Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
10 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Agent Orange Corn
Taq
Member
Posts: 9972
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 32 of 47 (666439)
06-27-2012 11:14 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by herebedragons
06-26-2012 10:06 PM


By poor people I am thinking of mostly third-world people. The continual engineering and re-engineering of food crops will drive the price up and up, out of reach of the world’s poorest.
I really don't understand this point. In the third world, they can continue to grow the same crop strains that they have always grown using the same techniques they have always used.
As to the bottom line, do you really think that farmers would be paying more in general operating costs for GM crops compared to non-GM crops? That would be kind of stupid if that were the case. A farmer would just start growing non-GM crops and profit. At the end of the day, it is cheaper to spray a field than it is to pay a work detail to hoe your field, especially for the massive corporate farms that are becoming the norm. If we didn't have GM crops the price of food might very well be higher.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by herebedragons, posted 06-26-2012 10:06 PM herebedragons has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by herebedragons, posted 07-01-2012 12:08 AM Taq has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9972
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 34 of 47 (666444)
06-27-2012 12:49 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by crashfrog
06-27-2012 12:39 PM


I see it as completely identical. Any change you could cause by genetic manipulation could, in principle, be the result (however unlikely) of random mutation. And if it were, there would simply be no question at all about exploiting that new trait in agriculture. So why should GM be subject to such an extremely different level of scrutiny, when the results are the same?
Should an arson be let off the hook because a lightning bolt could have come from the sky and lit the house on fire?
With GM foods, we are the cause for the change, so we should at least try to make sure that the changes we make are safe and for the good of humanity. Changes that occur in the wild are largely beyond our control, so we accept a certain amount of risk.
My apologies for the confusion - more than anything I was agreeing with you, that the position of GMO opponents that it's inherently wrong to "monkey" with the genome is blinkered, and reflects an ignorance that the genomes of all species are inherently "self-monkeying."
I will second that. Humans have been trying to change the genotype through selection of phenotype for 10,000 years or so. We can now directly change the genotype. I see this as a step in the right direction.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by crashfrog, posted 06-27-2012 12:39 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024