Should Ireland welcome gentically modified food?

steddyeddy

bleg wrote: »

Just wondering what the anti GMO people have to say about genetically modified micro-organisms which are used to produce medicines. Would you be comfortable getting treated with these?


Is it Ok to inject their products directly into your bloodstream, bypassing your immune system?

Or drugs which act on receptor sites within the cell. These arent native to the body either.

Stercus Accidit

bleg wrote: »

Just wondering what the anti GMO people have to say about genetically modified micro-organisms which are used to produce medicines. Would you be comfortable getting treated with these?


Is it Ok to inject their products directly into your bloodstream, bypassing your immune system?

The issue is that the organism will be patented and sold by one monopolistic entity and cost a fortune.
Very few people are afraid of fat tomatoes with crippled genes or medicine, it is everything to do with the cost and monopolisation of these things that are worrying. Medicine may operate this way, but food hasn't until recently.

Somnus

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

A lot of the genetically modified crops are designed with genetic DRM built in that kills their ability to produce seeds or multiple generations. It is also an industry that is heavily monopolised and exploited. Organic food does the job now and has done for millennia, GM crops are not better because it doesn't make business sense to make them better, they are better in some marketable ways, and crippled in terms of seed yield and multiple generations of plants.

Be aware of the guys selling the GM crops and a potential future dependence on them, its not the fatter tomato you have to be worried about.

Did you actually read any of my previous posts regarding the reproduction issue? If they could reproduce, people would complain of cross pollination. And anti-GM attitudes will reduce the amount of GM companies. If there were more GM companies, there wouldn't be a monopoly.

And what do you mean organic crops have done the job for millenia? Ever hear of mass starvation due to failing crops throughout history? I'm sure you're familiar with a certain potato failure that happened in this country....

Not to mention that most crops aren't "Organic". Organic crops (which is a ridiculous misnomer anyway) are required to have no chemical/pesticide aids at all. It's a niche market that is very expensive and cannot produce crops on large scale.

steddyeddy

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

The issue is that the organism will be patented and sold by one monopolistic entity and cost a fortune.
Very few people are afraid of fat tomatoes with crippled genes or medicine, it is everything to do with the cost and monopolisation of these things that are worrying. Medicine may operate this way, but food hasn't until recently.

So once this is policed you wouldnt have a problem?

bleg

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

The issue is that the organism will be patented and sold by one monopolistic entity and cost a fortune.
Very few people are afraid of fat tomatoes with crippled genes or medicine, it is everything to do with the cost and monopolisation of these things that are worrying. Medicine may operate this way, but food hasn't until recently.

So you have a problem with patent law and not GMO? Me too, but they're separate issues.

GLaDOS

bleg wrote: »

Just wondering what the anti GMO people have to say about genetically modified micro-organisms which are used to produce medicines. Would you be comfortable getting treated with these?

If you're against genetic modification, I hop you never develop diabetes, because guess where all that insulin is coming from.

Stercus Accidit

Dr.Poca wrote: »

Did you actually read any of my previous posts regarding the reproduction issue? If they could reproduce, people would complain of cross pollination. And anti-GM attitudes will reduce the amount of GM companies. If there were more GM companies, there wouldn't be a monopoly.

I have worked on this exact topic for the last year while designing farming solutions for the third world, I don't need to read the rest of this thread.
The current GM market is heavily monopolized, it also works in its own interests, examples of cross pollination have happened and law suits have arisen from them. The industry is also working on crippled crops that do not produce seeds, resulting in dependant customers on yearly seed purchases.

And what do you mean organic crops have done the job for millenia? Ever hear of mass starvation due to failing crops throughout history? I'm sure you're familiar with a certain potato failure that happened in this country....

Improved farming methods increase food yields dramatically in any of the modern famine regions we studied as part of our work. Yes, organic food has succeeded for millennia, we are alive aren't we?

Not to mention that most crops aren't "Organic". Organic crops (which is a ridiculous misnomer anyway) are required to have no chemical/pesticide aids at all. It's a niche market that is very expensive and cannot produce crops on large scale.

I'm not talking wishy washy soggy carrots, I am mentioning the real worry here, not the 'organicness' or not of some food, but the business models that are possible and being explored with GM tailored foods.

Read my post, understand it, I am pointing out future exploitation potential from this tech.

Stercus Accidit

bleg wrote: »

So you have a problem with patent law and not GMO? Me too, but they're separate issues.

It's a very pertinent issue here as this industry is one rife with monopolization and shady practices. I am only adding my point of view.

steddyeddy

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

I have worked on this exact topic for the last year while designing farming solutions for the third world, I don't need to read the rest of this thread.
The current GM market is heavily monopolized, it also works in its own interests, examples of cross pollination have happened and law suits have arisen from them. The industry is also working on crippled crops that do not produce seeds, resulting in dependant customers on yearly seed purchases.


Improved farming methods increase food yields dramatically in any of the modern famine regions we studied as part of our work. Yes, organic food has succeeded for millennia, we are alive aren't we?


I'm not talking wishy washy soggy carrots, I am mentioning the real worry here, not the 'organicness' or not of some food, but the business models that are possible and being explored with GM tailored foods.

Read my post, understand it, I am pointing out future exploitation potential from this tech.

In terms of scientific progression "we are alive" doesnt cut it for the standard.

Somnus

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

It's a very pertinent issue here as this industry is one rife with monopolization and shady practices. I am only adding my point of view.

If this is your only problem then that's fine with me. It definitely needs to be regulated. But the more companies involved the better though.
My arguement is more with people against the actual GM food, not the business plan.

You said yourself, that it's the current GM market that is monopolised. Teagasc getting involved helps disperse this. If there's a chance for exploitation I'd imagine it's at the beginning when there are not many companies involved in the business. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

44leto

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

The issue is that the organism will be patented and sold by one monopolistic entity and cost a fortune.
Very few people are afraid of fat tomatoes with crippled genes or medicine, it is everything to do with the cost and monopolisation of these things that are worrying. Medicine may operate this way, but food hasn't until recently.

That is a worry, BUT a patent only last 10 years and then the generics are rolled out, the farmer will always have a choice and the seed must always be cost effective and why would the farmer not go for the more productive and profitable seed. So really this is a very very good thing, look at the advances in drug treatment that patented medicine has driven. Imagine that same business model going into food, we can't imagine how productive and what agriculture will look like 20 years from now. But I can be certain it will be amazing. The deserts of the world may bloom.

Stercus Accidit

Dr.Poca wrote: »

If this is your only problem then that's fine with me. It definitely needs to be regulated. But the more companies involved the better though.
My arguement is more with people against the actual GM food, not the business plan.

You said yourself, that it's the current GM market that is monopolised. Teagasc getting involved helps disperse this. If there's a chance for exploitation I'd imagine it's at the beginning when there are not many companies involved in the business. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

My worry is that farming and food are very fragile in many countries. As part of our research one major problem that became evident was farmers understandable reluctance to try new methods or crops.
People who subsistence farm are one bad harvest away from starvation, they have been hungry their whole lives, it is hard to make them change their methods. What that tells me is that if GM versions of local staple crops were gradually introduced, people would become dependant on them, and in future the crippled crops could be rolled out, people would end up dependant on those and exploited, unable to change their methods due to fear and a lack of options.

Improved irrigation, crops and rotation were our primary focal points and prove to be very successful, but are hard to implement. GM comes along and offers a better version of a local staple, that is easier to achieve, in future then you get the move towards more restrictive and expensive crops, various legal tie ins and so on.

With checks and balances, diversity of providers and awareness that can be avoided, but in vulnerable regions that may not happen. I suppose remaining aware and informing people is the answer, GM is here to stay, I just hope it doesn't turn out badly for the most vulnerable farmers.

Stercus Accidit

steddyeddy wrote: »

In terms of scientific progression "we are alive" doesnt cut it for the standard.

What is your point, that current foods haven't fed people for thousands of years?

steddyeddy

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

What is your point, that current foods haven't fed people for thousands of years?

Gm foods have more potential than solving world hunger. Anyway even if they had that limited potential people are starving to death in developing countries so it would certainly serve a purpose.

Somnus

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

My worry is that farming and food are very fragile in many countries. As part of our research one major problem that became evident was farmers understandable reluctance to try new methods or crops.
People who subsistence farm are one bad harvest away from starvation, they have been hungry their whole lives, it is hard to make them change their methods. What that tells me is that if GM versions of local staple crops were gradually introduced, people would become dependant on them, and in future the crippled crops could be rolled out, people would end up dependant on those and exploited, unable to change their methods due to fear and a lack of options.

Improved irrigation, crops and rotation were our primary focal points and prove to be very successful, but are hard to implement. GM comes along and offers a better version of a local staple, that is easier to achieve, in future then you get the move towards more restrictive and expensive crops, various legal tie ins and so on.

With checks and balances, diversity of providers and awareness that can be avoided, but in vulnerable regions that may not happen. I suppose remaining aware and informing people is the answer, GM is here to stay, I just hope it doesn't turn out badly for the most vulnerable farmers.

Good post. I see where you're coming from and agree that farmers in disadvantaged regions are definitely more likely to be exploited. That is definitely something to be looked at. Of course I would like to see farmers in these regions given the best choice possible. They should be able to choose between GM and their traditional crops.

But in terms of the situation here in Ireland. I don't see it being an issue. Farmers in first world countries will always have a choice. And the more companies involved in GM crops, the more choice.

Stercus Accidit

steddyeddy wrote: »

Gm foods have more potential than solving world hunger. Anyway even if they had that limited potential people are starving to death in developing countries so it would certainly serve a purpose.

A lot of hunger stems from crap farming methods and storage, improved irrigation, techniques, rotation of crops and crop choice lead to substantially increased yields. GM can be used to cripple crops as well as improve them, don't presume that all genetically introduced modifications are beneficial to the farmer.

dvpower

steddyeddy wrote: »

GM does not mean "not green".

In the eyes of the general public GM is seen as not 'green' - right or wrong.

steddyeddy wrote: »

Our aproach to biodiversity is not green anyway. Why shouldnt we move forward in science just because some people think its controversial?

Marketing. If the customers for our food are wary of GM or they associate GM with not being green, then we need to listen to them.

steddyeddy

dvpower wrote: »

In the eyes of the general public GM is seen as not 'green' - right or wrong.


Marketing. If the customers for our food are wary of GM or they associate GM with not being green, then we need to listen to them.

I would put those people in with creationists to be honest. Market policy shouldnt be dictated by them.

dvpower

steddyeddy wrote: »

I would put those people in with creationists to be honest. Market policy shouldnt be dictated by them.

Market policy needs to be dictated by the market. If consumers are wary of GM, we can't just ignore that because their concerns are unfounded.

44leto

Originally Posted by Stercus Accidit
What is your point, that current foods haven't fed people for thousands of years?

Production methods have not fed the amount of people they feed now and we still do not produce enough food, someone in the world dies every second from malnutrition. This will get worse as food becomes more expensive, food like energy is becoming inevitably inflationary. They are looking for alternative energy with millions in research dollars. For food it has to be GM there is nothing else.

People opposed to GM, it's almost seems superstition to me, first you have to convince them that what we eat is not natural and mainly man made produce, then you have to convince them that the Earth is just a planet an enaminate object and not a living entity. That GM is not abhorant to nature because there is no such thing as an abhorrence in nature.

whelpy

blatantrereg wrote: »

Because GM foodstuffs are associated with bad practices.

Monsanto crops are genetically modified to make them resistant to the herbicide that Monsanto manufactures. This herbicide is routinely sprayed all over the crops which eleiminates all other plants growing there. There are serious concerns about the impact of the herbicide on the health of consumers as well as ecological effects. Some of the more alarming effects shown in studies include miscarriages and birth defects, interference in reproductive development of pubescents, interference with oestrogen and testosterone production, genetic damage. Direct consumption of as little as 85ml of it has caused human death.

Monsanto also use gene modifications to interfere with the ability of the crops to reproduce. They are genetically modified so that the next generation will be sterile. Farmers can't sow the seeds from their own crops in other words, but rather have to continually buy new seed from Monsanto.

The combination of these things offers a dangerous level of control to Monsanto over farms which use their products.

This is the association in my mind with GM food. Similar associations would exist for plenty of people, especially the types of consumers who would care about Ireland having a green image in the first place, when it comes to selecting produce. There are plenty of valid concerns about GM technology when it is used with benign intentions also.

Some really good points made here, but you have pointed out issues that occur in arable farming in general whether the crops are gm or not.

starlit

I thought they already have?

Porkpie

No harm in consuming gm food - if you don't mind having a third ball.

Taloolah

Wow. Some of the pro-gm posts on here are frightening. I feel sick after reading them. I never knew so many people had such a disregard for nature. I can only assume that these posters don't have much regard for their own bodies, or even know all that much about how their bodies work.
Everything that nature provides us with works in perfect harmony with our bodies. Veg and fruit grown from pure, clean soil provides us with all the vitamins and minerals we need to be healthy and strong.

GM food is completely alien to nature. It is not the same as selective breeding.Our bodies are not designed to deal with GM food. How could they be? You can apply the same logic to processed/junk food - you eat too much: you get sick.

But if only it was just our bodies we had to worry about. Allowing GMOs to flourish in nature may result in cross-pollination with normal crops, like a plague across this tiny country.
And then what? An end to native plant species?

This GM invasion has nothing to do with "progress", as so many posters have mentioned here, it is simply a matter of multi-nationals pushing their products on country after country, all in the name of profit.

And as for this theory that GM food would eradicate world starvation? Ha! That is HILARIOUS! The seeds are genetically designed to only produce one harvest a year! Do you honestly think that multi-nationals have global welfare in mind when developing these seeds?

Gbear

Taloolah wrote: »

Wow. Some of the pro-gm posts on here are frightening. I feel sick after reading them. I never knew so many people had such a disregard for nature. I can only assume that these posters don't have much regard for their own bodies, or even know all that much about how their bodies work.
Everything that nature provides us with works in perfect harmony with our bodies. Veg and fruit grown from pure, clean soil provides us with all the vitamins and minerals we need to be healthy and strong.

GM food is completely alien to nature. It is not the same as selective breeding.Our bodies are not designed to deal with GM food. How could they be? You can apply the same logic to processed/junk food - you eat too much: you get sick.

But if only it was just our bodies we had to worry about. Allowing GMOs to flourish in nature may result in cross-pollination with normal crops, like a plague across this tiny country.
And then what? An end to native plant species?

This GM invasion has nothing to do with "progress", as so many posters have mentioned here, it is simply a matter of multi-nationals pushing their products on country after country, all in the name of profit.

And as for this theory that GM food would eradicate world starvation? Ha! That is HILARIOUS! The seeds are genetically designed to only produce one harvest a year! Do you honestly think that multi-nationals have global welfare in mind when developing these seeds?

Oh dear... all I can say is that i'm disappointed there's no "rofl" emoticon.

This particular gem is a true lesson in irony:
"I can only assume that these posters don't have much regard for their own bodies, or even know all that much about how their bodies work."

Somnus

Taloolah wrote: »

Everything that nature provides us with works in perfect harmony with our bodies. Veg and fruit grown from pure, clean soil provides us with all the vitamins and minerals we need to be healthy and strong.

This is a ridiculously naive statement.
The earth is not some benevolent God looking out for human kind. Plants are organisms, they evolve to take care of themselves, they don't give a sh*t how good for us they are. Think of all the lethally poisonous plants/fungi that exist. I'm sure you're not rushing to prove they work "in perfect harmony with our bodies".
Many people in Asia suffer from vitamin A deficiency because the "natural" crops that consist of their diet do not produce enough. So that pretty much invalidates you statement of all crops providing everything we need.

Taloolah wrote: »

GM food is completely alien to nature.

So are computers,planes, technology in general. Do you refuse to accept these things?

Nature is not this perfect example of the way things should be. It has faults, just like people, which can be improved. I respect the biodiversity of the planet, but that doesn't mean I think it's perfect. Human kind has shaped the resources of the planet to our will for a long time, and I think we've done all right out of that. We live longer lives, with a better standard of living.
GM foods are just another step in improving things for ourselves.

steddyeddy

Taloolah wrote: »

Wow. Some of the pro-gm posts on here are frightening. I feel sick after reading them. I never knew so many people had such a disregard for nature. I can only assume that these posters don't have much regard for their own bodies, or even know all that much about how their bodies work.

This is a frightening post to be honest. First of all I have to address this "respect for nature thing" You will find no one with more respect for nature than me. Secondly Ireland has a terrible record of respect for nature so I dont buy the whole gm foods will ruin that thing. We are using unscientific and pointless way to eradicate bovine tb by culling badgers. We are killing the reintroduced birds of prey In ireland by the same method they were made extinct one hundred years ago. We see any non livestock animal as vermin. Talk to any conservationist outside of Ireland and youll hear about our reputation first hand.

I know how the body works quite well thanks (at a cellular level anyway).

Everything that nature provides us with works in perfect harmony with our bodies. Veg and fruit grown from pure, clean soil provides us with all the vitamins and minerals we need to be healthy and strong.

As Dr.Poca says some nutirents are lacking in certain crops. These deficiencies can lead to blindness and a host of other problems. If nature works in perfect harmony with our bodies why do we bother pasteurizing milk or selecting certian crops endowed with particular traits? You cant believe nature revolves around how well it works for us can you?

GM food is completely alien to nature. It is not the same as selective breeding.Our bodies are not designed to deal with GM food. How could they be? You can apply the same logic to processed/junk food - you eat too much: you get sick.

There are four types of DNA pairs found in the body (Five if you count uracil) they code for twenty amino acids. Selectively breeding for plants changes the occurence of certain genes in a gene pool. With genetic modification you use a more sophisticated method to change the occurence of certain genes in the gene pool. All the additions result in a change in the amino acids expressed by a gene. Apart from technique whats the difference?



But if only it was just our bodies we had to worry about. Allowing GMOs to flourish in nature may result in cross-pollination with normal crops, like a plague across this tiny country.
And then what? An end to native plant species?

This GM invasion has nothing to do with "progress", as so many posters have mentioned here, it is simply a matter of multi-nationals pushing their products on country after country, all in the name of profit.

Once its policed this wont be a problem. In theory anyone with a lab can make GM crops.

[/QUOTE]And as for this theory that GM food would eradicate world starvation? Ha! That is HILARIOUS! The seeds are genetically designed to only produce one harvest a year! Do you honestly think that multi-nationals have global welfare in mind when developing these seeds?[/QUOTE]

Sorry some seeds are designed to harvest once a year to prevent cross pollination. Some seeds and heres the whole point of gm foods in a nutshell, we can genetically engineer a crop to do anything. A scientist in UCD engineered a crop to have a nutrient it was deficient in. The resulting modification prevented thousands from going blind. Its a bit insulting the way you state that global welfare isnt important to some people.

I take it your also against Insulin and gene therapy, anti cancer drugs, anti aids drugs, blood transfusions and all the other ways we meddled with nature?

Dude111

GMO is BAD NEWS and should be avoided @ all costs!!!

EVERYONE IN IRELAND SHOULD TAKE A STAND ON THIS!!

You dont want GMO stuff!

Somnus

Dude111 wrote: »

GMO is BAD NEWS and should be avoided @ all costs!!!

EVERYONE IN IRELAND SHOULD TAKE A STAND ON THIS!!

You dont want GMO stuff!

What an insightful and educational post....

Edit: Unless this is sarcasm, but it's hard to tell...

bleg

Dude111 wrote: »

GMO is BAD NEWS and should be avoided @ all costs!!!

EVERYONE IN IRELAND SHOULD TAKE A STAND ON THIS!!

You dont want GMO stuff!

Grand. No anti cancer drugs for you so.