Yes they should. (32.94%)
Yes but not until we know more about them (15.29%)
No they shouldnt. (51.76%)
We are well able to feed the worlds population and then some without GM crops if only we'd stop warring and cheating each other.
You think so ? How much do you actually know about genetics ?
No, GM is a shotgun. The 'shotgun technique' has been one of the main techniques genetic engineering has used for decades. Crudely put it means you fire the new gene into a bunch of germ cells, grow em, and hope one of them has the trait you want. And doesn't have other traits you don't want. You may not know until donkeys years down the line what traits show up.
It isn't. One of the great scientific scams of the last 20 years was that we understood genetics and could manipulate it in predictable ways. Absolutely rubbish. The stuff of science fiction - years away from that if its even possible. People don't seem to understand - we are still decoding the language of genetics - right now - we are like babies speaking their first quasi-words, we are years if not decades away from writing the eloquent prose that so many seem to think we are capable of already.
The general understanding of genetics by the population, and I dare say businessmen and investors of the 80's and 90's, is rudimentary at best. The arrogance of some scientists is stellar. They actually labelled part of the genome as 'junk' DNA - because it didn't make sense to them they figured it did nothing and was junk. In last few years we know it does stuff, important stuff.
Genetically modified crops outside of a lab represent nothing less than a massive, planetary, ecosystem wide, uncontrolled, completely unplanned, unscientific experiment carried out on a worldwide population, who not only did not give informed consent, but weren't even asked their permission or told it was happening until it was too late.
Surely it should be dependent on the modification???
There's a big difference between a modification to allow crops to withstand ridiculous unnecessary levels of pesticides and herbicides, compared to something like golden rice.
There are pros and cons to genetic modification. The cons are not considerable enough to make me think GM should be banned, but the pros are very often just not worth it. If the pros reflect a need, then I say go for GM, but if the pros reflect greed, then those crops should not be grown outside. Too risky to grow them without a good reason.
With regards to the mention of no cross pollination, in many plants seeds can be produced without cross pollination. These seeds can then be dispersed outside the area of farming and enter the outside population. Especially if these plants have been grown to resist herbicides, we'll have a big problem with a potentially invasive species.
There has been problems with gm crops but as we speak those problems are being ironed out. I think hes mostly referring to the potential of gm crops to cross breed with non gm crops. Most of it is scare mongering though.
the big risk to all of this is cross breeding with native plants resulting in uncontrolled changes to the native plants.
Well I dont see war stopping anytime soon as its part of human nature.
Not as much as a geneticist but I would have done a large amount of study on it.
That seems to be knock out mice your referring to where you knock out a gene and try to determine the effect that gene had on development ect. Modern genetics uses vectors in the form of plasmids and other methods to introduce new dna.
Yes we are still decoding the genome but you can be sure that the genes being introduced to plants are fairly well understood. We have a much larger understanding of genetics than you think.
Ill be the first to say that a lot of scientists are arrogant and there is a lot of dogma in science even to this day but there will always be people to question the hypothesis put forward by most scientists. I dont accept some of the current scientific thinking to this day. It wasnt fair to call it junk dna and today its largely referred to as non coding dna as it doesnt express a gene or translate to a protein. The businessmen or investors havent a clue I agree.
Outside of your coperate concerns what are you afraid will happen?
Cross breeding in general results in uncontrolled changes to native plants. Domestic crops are nothing like the wild type before man got to it.
Rather than having a self-indulgent punt at derailing my reasoning, perhaps an intelligent rebuttal?
Natural doesnt always mean good and unnatural doesnt always mean bad. Vaccines are not natural yet they save millions of lives worldwide.
Not as much as you think. Read more.
No its not knock out mice I'm referring to - its specifically plant genetic engineering techniques. More correctly called bioballistics. You basically stick your target gene onto a metal atom and fire it into the cell and hope for the best. Its the most used method for engineering plants. See what I said about you reading some more ? This is an example of stuff you apparently don't know about.
I am sure we don't. We have a much poorer understanding of genetics than you think.
Difficult to predict. They have apparently already found plant transgenes in human enteric bacteria. That can't be good. We are using sophisticated shotguns to f**k with an ecosystem of immense complexity evolved over eons. Anyone who tells you what can or can not happen is talking through their hole - like I said, its 'a massive, planetary, ecosystem wide, uncontrolled, completely unplanned, unscientific experiment'
lol at Organic Market.
Over priced foods with a highly limited option for export.
There is no need for Ireland to grow GM products, are soil and growing conditions are just about perfect. There is a case for GM products in some country's, as there are drought/disease resistant variants of crops that will give a higher yield in places with poorer growing conditions. But in Ireland we simple just dont need them. In saying that, i wouldnt deny any developing country with a high population density the opportunity to be able to produce greater yields, therefore feeding more people.
We already share much of our genes with plants, viruses, rats, bats and bacteria. The importance of research is paramount here but judging by the poll most people dont even want to give research a chance.
So therefore you agree that the long terms effects are completely unpredictable given that these genes can hop species unpredictably ?
The poll is not about research - it is about releasing the stuff into the environment.
We could increase our ability to export goods longer distances without fear of them going off and we could engineer crops that would be in season all year round. We are famous for our agricultural prowess and rightfully so but If we dont capiltalise on new technology we could fall behind.
I added a option yes but more research is needed first.
Yes as with ANY type of breeding genetic or otherwise the random recombination of alleles is largely unpredictable.