Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Should Ireland welcome gentically modified food?

Options
1246789

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 25,953 ✭✭✭✭kryogen


    Anybody thinking GM foods is a good thing should do a good bit more research into it.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    The only thing that has changed with genetic engineering is the techniques used. The native americans used hybridization and the rest to acheive something totally different from what they started with. The techniques used now are much much more refined.

    But surely you see the difference between genetic modification and selective breeding? Just because they have a similar goal does not mean they're the same thing.

    Selective breeding has it's risks, from the undesirable consequences that may arise from bred traits such as increased competitiveness of a plant, to the consequences of the continuous inbreeding of the crop once the desired trait has been reached. But the effects of selective breeding are far more subtle than those of GM, as selective breeding has no choice but to stand the test of time, whereas GM has genes inserted straight away. There's a big difference between the selected breeding of two varieties (or just two individuals of the same variety) of Zea mays, compared with artificially throwing a bacterial gene into a potato. Big difference.

    I'm not saying selective breeding is ok and genetic modification isn't, I'm just saying they're clearly not the same thing.


  • Registered Users Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    Another type of genetic engineering of plants is cisgenic engineering producing cisgenic plants. These plants contain genes from sexually compatible species that could pollinate them anyway.

    Ill add that scientists are not out to get people. I do get that theres a deep distrust of scientists and to a large degree thats deserved but for every scientific dogma put out by scientists there are those of us who question it.

    Most scientists I know are not in it for the money or do not want food to be controlled exclusivley by big faceless companies. Most scientists are depressed about the fact that big industry is going to be the major factor in what gets researched at all. Theresonly problem I see with gm crops is who owns the patent. I think the patents should be publically owned.

    Granted there is a problem with cross pollination but that problem is nearly eradicated using new techniques.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,705 ✭✭✭Johro


    kryogen wrote: »
    Anybody thinking GM foods is a good thing should do a good bit more research into it.
    Cryogenics, on the other hand, sounds great. Didn't Walt Disney have his body cryogenically frozen?
    Gives a whole new meaning to 'Disney On Ice'.


  • Registered Users Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    Johro wrote: »
    News article, December 2009

    'IRELAND ADOPTS GM-FREE ZONE POLICY

    DUBLIN - The Irish Government has announce it will ban the cultivation of all GM crops and introduce a voluntary GM-free label for food - including meat, poultry, eggs, fish, crustaceans, and dairy produce made without the use of GM animal feed.


    The policy was adopted as part of the Renewed Programme for Government and specifies that the Government will "Declare the Republic of Ireland a GM-Free Zone, free from the cultivation of all GM plants".

    The official text also states "To optimise Ireland's competitive advantage as a GM-Free country, we will introduce a voluntary GM-Free logo for use in all relevant product labelling and advertising, similar to a scheme recently introduced in Germany."

    The President of the Irish Cattle and Sheepfarmers Association, Malcolm Thompson, said he was delighted by the announcement, adding, "The Government's new GM-free policy is the fulfillment of what we at ICSA have held for the last five years. I very much look forward to its full implementation."


    Michael O'Callaghan of GM-free Ireland said the policy signals a new dawn for Irish farmers and food producers:


    "The WTO's economic globalisation agenda has forced most Irish farmers to enter an unwinnable race to the bottom for low quality GM-fed meat and dairy produce, in competition with countries like the USA, Argentina and Brazil which can easily out-compete us with their highly subsidised GM crop monocultures, cheap fossil fuel, extensive use of toxic agrochemicals that are not up to EU standards, and underpaid migrant farm labour.


    "Meanwhile, hundreds of European food brands, retailers and Regions now offer GM-free beef, pork, lamb, poultry, eggs, fish and dairy produce as part of their Food Safety, Quality Agriculture, Biodiversity, Fair Trade, Sustainable Development and Climate Change strategies. Thousands of brands in the USA are doing likewise. Without a GM-free label to distinguish our produce, Irish food is being excluded from this global market."


    "The Irish Government plan to ban GM crops and to provide a voluntary GM-fee label for qualifying animal produce makes obvious business sense for our agri-food and eco-tourism sectors . Everyone knows that US and EU consumers, food brands and retailers want safe GM-free food, and Ireland is ideally positioned to deliver the safest, most credible GM-free food brand in Europe, if not the world."


    The international market for GM-free animal produce is growing rapidly


    Across Europe, hundreds of leading food brands (including the largest dairy coop, Friesland Campina) and dozens of leading retailers (including the largest, Carrefour) now offer premium meat, fish, eggs, poultry eggs and dairy produce made without the use of GM feedstuffs. These are backed by GM-free labels and Government regulations in Austria, Italy, Germany, with France to follow later this year. Sales of GM-free milk have skyrocketed since the label came into effect in Germany.


    In the USA, to which Ireland exports vast quantities of dairy produce (including milk powder and casein for cheese production), leading food manufacturers, retailers, processors, distributors, farmers, seed breeders and consumers have set up joint venture called the Non-GMO Project, which already provides GM-free labels for over 1,000 food products by individual manufacturers in addition to thousands of GM-free private retail brands.


    Unique selling point for Irish food

    Ireland's geographical isolation and offshore Atlantic western winds provide a natural barrier to contamination by wind-borne GM pollen drift from countries such as the UK and Spain which still allow commercial release and/or field trials of GM crops.
    Together with this natural protection - and Ireland's famous green image and unpolluted topsoil - the new GM-free policy will provide Irish farmers and food producers who avoid the use of GM feed with a truly unique selling point: ''the most credible safe GM food brand in Europe."

    Moreover, because most Irish cattle and sheep enjoy a grass-based diet, their consumption of GM feedstuffs is lower than livestock in many competing countries. This provides Irish farmers with a valuable lead start in phasing out the use of GM feed. The only obstacle is the Irish animal feed cartel, which has a virtual monopoly on feed imports, and seems unwilling to provide the affordable Non-GM feedstuffs available to farmers in other European countries.


    Back in 2007, the Irish Government adopted a weaker policy "to seek to negotiate to declare the island of Ireland as a GMO-free zone", but the two opt-out clauses did not inspire conviction; failure to define the implications of the policy for GM animal feed created confusion in the farming sector and the Government failed to even draft any related legislation to implement the policy. That said, Ireland did stop voting in favour of new GMOs in Brussels and has since joined the majority of EU member states which back an Austrian proposal for the EU Commission to allow national bans on GM crops. In response to this move, the EU Commission indicated its willingness to consider national bans earlier this year.


    Although Ireland's new affirmative GM-free policy unambiguously aims to ban both commercial release as well as field trials of GM crops, it requires implementing legislation in the Republic, as well as Northern Ireland to prevent contamination from across the border.


    A label that means what it says


    O'Callaghan said the Irish GM-free label for algae, meat, poultry, eggs, crustaceans, fish, and dairy produce should set a higher standard than the existing German and proposed French labels, which mislead consumers by allowing GM-free claims for animal produce from livestock whose diet has included large amounts of GM feedstuffs for varying periods before they are converted into food:


    "Ireland's GM-free label should mean what it says, i.e. no feeding of any GM-labelled feedstuffs during the entire life of the animal. Specifically, the label should guarantee that the animal has been fed either on plant materials for which no GMO varieties exist, or on fodder crops that contain no GMO ingredients above the generally accepted detection level of 0.1 per cent. To avoid misleading consumers, the EU should to adopt a credible GM-free labelling regulation of this kind for the whole single market, instead of allowing individual member state to set their own standards, which can be not only confusing, but also deceptive. The Irish Government is now in a position to lead on this."


    International reaction


    Jochen Koester, a leading soy industry adviser who runs TraceConsult in Geneva, Switzerland, said: "The Irish Government's decision is very timely and deserves congratulations. In a very natural way, this will increase the Irish farmers' demand for Non-GMO animal nutrition that permits GMO-free claims on the final animal product. Increased import volumes and lower per-tonne logistics costs will bring down the price of certified Non-GMO imported soy meal. Irish farmers can thus soon join the ranks of "GMO-free" producers from Austria, Germany and France. This enhanced supplier platform will also create a lot more clout for all players in the Non-GMO food and feed industries."


    In London, the Irish Michelin-starred celebrity chef and TV host Richard Corrigan laughed out loud when he heard the news at his Bentley's Mayfair restaurant, adding that "the eyes of Europe will now gaze with envy on Ireland!" (Corrigan created a stir in Irish farming circles earlier this year when he denounced Bord Bia [the Irish Food Board] on his TV programme for providing its Quality Assurance label to meat and dairy produce from livestock fed on GM feedstuffs which are excluded from such labels in more food-savvy EU countries.


    Reacting to the announcement in Rome, Greenpeace EU GMO Policy Director Marco Contiero said "Greenpeace welcomes this decision by the Irish Government. It puts an additional brake on the global expansion of the risky, unproven and costly technology of genetically modified agriculture. Ireland's GM-free policy answers the serious concerns which European consumers have on GM food, and will allow Irish retailers and businesses to be rewarded for the good quality produce they bring to the market."


    Commenting from the USA, the Executive Director of the Non-GMO Project Megan Thompson said "Ireland has taken a truly inspiring step towards ensuring consumers' right to choose non-GMO products... As more and more companies in the USA and Canada are looking for non-GMO ingredients, this is a very timely move and we look forward to developing sourcing opportunities with GM-free producers in Ireland."


    Speaking for GM-Free Cymru in Wales, Dr Brian John said: "We congratulate the Irish Government on this very bold step, which is underpinned by sound science and by a proper regard for the precautionary principle. It is also a very smart commercial move which will give Ireland a competitive advantage. We hope that Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland will now follow suit by making similar declarations and by showing the Westminster government that its slavish adherence to a pro-GM agenda is scientifically untenable and out of step with the public mood."


    In Brussels, Friends of the Earth Europe's GMO campaign co-ordinator Helen Holder said "All around Europe, countries are putting up bans or other limits to growing genetically modified crops and the Irish government is to be congratulated. The EU should drop genetically modified food and crops, and instead support green farming which is good for the economy and for the planet".


    But that was then... It's ultimately very disappointing to see yet another about turn just when politicians got it right for a change.

    Richard corrigan and politicians should stay out of science they havent a clue.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    But surely you see the difference between genetic modification and selective breeding? Just because they have a similar goal does not mean they're the same thing.

    The techniques have changed now and the fact that previously you could only introduce genes from one plant species to another sexually compatiable one where as now you can introduce genes from a sexually incompatible species. The amount of genes added now has been reduced hugely.
    Selective breeding has it's risks, from the undesirable consequences that may arise from bred traits such as increased competitiveness of a plant, to the consequences of the continuous inbreeding of the crop once the desired trait has been reached. But the effects of selective breeding are far more subtle than those of GM, as selective breeding has no choice but to stand the test of time, whereas GM has genes inserted straight away. There's a big difference between the selected breeding of two varieties (or just two individuals of the same variety) of Zea mays, compared with artificially throwing a bacterial gene into a potato. Big difference.

    Yes the effect is a more pronounced trait which is instant as opposed to breeding a crop for generations to produce effects. Genes are natural they (usually) code for proteins which are a series of amino acids. The only difference here is we are dictating the exact sequence of amino acids.

    [/QUOTE]I'm not saying selective breeding is ok and genetic modification isn't, I'm just saying they're clearly not the same thing.[/QUOTE]

    The only difference is selective breeding is a lot cruder.


  • Registered Users Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    Johro wrote: »
    What about all the other people in the article who are not politicians? Or chefs. Millions of people do not want or are suspicious of GM foods, just look at your poll. Politicians, businesses, farmers and the food trade are well aware of it. Are you saying they're all misinformed or stupid?

    Im saying they are definatly misinformed of the science involved. Definatly not stupid however. There was a scare attached to certain vaccines that had little or no scientific evidence attached to it at the time and this reaction to anything gm is very similar.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,001 ✭✭✭✭opinion guy


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    Richard corrigan and politicians should stay out of science they havent a clue.

    Thats a bit rich coming from you when you weren't familiar with the bioballistic method yourself, yet you are on here pushing this agneda for some reason.

    I'm curious - what exactly is your interest in this ? Do you have any financial interests in genetic engineering ?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,038 ✭✭✭Nothingbetter2d


    Should ireland welcome gm food?

    YES. if they can develop foods that cure illness, or substance addiction. Homer's Tobacomatos ftw.

    NO. if they just wanna develop a cartel where they charge through the nose for their seeds


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,001 ✭✭✭✭opinion guy


    or substance addiction

    Its been known/suspected for years that LSD can cure substance addiction. Its just too controversial for mainstream acceptance. Althou this might signal a change in that:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-17297714


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,173 ✭✭✭D


    The major concern is that GM crops can be designed to not propagate a seed. This means that unlike now where a farm keeps some seed to replant next year, the farmer will have to buy more seed of the company every year.

    GM crops can also be designed to aggressively cross-pollinate so that non-GM crops can be affected, resulting in the farmer having to buy seeds every year.

    GM crops can also be designed to respond only to certain fertilisers so that the farmer needs to buy from the company every year too.

    The main point is that GM crops create a dependency on that company. So instead of now where someone gets seed and is able to continue farming, with GM crops you have to pay an outlay to the company every year.

    This is fine if you are a big factory farm but for smaller farmers, especially poorer farmers you are creating an unnecessary burden.

    GM crops can have loads of benefits but companies will attach conditions to those benefits to shackle farmers to them. It will also mean that the bio-diversity will be threatened.


  • Registered Users Posts: 224 ✭✭Conflats


    There has been talk of cross polination in crops in Ireland, potatoes wheat barley do not have plants related to it in the wild the only possible one is oilseed rape which is a brassica crop, the point of this trial is to assess the environmental impact of the blight resistant trait has on the environment
    It's all well and good people who haven't seen first hand what it is like to have to go spray chemicals on a crop 10-12 times a year and still have losses, big thing with blight is make a mistake with your control and 100% loss of the crop is possible.
    People have talked here about Ireland being a green island and somebody even suggested go and aim for the organic market is a ridiculous statement to make, we tried to farm organically 50-60 years ago and that was a disaster people were unable to make a living form the land.
    GM should be regulated strictly and the so called 'terminator gene' is a way to protect a patent, it happens in every industry but it should be in the hands of the people which is why a semi- state body such as Teagasc should be encouraged to use gm technologies which benefit Irish farmers.

    And anyone who starts saying rats and mice in trials fed gm foods better have a good strong example because if anyone ate the same food day in day out you would get the same kind of results.
    Plus people in Europe welcomed Gm in fact when a tomato was brought out which enabled it to stay fresher but then the scare mongerers came along and played on the people.
    Its high time Ireland had a INFORMED debate on Genetically modified foods.
    AND final comment when you buy Irish meat and milk their is a strong chance that the animal in question has been feed GM soya Due to the fact europe is not self sufficient in proteins.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,171 ✭✭✭af_thefragile


    I'm up for selective breeding and all where the crops are still grown by a natural process. You're just picking out the best variety and growing them.

    But i wouldn't trust GM foods. A carrot is no longer a carrot if it has a bit of tomato or whatever in it which hasn't been introduced through a natural process but in a lab by a bunch of meddling scientists.

    Why cant they focus on ways to improve the fertility of soil and ways to grow crops in arid regions? Like Ireland is full of bogs, why cant all the empty land be converted into farms for growing crops for food and maybe also bio fuels??


  • Registered Users Posts: 152 ✭✭brokenhinge


    As long as it's clearly labelled I don't care. I wouldn't eat GM foods if I had the option, but I'm not struggling to afford food or starving- so I don't think I have the right to dictate that others shouldn't.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,848 ✭✭✭bleg


    Like it or not GMO will be at the forefront of food technology for at least the next 30 years. Ireland should be riding on the cusp of the wave and not wallowing in the backwater.

    Thankfully, most people here don't have a problem with GM but rather with the company and patent law that surrounds it at the moment.


    If you don't like the idea of GMO you can always go off and join the Amish.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,001 ✭✭✭✭opinion guy


    As long as it's clearly labelled I don't care. I wouldn't eat GM foods if I had the option, but I'm not struggling to afford food or starving- so I don't think I have the right to dictate that others shouldn't.

    Doesn't work that way. Once you introduce it it will cross contaminate the non GM stuff. Its all or nothing I'm afriad


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,848 ✭✭✭Andy-Pandy


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    Hey Im sorry for the lateness of reply just back now.

    The debate about genetic engineering is extensive and has being going on for decades however the purpose behind genetic engineering is to breed a crop with a desired trait and this in itself has being going on for thousands of years. Although recent techniques allow us to modify, cut out and insert genes into crops with relative accuracy the desire to imbue a desired trait into a crop led farmers and plant breeders to experiment with breeding and cross breeding species of plant in an effort to breed the ideal crop. The very fact that there is “domesticated” plant species and wild plant species is testament to the fact that sometime in the past man has cultivated plants to have a desired trait such as sweetness, faster growth or larger tubers. These early farmers knew nothing of genetic engineering yet they still managed to completely breed thousands of species with the desired traits. The potential to manipulate plant growth and trait development is huge in plants as they are totipotent, that is plant cells have a high differentiating potential. This can be seen when plants generate an entire individual out of a small branch cutting.

    Every botonist worth his salt knows that the native americans were amongst the best engineerers of crops. The modifed a species of plants called teosintes from a bush like shrub to a crop that produced corn as evident in the "before and after seen here.

    The only thing that has changed with genetic engineering is the techniques used. The native americans used hybridization and the rest to acheive something totally different from what they started with. The techniques used now are much much more refined.

    Steddyteddy, I was going to write about the fundamental differences between genetic engineering and selective breeding but i found this article that says pretty much what i wanted to say.

    Id also like to add that its not the damage that could be done to the people that eat GM foods but the possible damage to the country's biodiversity that worries me most. Look at the damage that rouge plants like Japanese Knotweed, Japanese Bindweed, Rhododendron's and Hogweed (i could name many more) have caused when they have managed to gain a foothold in the country. Unfortunately these plants have no natural predators and find Ireland to have perfect growing conditions. They are almost impossible to eradicate and have been causing the destruction of are natural habitats, leading to loss of biodiversity and the eradication of species. Now picture what would happen if a crop that is immune to herbicides did the same thing. Ireland does not need GM crops, we have perfect growing conditions and the country has enough land to feed many many millions, we have a small population density and no need to increase crop yields.

    I agree scientists are not trying to make a balls of things but they make mistakes, DDT is the perfect example that in the end they dont know the full implications of what they are doing.


  • Registered Users Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    As long as it's clearly labelled I don't care. I wouldn't eat GM foods if I had the option, but I'm not struggling to afford food or starving- so I don't think I have the right to dictate that others shouldn't.

    Doesn't work that way. Once you introduce it it will cross contaminate the non GM stuff. Its all or nothing I'm afriad

    This sort of thing is something I have a massive problem with. Where are you getting your information on gm foods, little shop of horrors? Not all gm crops cross contaminate other crops. Theres a lot of ways to prevent this happening?


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,848 ✭✭✭Andy-Pandy


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    Theres a lot of ways to prevent this happening?

    Thats the problem, there's no way to be sure that there wont be cross contamination. The company's that develop the GM stock are like the pharma companys, its profit before anything else. Look again at DDT, we were told for years it was safe but it was anything but, i trust nature more than i would ever be able to trust them.


  • Registered Users Posts: 224 ✭✭Conflats


    Andy-Pandy wrote: »
    Thats the problem, there's no way to be sure that there wont be cross contamination. The company's that develop the GM stock are like the pharma companys, its profit before anything else. Look again at DDT, we were told for years it was safe but it was anything but, i trust nature more than i would ever be able to trust them.
    Well in Ireland we don't have any naturally related species of wheat, barley potatoes so thats a fundamental flaw in your argument the only crop which can and isn't largely grown in Ireland is Oilseed Rape which is a member of brassica family.
    Again another you make about the companies why not put the funding into government bodies such as Teagasc and the Universities to use this technology in a non commercial way in that they cover there costs of development but the ownership rights are the developer who would be funded by the state and which in turn the people of the country


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,848 ✭✭✭bleg


    Excellent video and deals with a small bit about GMO from 12 minutes.




  • Registered Users Posts: 1,848 ✭✭✭Andy-Pandy


    Conflats wrote: »
    Well in Ireland we don't have any naturally related species of wheat, barley potatoes so thats a fundamental flaw in your argument the only crop which can and isn't largely grown in Ireland is Oilseed Rape which is a member of brassica family.
    Again another you make about the companies why not put the funding into government bodies such as Teagasc and the Universities to use this technology in a non commercial way in that they cover there costs of development but the ownership rights are the developer who would be funded by the state and which in turn the people of the country

    I don't mind being corrected if im wrong, im trying to widen my horizons on this subject. GM product's most likely will cross pollinate with are existing crops, this would mean that we would have no choice but to eat these GM crops even if we don't want too. If this happens do the company's that produce these crops then have the right to charge neighbouring farmers for using there patent? Cases like this have happened in the states before.

    I would love if it was only the Universities and An Teagasc that ran this in Ireland, but i dont trust the government to handle this correctly, they will most likely go down the easiest road and use crops already in production, therefore loosing the opportunity to produce are own patents and forcing farmers to use patented crops and therefore loosing control of what we can grow to outside company's.

    I really think one of the main driving forces behind the surge in GM crops is to allow company's to patent foods and gain monopoly's, that just seems very wrong to me.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,001 ✭✭✭✭opinion guy


    Thats a bit rich coming from you when you weren't familiar with the bioballistic method yourself, yet you are on here pushing this agneda for some reason.

    I'm curious - what exactly is your interest in this ? Do you have any financial interests in genetic engineering ?

    Still waiting for your answer.....


  • Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 35,093 Mod ✭✭✭✭pickarooney


    Let nobody say they don't recognise a Canadian accent any more:
    http://www.percyschmeiser.com/conflict.htm


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,848 ✭✭✭Andy-Pandy


    .


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,029 ✭✭✭shedweller


    Andy-Pandy wrote: »
    Cases like this have happened in the states before.
    They have and i do remember seeing a documentary about it about three or four years ago. You would think you could counter sue them for contaminating your crops but hey, i'm not a lawyer!

    Anyway, in other, somewhat related news:
    http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/03/04/147819839/the-ultimate-in-heirloom-wheat-arrives-at-seed-vault?sc=fb&cc=fp
    A few days ago, amid darkness and freezing winds, thousands of small packages of seeds were carried into an underground storage vault on a remote Arctic island. That vault holds a growing collection of seeds from all the different kinds of crops around the world that humans grow for food.
    The seeds — 740,000 samples and counting — are stored inside a mountain on a group of islands called Svalbard, which is legally part of Norway, but is located far out in the Arctic Ocean, just 600 miles from the North Pole.
    The Svalbard Global Seed Vault — along with dozens of other, less-secure collections around the world — is supposed to preserve a vital part of the world's botanical gene pool; in this case, all the varieties of corn or peas or tomatoes that have disappeared from farmers' fields.
    Those varieties disappeared because farmers turned to varieties that promise bigger harvests and greater profits. But Cary Fowler, director of the Global Crop Diversity Trust, which runs the Svalbard vault, says the old varieties hold underappreciated genetic traits that we may need someday in order to fight diseases or cope with a changing climate.
    Will that GM rubbish be going to Svalbard? I certainly hope not.

    One of the comments to this article got my attention with this bit:
    crop yield improvements are a result of many centuries of breeding, GMO's do not increase yield directly, glyphosphate is a weed killer not a yield enhancer.
    Do not increase yield, he says. Hm.


  • Registered Users Posts: 224 ✭✭Conflats


    Andy-Pandy wrote: »
    I don't mind being corrected if im wrong, im trying to widen my horizons on this subject. GM product's most likely will cross pollinate with are existing crops, this would mean that we would have no choice but to eat these GM crops even if we don't want too. If this happens do the company's that produce these crops then have the right to charge neighbouring farmers for using there patent? Cases like this have happened in the states before.

    I would love if it was only the Universities and An Teagasc that ran this in Ireland, but i dont trust the government to handle this correctly, they will most likely go down the easiest road and use crops already in production, therefore loosing the opportunity to produce are own patents and forcing farmers to use patented crops and therefore loosing control of what we can grow to outside company's.

    I really think one of the main driving forces behind the surge in GM crops is to allow company's to patent foods and gain monopoly's, that just seems very wrong to me.

    The problem is with all this is the need for proper laws to be put in place to handle this before situations arising, and in Ireland I feel we dont need the herbicide tolerant(yes this is a naturally occurring thing too) crops as we have one major advantage in weed control which is ploughing unlike other more arid regions of the world. however if we had varitieties of the aforementioned crops to have better Nitrogen efficiency( which is about currently 50%) or the main one Disease resistance, Gm should be seen as a tool in the box to help provide a more rational control because i find it funny how the people who call for no gm also call for no chemical inputs which gm has the potential to cut if

    On the issue of cross pollination the main problem has been the perceived threat of 'super' weeds and the lack of natural relations helps. Also the point in ireland we dont eat directly the grain crops or at least the majority of it due to the quality aspects(esp in milling wheat).

    The main thing is though a lot of these issues is around people either dont know or the anti-gm lobby forget to mention, all these traits are in the natural environment for example this thread was started over the application to study the environmental impacts of GM potatoes, these genes have been transferred from a wild relative of the potato. These genes can create a new improved variety in about 16 weeks vs 15 years for the natural one.
    And please dont somebody say there is already naturally resistant blight varieties out there yes there is and the reason they arent used widely is down to quality and cooking characteristics which the people who dont want them are the CONSUMER who wont buy them


  • Registered Users Posts: 224 ✭✭Conflats


    One of the comments to this article got my attention with this bit:

    Do not increase yield, he says. Hm.[/QUOTE]
    Well by using a trait such as herbicide tolerance in the plant by getting a better kill of weeds will actually increase yields due to the competition effect which weeds have with crops, so yes the use of glyphosate does increase yields in both herbicide sensitive and herbicide tolerant crops.


  • Registered Users Posts: 343 ✭✭Digits


    Interesting thread.

    To me GM crops is a bigger issue for Ireland than the US, Australia etc. Irish food produce sold accross the globe is heavily marketed as organic, free range, healthy etc. Take kerrygold, they are very popular in German supermarkets. Look at there german website showing cows grazing fresh pasture. This is the image we are selling as food producers.

    http://www.kerrygold.de/

    People in counties that import Irish food believe we have he highest quality food. Now what about when they learn that our cows are actually being fed GM beet, kale etc. Foreign consumers will just think "why don't I just buy the cheaper product since Irish cows are being fed the same GM thing". This is just in the example of butter but it can be applied accross the board.

    Basically we're viewed as having the best quality natural foods across the globe, so why cast doubts into the consumers minds, thus killing our 'green image?'


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 224 ✭✭Conflats


    The only GM ingredients our livestock are being fed are soya and maize meal (not the stuff we grow the actual grain) this is due to the fact over 90% of world soya is now GM due to the widespread adaption of the technology.

    Also with the image of the cows grazing the focus in irish agriculture is to use the most amount of grass possible in the diets reducing the need for the expensive concentrates( grains and protein sources).

    Also a huge part of the irish products is the taste the meat, milk and butter etc taste better which is why the consumer buys it 99% of the time
    Digits wrote: »
    Interesting thread.

    To me GM crops is a bigger issue for Ireland than the US, Australia etc. Irish food produce sold accross the globe is heavily marketed as organic, free range, healthy etc. Take kerrygold, they are very popular in German supermarkets. Look at there german website showing cows grazing fresh pasture. This is the image we are selling as food producers.

    http://www.kerrygold.de/

    People in counties that import Irish food believe we have he highest quality food. Now what about when they learn that our cows are actually being fed GM beet, kale etc. Foreign consumers will just think "why don't I just buy the cheaper product since Irish cows are being fed the same GM thing". This is just in the example of butter but it can be applied accross the board.

    Basically we're viewed as having the best quality natural foods across the globe, so why cast doubts into the consumers minds, thus killing our 'green image?'


Advertisement