vanor,
Thanks for your comment. You make some valid points. What do you think can/should be done about this concerning trend? What might farmers do? How might the consumer influence policy?
At the very least, I know I'd like to know what I'm eating and have a choice. In the United States, the non-GMO project is starting.
http://www.nongmoproject.org/
This is at least a first step in testing and identifying what foods contain GMO and labeling non-GMO products as such.
Farmers have been fooled for too long. Somehow they need to wake up to the reality that GM is not the answer. If you know of a farmer, inform them before it's too late. You cannot unplant GM. Farmers go broke with GM.
Consumers can help by ringing every supplier they know and demand no-GM in your food. If there is, say you will shop organic or find a supplier that keeps GM out of their food. The more people that complain to the suppliers the more the suppliers will sit up and listen and stop this stupidity by demanding no-GM in their ingredients.
Inform your politician if they do not bring this to account, you will vote for the other political party. Find a political party that supports non-GM. Make the FDA and FSANZ accountable for what they have allowed into our diet as they do no independent testing. That's like saying to the tobacco industry to prove that smoking is safe. There is bad science in GM and is not quantitative and qualititive. Most are assumption which is dangerous to our health.
Take action and GM will be taken from our food supply. We must act now to keep GM out of our wheat and sugar. It's too late for corn, cotton, cotton seed oil (vegetable oil) and soy in America but once wheat and sugar is GM, as it is a major part of your diet, you will find that health issues will really speed up. Go organic if you can.
And Maize, I haven't forgotten you. Brookes has major links with Monsanto the GM giant which you can look into if you do a search on Graham Brookes and Monsanto. Here's one of them. www.politicalfriendster.com/showPerson.php
You cannot deem it as independent research if he is paid by Monsanto surely. His research was funded by Monsanto as well which would mean that they would have influence on the research. He is a pro-GM advocate and has been for a long time.