Comment on Question

Responses (6) to "Why is "Genetically Modified" being pushed as 'the way' to ensure better fo"

1. Keith, September 17, 2011

   The major reason genetic modification is being pushed, is that it allows plant breeders to make targeted changes to a species, rather than traditional methods, which take much more time, and involve finding chance mutations, which are often induced, and have been for centuries...

2. kit, November 26, 2011

   We have been genetically modifying food for centuries, via breeding for selected, preferable qualities in food products. Doing it with genes is perfectly safe and much faster. Legitimate concerns have been expressed about using an allergenic product gene in a non-allergenic plant. Those concerns are being addressed. As long as humans continue to outbreed current food production capacity, new ways must be found to increase food supplies. Malthus was right.

3. Marguerite, November 27, 2011

   But you must admit, there's a HUGE difference between what a regular botanist does vs. a chemical company. They actually force a dna change in the laboratory and then get farmers to sign contracts that they can't get out of without losing their farms, which is their livelihood.
   That's dishonest marketing and a complete lack of disclosure. People are now becoming aware of all of the suicides by farmers in India and Bangladesh, where Monsanto has a huge hold on. Those poor farmers are overrun by pests who have developed an immunity to the gmo-crops and the pesticides and food that they are supposed to feed those gmo-crops.
   
   The large corporations have such a hold on what happens at that farm that it has extended into the average American not being able to grow certain vegetables and fruits in their own backyards, in some states/counties!! That's criminal.

4. First Step Farm, December 02, 2011

   Dear kit, There is a huge difference between breeding for desirable traits and splicing foreign genes of a different species into a food product. The biggest danger in GMOs that I see is the unknown effect on the environment. Pollen and seed can travel to non-GMO crops and lands. This has the potential of wiping out native food plants and food plants that have adapted to their local growing conditions. This should be of great concern. Another major concern is the inability of the farmer to save seed and always be forced to purchase from a provider. While trying to grow food to feed the world is a noble ambition, the end result of patenting life could be all food production is in the control of a few large corporations.

5. JMB, February 16, 2012

   Breeding is random while GM engineering is targeted. One can breed traits they want (types of resistance), but even with traditional breeding these traits could "escape" into the environment. DNA is DNA, nature does not care where it comes from if it gives an advantage. Countless cases site natural herbicide/disease resistance escape from breeding into the environment. This will always be a problem independent of selection strategy (breeding vs GM). Management should be the focus and not the strategy development. One example is cassava which naturally has cyanide in the leaves, stems, and edible roots. The problem is cassava feeds thousands/millions of people each year, specifically in under developed countries due to easy propagation. The removal of cyanide requires specific cooking strategies, if done wrong, death ensues for the consumer (mostly children). With GM, science has removed cyanide from roots but left it in the leaves (not consumed) for insect resistance.

6. foodie5951, March 16, 2012

   @First Step Farm - you are absolutely correct about the end result being that ALL food production is going to be in the control of a few large corporations due to the use of GMO seeds and that is precisely why this is happening!