Concerning the “terminator seeds”: While I agree that Monsanto’s concern is undoubtedly its profit margin, this approach does at least tend to limit the flow of modifications into wild or other nonmodified populations. Hopefully, this would help reduce some of the concerns already mentioned on this thread.
CurtC wrote:But I still haven’t heard any objections to gene-spliced foods that would not also apply to conventionally modified ones. Gene splicing is more precise, and therefore we can do more of it
I think the point is that, with gene-splicing, we can modify one plant with genetic material from another species, as was done with the Bt enhanced varieties.
I garden organically. One of the pest control methods I use is companion planting. I plant marigolds next to my tomatoes because the bugs that like the toms don’t like the scent of the marigolds. I put radishes around my squashes and cukes and plant allia near the roses. With gene splicing technology I could maybe find a way to add the scent of the offending plant to the one I want to grow, and, assuming it didn’t affect the flavor of the fruit, I might create a more pest resistant variety. What people are worried about is the possibility of an allergan being introduced into a food where one wouldn’t normally suspect it.
But a farmer who wants to use seed he’s saved just simply wouldn’t buy the terminator seed. He’d keep using what he already has.
The companies are concerned only with their profit, as they should be. If they make a product that ends world hunger, I hope they are well-rewarded.
There are all kinds. An example is a new variety of rice engineered to produce its own vitamin A. Vitamin A deficiency plagues over 100 million children, and about a million per year go blind becuase of it. Typically their diet is high in rice but very low in vitamin A. But even extended shelf life is a great benefit to everyone. Fresh fruits and vegetables are very good for you, and with a longer shelf life even the poor will be able to afford more of them.
It’s cute that robinh gardens organically, but you can’t expect low-yield agriculture to feed our population. We’d have to wipe out all the forests and convert them to agriculture, and still billions would starve.
The problem is these plants still have pollen. The concern is that the pollen from these plants can be carried to field of farmers that use seed saving and cause them to be sterile and also be carried to wild forms of the plants and change the environment.
CurtC, please don’t patronize me. Farming organically is not cute, it is a responsible choice. It does not necessarily produce low yields. (Lower yields can be expected during the transition from conventional to organic as the sterile soil is brought back to life.) Various practices such as low- or no-till farming, growing cover crops as mulch and to prevent soil erosion, and crop rotation can all combine to produce a crop just as abundant and pleasing as one doused in pesticides and chemical fertilizers.