Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Permission granted to grow GM potatoes in Ireland

1…34689…13

Comments

  • #152
    zenno
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,377 ✭✭✭zenno


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    No offence meant. Look at my previous posts I made clear my feelings on the subject. I think gm is safe but I wouldnt like the idea of monsanto owning the patent on something.

    I read your previous posts just there, sorry I thought you just jumped in with that last comment my fault for not reading the whole thread.


  • #153
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,046 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    The same people praising scientists for trying to sort out the food shortages problems in the world are the same people who cry out at the idea of eating GM potatoes.


  • #154
    hardCopy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,969 ✭✭✭hardCopy


    zenno wrote: »
    steddyeddy wrote: »
    Or people who know what gm actually is?

    Do you ?...

    Look, it's common sense that a consumer is going to go for organic over genetically modified if purchasing food so unless you can brainwash them to think GM is safe then it won't work, and so far there has been feck all long-term studies proving it is safe. If you think for 1 second that Monsanto have the populations health as priority then think again, they won't release the so-called studies on this even in america. It's up to yourself what you want to eat and most people will go organic.
    To be honest I would out this mad anti gm stuff up with creationisim. It just seems to be hating it for the sake of hating it.

    If this is all you have to add in relation to GM then you haven't done well. Debate it instead of foolish remarks ?.


    Very few people choose organic over pesticide supported produce, what makes you think people will care about GM?

    Plenty of people won't care or check if their local chipper uses GM spuds it their supermarket frozen wedges.

    I think you're over estimating people's desire for organic food.


  • #155
    --Kaiser--
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,461 ✭✭✭--Kaiser--


    N64 wrote: »
    how many monsanto shills do we have on this thread? :)

    How many conspiracy theory nutjobs do we have on this threas? I mean, besides you.


  • #156
    Dave!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,856 ✭✭✭✭Dave!


    Can't say I know a whole lot about GM. From my reading I don't believe there is any health risk associated with it, so would have no problem eating it (we already do!). I'm also aware of the advantages it provides to many consumers and farmers in developing nations. But I don't know enough about agriculture etc to have an opinion on any potential environmental risks, and I'm a bit concerned about the foods being patented, and the monopoly issue because of the lack of competition in the market.

    BTW shouldn't it be pitched as GM vs. conventional agriculture, rather than GM vs. organic? At least, the GM side would be best served as pitching it thus. I'd say if you asked someone would they like a potato which has been sprayed by 15 different fungicides, or one which has had a gene modified to make it resistant to blight, most people would opt for the latter. I'm sure most people would say they'd prefer organic food, but does the reality bear this out? The price is prohibitively high for a lot of organic food, certainly the meats anyway.

    I heard a report on RTE radio yesterday where a bunch of "punters" were asked would they eat GM food. Even pitching the question like that to an ignorant audience is likely to incline them a particular way. But the reactions were pretty telling -- most of them had no clue what it actually is, but responded with things like "it's unnatural", "it contains loads of chemicals", "there's something wrong with it", etc.

    The ignorance is astounding. Cue me screaming at the radio and punching my steering wheel...


  • Advertisement
  • #157
    Colmustard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,836 ✭✭✭Colmustard


    Just think from 1845 to 1852 potato blight a newly active disease kills the stable crop of the Irish peasant resulting in a devastation that killed 2 million from starvation and forced another 2 million to emigrate.

    Now with the ingenuity of man they create a crop more resistant to that disease, this should be celebrated, Enda should be there cutting a ribbon. But instead we get some holy Earth, not Gods way, its Frankenfood saying no, its just not natural.

    Very little we eat today is natural and "as god intended" from our cattle, our poultry to even our roots are totally dependent on us and could not exist independently from us, for we have changed them so much.

    So now we have a quicker more predictive way of doing that. This technology is amazing and a human achievement, I would like to see Ireland at the forefront of this future and exciting industry.


  • #158
    granturismo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,001 ✭✭✭granturismo


    Seaneh wrote: »
    Who the **** are you, NUIG or something?

    Scroll down the page, lazy sod.

    Yes, I am a university. MowHAHAHA.

    My minions are working on GM projects similar to this;

    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ7TcPEQOMIHRrjQVX9asrNuuOz2AAKLCP3wmuHpOsHukWL3H0g


  • #159
    Seaneh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 18,300 ✭✭✭✭Seaneh


    Colmustard wrote: »
    Just think from 1845 to 1852 potato blight a newly active disease kills the stable crop of the Irish peasant resulting in a devastation that killed 2 million from starvation and forced another 2 million to emigrate.

    Very simplistic view of why 2 million people died and millions more left the country...


  • #160
    Seaneh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 18,300 ✭✭✭✭Seaneh


    jurahnimoh wrote: »
    Will these spuds taste nice does anybody know?

    No.

    Spuds you'd buy in a supermarket in the US are about 4 times bigger than ours and all taste like nothing. Just big balls of bland starch.

    That is probably more to do with the varieties they prefer though (yukon gold etc) than the fact they are modified though. Although I wouldn't be surprised if the fact that something growing bigger in a shorter amount of time means that less nutritional density impacts negatively on flavour.


  • #161
    CruelCoin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,463 ✭✭✭CruelCoin


    The vast majority of us each genetically modified foods in some way or another each and every day.

    Why would you say no to the following?
    Longer shelf Life,
    Greater Yields,
    Hardier,
    More disease resistant,
    Greater Nutritional value (pulled from Nat-Geo, reputable)

    Its funny how people won't bat an eyelid at the rest og the GM stuff they eat, but the moment they touch "de aul' spuds be jaysus" everyone goes mad.


  • Advertisement
  • #162
    Seaneh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 18,300 ✭✭✭✭Seaneh


    My major problem is just patenting a species of plant and the negative impact that has on everyone involved in the industry.

    Also, yields aren't increased, they just aren't with Corn, Soy or Rape seed anyway, the crop requires less attention but the ieild isn't much different.


    Then you have the fact of repeated failings of GM crops in south america and south africa in the last 10 years (mostly with corn) where people have lost millions of dollars because the corn crop didn't produce any seeds, they switched because they were advised the terminator crop would have higher yields because pests wouldn't be an issue and are left with nothing because int he first time in their history the corn crop produced no harvest.


    Also, Terminator corn has been proven cause organ failure in animals, even weeks after harvest, how the **** can that stuff be safe for human consumption?


    Stuff like isolating genetic resistance to certain diseases, that's grand, or finding the "perfect" structure (more solid content, more waxy, etc) that's grand, but adding stuff like in the RR Soy/Rape/Corn or Terminator Corn/Soy/Rape is just sketchy.


  • #163
    Tipp Man
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,023 ✭✭✭Tipp Man


    Firstly there is no problem feeding the world from current agri methods - we still have milk quotas in Europe for heaven's sake. There is also a huge amount of land now being dedicated to energy production. Producing the food needed is not a problem

    The distribution of food is another matter and the main cause of the worlds food problems

    GM symbolises a lot of the problems of the world today such as
    • our need for cheap food so we can renew the iphone every year and maintain our "lifestyle"
    • everything has to be instant - as opposed to natural breeding selections which take time we have to do it in a lab so the results are instant
    • the lack of foresight to produce things in a sustainable manner - I am far from being an organic entusiast but as a farmer i can appreciate that a lot of methods used by organic farmers are much more sustainable in the long run than commercial farming


  • #164
    Duggys Housemate
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,298 ✭✭✭Duggys Housemate


    Tipp Man wrote: »
    Firstly there is no problem feeding the world from current agri methods - we still have milk quotas in Europe for heaven's sake. There is also a huge amount of land now being dedicated to energy production. Producing the food needed is not a problem

    The distribution of food is another matter and the main cause of the worlds food problems

    GM symbolises a lot of the problems of the world today such as
    • our need for cheap food so we can renew the iphone every year and maintain our "lifestyle"
    • everything has to be instant - as opposed to natural breeding selections which take time we have to do it in a lab so the results are instant
    • the lack of foresight to produce things in a sustainable manner - I am far from being an organic entusiast but as a farmer i can appreciate that a lot of methods used by organic farmers are much more sustainable in the long run than commercial farming

    Why does the iPhone have to come into everything. It, and Android phones are cheaper than most household goods.

    Of course people want cheaper food, but the cost of food harms the poorest who spend more on it. And why not use instant solutions. Why wait generations if we can fix something today?


  • #165
    WhatNowForUs?
    Closed Accounts Posts: 687 ✭✭✭WhatNowForUs?


    Colmustard wrote: »
    Just think from 1845 to 1852 potato blight a newly active disease kills the stable crop of the Irish peasant resulting in a devastation that killed 2 million from starvation and forced another 2 million to emigrate.

    Now with the ingenuity of man they create a crop more resistant to that disease, this should be celebrated, Enda should be there cutting a ribbon. But instead we get some holy Earth, not Gods way, its Frankenfood saying no, its just not natural.

    Very little we eat today is natural and "as god intended" from our cattle, our poultry to even our roots are totally dependent on us and could not exist independently from us, for we have changed them so much.

    So now we have a quicker more predictive way of doing that. This technology is amazing and a human achievement, I would like to see Ireland at the forefront of this future and exciting industry.


    The problem with the famine was not just about the potato blight, there was plenty of food being shipped out of the country.
    Now if the government of the day all-be-it governed from London was willing to ship out food in front of the starving millions what would a corporation do who has these crop patented and are governed by share holder profits.


  • #166
    Tipp Man
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,023 ✭✭✭Tipp Man


    Duggys Housemate wrote: »
    Why does the iPhone have to come into everything. It, and Android phones are cheaper than most household goods.

    Of course people want cheaper food, but the cost of food harms the poorest who spend more on it. And why not use instant solutions. Why wait generations if we can fix something today?

    Well the iphone is a symbol of consumerism - why do you think Apple have become one of the biggest companies in the world in the last few years

    In your typical western economy food accounts for about 6% of household expenditure - compared to 30% in the 70's. The public is demanding that our most important item of expenditure is produced cheaper and cheaper so that more money is available for "discretionary" expenditure. If the public was willing to pay proper prices for food produced in a sustainable manner then long term the world would be much better off

    On your last point - Why mess with nature when you can use natural selection methods?


  • #167
    CruelCoin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,463 ✭✭✭CruelCoin


    WhatNowForUs? wrote: »
    The problem with the famine was not just about the potato blight, there was plenty of food being shipped out of the country.
    Now if the government of the day all-be-it governed from London was willing to ship out food in front of the starving millions what would a corporation do who has these crop patented and are governed by share holder profits.

    For one it's not the 1800's, corporation witholding of goods resulting in millions dying would not happen today.

    Also, there was not so much corn being shipped out that it could have supported the 4 million that died/left. Perhaps 250k but thats about it.


  • #168
    CruelCoin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,463 ✭✭✭CruelCoin


    Tipp Man wrote: »
    Well the iphone is a symbol of consumerism - why do you think Apple have become one of the biggest companies in the world in the last few years

    In your typical western economy food accounts for about 6% of household expenditure - compared to 30% in the 70's. The public is demanding that our most important item of expenditure is produced cheaper and cheaper so that more money is available for "discretionary" expenditure. If the public was willing to pay proper prices for food produced in a sustainable manner then long term the world would be much better off

    On your last point - Why mess with nature when you can use natural selection methods?

    Natural selection takes generations to perfect. Time the booming (and hungry) world population simply does not have.

    You can keep your sustainable stuff thank you very much.
    Me, i'd watch the entire amazon be slash-and-burned if it meant having three sausages on my plate rather than two.


  • #169
    Seaneh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 18,300 ✭✭✭✭Seaneh


    CruelCoin wrote: »
    For one it's not the 1800's, corporation witholding of goods resulting in millions dying would not happen today.

    Also, there was not so much corn being shipped out that it could have supported the 4 million that died/left. Perhaps 250k but thats about it.

    There was enough grain being grown in Ireland to support a population of 15million. We were the major growers for Britian and France, we exported to Africa, North America and Asia.

    There was more than enough food in Ireland at the time of the famine, it was just being sold out of the country by the british establishment.


  • #170
    Dave!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,856 ✭✭✭✭Dave!


    Tipp Man wrote: »
    Well the iphone is a symbol of consumerism - why do you think Apple have become one of the biggest companies in the world in the last few years

    In your typical western economy food accounts for about 6% of household expenditure - compared to 30% in the 70's. The public is demanding that our most important item of expenditure is produced cheaper and cheaper so that more money is available for "discretionary" expenditure. If the public was willing to pay proper prices for food produced in a sustainable manner then long term the world would be much better off

    What % of expenditure is used on consumer electronics in Ireland? In this day and age? My understanding is that accommodation, fuel, childcare, etc., are the biggest burdens on households.


  • #171
    Seaneh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 18,300 ✭✭✭✭Seaneh


    CruelCoin wrote: »
    Natural selection takes generations to perfect. Time the booming (and hungry) world population simply does not have.

    You can keep your sustainable stuff thank you very much.
    Me, i'd watch the entire amazon be slash-and-burned if it meant having three sausages on my plate rather than two.

    You lack a very basic understanding of the current problem with food "shortages" in the world.

    There is an over abundance of food being grown, even in Africa, it's just not distributed properly.


  • Advertisement
  • #172
    noxqs
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 412 ✭✭noxqs


    Jesus people posting links to foodandhealing.com

    Whats next, medical advice from a homeopath?

    How about some science. I could give a damn about some hippies opinions not backed up by fact, data, and cold hard scientific reasoning.

    These websites - I've even seen them say microwave ovens somehow modifies the food to make it bad for you. Holy crap a load of unscientific bull****.


  • #173
    Tipp Man
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,023 ✭✭✭Tipp Man


    CruelCoin wrote: »
    Natural selection takes generations to perfect. Time the booming (and hungry) world population simply does not have.

    You can keep your sustainable stuff thank you very much.
    Me, i'd watch the entire amazon be slash-and-burned if it meant having three sausages on my plate rather than two.

    What hungry population??

    As i have already outlined those are mainly distribution problems

    You are aware that production to feed the world is not a problem, certainly not at the moment - the EU still has milk quotas in place for instance

    Well your Amazon comment is exactly what i am saying - people not really giving a **** about things as long as they can have what they want


  • #174
    Colmustard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,836 ✭✭✭Colmustard


    Originally Posted by Tipp Man
    Well the iphone is a symbol of consumerism - why do you think Apple have become one of the biggest companies in the world in the last few years

    In your typical western economy food accounts for about 6% of household expenditure - compared to 30% in the 70's. The public is demanding that our most important item of expenditure is produced cheaper and cheaper so that more money is available for "discretionary" expenditure. If the public was willing to pay proper prices for food produced in a sustainable manner then long term the world would be much better off

    On your last point - Why mess with nature when you can use natural selection methods?

    Sustainable for who, so if we were to pay 30% of our income on food, we may have something left over for some added luxuries like shelter and health care. But how about the other 3 quarters of the world who can barely afford food now. Do you think they should starve so you can feel good about eating organic sustainable food.

    With a population of 7 billion there is no such thing as sustainable agriculture. Industrial farming higher yields cheaper food is the only way. And even then it wont be enough. GM is the only hope.


  • #175
    CruelCoin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,463 ✭✭✭CruelCoin


    Tipp Man wrote: »
    What hungry population??

    As i have already outlined those are mainly distribution problems

    You are aware that production to feed the world is not a problem, certainly not at the moment - the EU still has milk quotas in place for instance

    Well your Amazon comment is exactly what i am saying - people not really giving a **** about things as long as they can have what they want

    If i can have what i want, then what is the incentive to act otherwise? I'm not going to pretend i want to live in a hello kitty world. I don't. I really really don't.


  • #176
    Tipp Man
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,023 ✭✭✭Tipp Man


    Dave! wrote: »
    What % of expenditure is used on consumer electronics in Ireland? In this day and age? My understanding is that accommodation, fuel, childcare, etc., are the biggest burdens on households.

    you are probably correct - don't have those figures to hand

    I find it a little ironic that your typical Irish (and Western) household needs both parents working meaning they have much greater childcare costs, much greater transport costs and less time with their children - and for what exactly?? So they can fund the childcare, the 2 cars and the house that is costing a fortune

    Sometimes less is more - I have applied this logic to our farm - less animals, much less costs and much more profits


  • #177
    Tipp Man
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,023 ✭✭✭Tipp Man


    Colmustard wrote: »
    Sustainable for who, so if we were to pay 30% of our income on food, we may have something left over for some added luxuries like shelter and health care. But how about the other 3 quarters of the world who can barely afford food now. Do you think they should starve so you can feel good about eating organic sustainable food.

    With a population of 7 billion there is no such thing as sustainable agriculture. Industrial farming higher yields cheaper food is the only way. And even then it wont be enough. GM is the only hope.

    Sustainable for the planet is who

    If the entire planet was farmed organically we could still feed 7 billion people and probably fairly easily

    For the record i am not an organic farmer and i don't buy organic goods

    But i am more than aware that the way agriculture is going now cannot continue


  • #178
    Colmustard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,836 ✭✭✭Colmustard


    Tipp Man wrote: »
    Sustainable for the planet is who

    If the entire planet was farmed organically we could still feed 7 billion people and probably fairly easily

    For the record i am not an organic farmer and i don't buy organic goods

    But i am more than aware that the way agriculture is going now cannot continue

    That is a green fantasy and absolute rubbish, organic farming is a lot less efficient and productive then industrial farming. Imagine if the American government ordered that American grain production was to be only farmed organically. It would quickly be forced stop exporting grain.

    Bread and meat prices would rise dramatically. There is a drought in North America this year watch what happens to the price of food next year. We need more fence to fence industrial farming not less.

    Imagine if they could mix a cactus gene with a grain gene and make drought resistant grain, I am not saying that would work, but with this technology you can even imagine that. That is amazing.


  • #179
    hardCopy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,969 ✭✭✭hardCopy


    CruelCoin wrote: »
    For one it's not the 1800's, corporation witholding of goods resulting in millions dying would not happen today.

    Also, there was not so much corn being shipped out that it could have supported the 4 million that died/left. Perhaps 250k but thats about it.

    You mean like the companies that give out free HIV treatments?


  • #180
    Colmustard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,836 ✭✭✭Colmustard


    WhatNowForUs? wrote: »
    The problem with the famine was not just about the potato blight, there was plenty of food being shipped out of the country.
    Now if the government of the day all-be-it governed from London was willing to ship out food in front of the starving millions what would a corporation do who has these crop patented and are governed by share holder profits.

    LOL
    The British government never forced the Irish farmers (and they were Irish) to ship their produce to Britain. They did it because they were in the business of farming..

    You there WhatNowForUs You have a field of 100 cattle that you have raised and farmed and it is time for them to go to the market. You hear of a famine in the west of Ireland. So do you ship your produce to them for free or do you sell them to the market for a profit.

    Don't be ashamed of your answer because all of us would also sell them to the market. That is business and human nature.


  • Advertisement
  • #181
    Tipp Man
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,023 ✭✭✭Tipp Man


    Colmustard wrote: »
    That is a green fantasy and absolute rubbish, organic farming is a lot less efficient and productive then industrial farming. Imagine if the American government ordered that American grain production was to be only farmed organically. It would quickly be forced stop exporting grain.

    Bread and meat prices would rise dramatically. There is a drought in North America this year watch what happens to the price of food next year. We need more fence to fence industrial farming not less.

    Imagine if they could mix a cactus gene with a grain gene and make drought resistant grain, I am not saying that would work, but with this technology you can even imagine that. That is amazing.

    They already have developed drought resistant corn, or are certainly along way advanced with its development

    The question is where does your idea on food production end?? Fence to fence industrial farming sounds great but do you have any idea of the resources that are used to keep that show on the road?

    What happens when you use all the supplies of potash?
    What happens when we end up diverting more and more water for crop production?
    Do you continue to destroy other habitats, such as rainforest, to grow more and more industrial food to feed an unsustainable population?

    As i have already said i am not an organic farmer and despise the green movement - but i am not stupid enough to think that we can continue with this trend indefinately


Advertisement
Advertisement