2
Comments:

Filter Questions

Reset Filter

No questions match....

  • There have been no discussions since the expert answer was published.

  • Joseph Najjar's picture
    Joseph Najjar
    12.22.2013
    "In what ways might GMOs be most beneficial to our biosphere, and why might organic farming not be as good as to get us there?


    There is no doubt that transgenic plants can be designed to limit pest damage with lower pesticide applications. That is well documented by the National Academies of Science, the best unbiased brains in our nation. Most data is for cotton and maize, and show substantial reductions (like 60%). Transgenic potatoes were amazingly successful in Romania until they joined the EU and had to go back to insecticide-intensive agriculture. Even glyphosate resistance traits, for all of their drawbacks in creating new resistant weeds, replace toxic alternatives.
    Conventional farming takes fuel, labor, fungicides, pesticides, nematicides and many other inputs. Water and fertilizer are in there too. There are genes out there in the literature that address most of these issues. Scientists in academic labs discover these genes and define their function in lab-based GMOs that never are used outside the lab. The regulatory hoops are too difficult and expensive. Only the big companies can play in that space. Even little companies like Okanagan Specialty Fruits have to deal with the nonsense from those that hate the technology. Opposition to the science keeps the big guys in business, because nobody else can compete.
    Who loses? The farmer, the consumer, the environment, the academic scientist and most of all the people around the world that don’t get enough food and nutrition. Who gains? Big Ag."

    --From question 2, on page 13
    https://www.smashwords.com/extreader/read/380524/13/the-lowdown-on-gmos-according-to-science


  • Joseph Najjar's picture
    Joseph Najjar
    12.22.2013
    To begin with, if we were to not use GM crops, farmers would likely burn much more petroleum. GM crops tend to produce higher yields per acre, in the naturally stressed farm environments they are grown in. If we did away with those, you would be left with lower yield per acre. GM crops are aimed at streamlining the process, and make it as efficient as possible. They use less water, and fewer pesticides than their non-GM counterparts, and produce more. Organic farming is great for feeding a small demand, but I think it is outlandish to suggest that it could feed our entire population. Only the rich could afford to eat under those circumstances. Here is a comprehensive study done in Italy, that looks at many of the issues raised with GMOs, including their efficiency and sustainability. Give it a read.

    http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Nicolia-20131.pdf