Corps will not consider anything you guys are saying (even though im 100% agreeing), why? because it will cut profits. Simple, 1-2-3
Indeed. The truth is gmos are way superior in effiency.
Gm crops for example can grow during winter and are immune against pests and illnesses.
The problem is only that we dont know for sure if it is healthy or not.
Most scientist also say there is no way to not use gmo for the future, because we just need to produce more food for the increasing world population.
As far as I know there are no factual basis for these claims. Care to support these arguments with evidence?
I have never heard of these supposed GMO winter crops, but I know for a fact that the supposedly immune BT products lead directly to resistance to pesticides and create pests that are almost completely uncontrollable even by standard methods using insecticide, so this is far from a fact.
As far as GMOs being required in order to meet food demand, this is also another talking point they like to claim that has no basis in reality. I will also give you two reasons why this is patently false. Number one, GMO seeds are EXPENSIVE, more expensive than natural seeds, meaning the worlds poor can't afford them to begin with.
Number 2, most of their GMO seeds are what are known as "Terminator" seeds, where they are completely sterile and can not be used to replant because they are designed so that farmers have to buy seed stock from them EVERY YEAR. This is again another factor that increases dependance on Monsanto and raises the cost of growing food.
@wintercrops
I read about winter oilseed rape (wtf name in german it is called raps) which they try to modify to get high(er) immunity against pest and herbizide and more yields.
There sadly already exist an example of what you are talking about:
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0025736Imho with more research this should be solved somewhen in the future.
@food for the world
I think the main problem is how the Patents work atleast i know that for Monsanto.
http://www.monsanto.com/newsviews/pages/why-does-monsanto-sue-farmers-who-save-seeds.aspxHere is their official statement.
It is just about money. They could give it to the 3rd world farmers for free if they wanted too.
*edit
I checked terminator seeds, good lord they seem not to be commercial available yet?
If these genes go rampage in the wild then we really will destroy our world.
I misspoke earlier. I was using the wrong terminology. Terminator seeds seem to be banned by international convention. What I was thinking of and meant to say is most GMO seeds are HYBRIDS that will not produce the same results from saved seed if they are viable at all.
"When two dissimilar varieties are crossed, the result is a hybrid which will often be bigger, brighter, faster-growing or higher-yielding than either of its parents, which makes for a great selling point. But it’s a one-hit wonder. Subsequent generations don’t have the same vigour or uniformity, and the idea is that you don’t save seed from it, you just throw it away and buy some more. This is bad for the plants, bad for the garden and bad for you, but the seed companies make a packet out of it and gain increasing control of what we buy and grow."
http://daughterofthesoil.blogspot.com/2008/02/commercial-f1-hybrids.htmlAs far as the oilseed rape, apparently this isn't even a food crop, it is used mostly as a bio-fuel and as a soil restorer in crop rotation. Also as far as I can tell varieties which can be grown in winter are already available by nature. In conclusion I don't think any GMO varieties of oilseed rape qualify feeding the world any better than it already is.
It took me a while to read all that stuff, but first:
I think we have to differ first between the techniques to modify the plants.
1. Natural pollination
2. Hybrids, which are actually selected/directed breeding between plant relatives - think about all the nice dogs, cats and animals we have today. Usually they dont crossbreed non relatives because the fertility of such crossbreeds is very low, although there exist exceptions. (Mendel and co)
3. Gmo, which is the artificial modification of the gene code of the target plant with completely new genes (usually genes from completely different organisms).
The thing is now hybrids exist in nature through natural pollination too, it just doesnt happen to often and is random.
Hybrids are crossbreeds between relatives and the f1(first child generation) are like you said extremely efficient (yields,immunity) but the drawback is that the f2 generations usually lacks everything of it.
The problem of course: farmers have to buy f1 seeds over and over.
Now this works actually pretty good in the western/first world nations regarding cost and effiency (there are alot of studies and charts about it) but was pretty much doom for the 3rd world/poor countries because farmers there are dependent on seeds they save from this years yield to plant next year.
They just couldnt afford to buy f1 seeds every time.
Gmos are a whole different league then the last two mentioned, they do not exist in nature.
About the winter oilseed rape, maybe you know it better as Canola?
It is true that before the 80's it wasnt widely used because it was actually unhealthy/not edible.
But with the upcoming hybrids and gmo canolas (00-, 0-,0plus-canola) that changed.
It is now used mainly for food processing (frying oil etc), as animal food and as biofuel.
If you look at the oilseed production of the world, then canola is only nr 2 behind soya.
With the upcoming of the gmo canola this are the yields per ha for germany since 1992 to 2009 of winter canola: 2.6 t per ha to 4.2 t per ha.
You are correct that the winter canola grows naturally, but hybrids and gmo increased the yields and also made it better useable as food and biofuel. (Of course with their drawbacks)
But you see through gmo we could now take out the genes which make the winter canola grow in winter and put in other crops for example. There are pretty much infinite possibilities (of franken crops).
My opinion is this:
We shouldnt close the doors for gmos, but we need:
1. Way more reasearch, mainly human and ecological long term studies
2. Much safer and stricter regulations on how to grow gmos in the open
3. Proper labeling of gmos
4. A way to distribute it to the poor that is socially and economically tolerated
*edit typos
