Secret GM Crop Trails

JohnJimbo

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7529590.stm

What a joke.

The new freedom. Who would choose to eat this rubbish.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

starving people, probably.

also I don't get the joke, they want a secret location because hippies and anti-science nutjobs keep vandalising private property... that's all perfectly reasonable.

shayser

We don't need to genetically modify food. If food was produced primarily to feed the hungry and not for huge profit, there would be no food shortages, except maybe sporadically, or where it is regular, predictably and manageable.

The reason for genetically modifying food is profit.

People could be encouraged to eat less meat, in the same way as we are being encouraged to use less energy, to free up land for crops that is used for livestock.

Bio-fuel crops are using land that could be used for growing food crops. Except bio-fuel might be a whole new market.

The beast that is Monsanto springs to mind:

irishseedsavers.ie wrote:

Monsanto has filed dozens of patent infringement lawsuits asserting the four challenged patents against American farmers, many of whom are unable to hire adequate representation to defend themselves in court. The crime these farmers are accused of is nothing more than saving seed from one year's crop to replant the following year, something farmers have done since the beginning of time.

Mahatma coat

I'm not so sure Shayser, some of the GE advances have been great, what we really dont need are either the Monsanto Legal Team or the Hippie Vandals.

there are great benefits to humanity if the GE issue was managed propperly, course thats not gonna happen as there are large corporations trying to maximise revenue, and emotivley driven Morons who think they have the right to destroy all thee experiments to 'Save Us'.

JohnJimbo

Princess Innocent Knickers wrote: »

starving people, probably.

also I don't get the joke, they want a secret location because hippies and anti-science nutjobs keep vandalising private property... that's all perfectly reasonable.

Just you stick to the princess land.

GM food does not produce any higher yields. Ask any farmer.

"anti-science nutjobs" ????????????? what are you little miss einstein, clealy not. Maybe you want to do some research before commenting.

taram

JohnJimbo wrote: »

Just you stick to the princess land.

GM food does not produce any higher yields. Ask any farmer.

"anti-science nutjobs" ????????????? what are you little miss einstein, clealy not. Maybe you want to do some research before commenting.

Ask what farmers? US farmers say it works, and I've seen GM crops produce better yields time and time again under stresses in the lab and greenhouse, that's the point of them.

I agree if we used better techniques we wouldn't need GM food, or if our maize went to food market rather than feeding cows cheaply for McDonalds.

The problem with GM is that the first green revolution was efforts by universities and public institutions to devlope better chemicals and techniques for everyone, this green revolution is owned by private companies.

Sherifu

Another predictable Casey thread.

Fry it, throw on a pinch of salt. As good as normal food.