Post Punk Kitchen Forum

I want to start with some apologies. For the record, here and upfront, I apologise for having spent several years ripping up GM crops. I am also sorry that I helped to start the anti-GM movement back in the mid 1990s, and that I thereby assisted in demonising an important technological option which can be used to benefit the environment.

As an environmentalist, and someone who believes that everyone in this world has a right to a healthy and nutritious diet of their choosing, I could not have chosen a more counter-productive path. I now regret it completely.

So I guess you’ll be wondering—what happened between 1995 and now that made me not only change my mind but come here and admit it? Well, the answer is fairly simple: I discovered science, and in the process I hope I became a better environmentalist.

To feed a growing world population (with an exploding middle class demanding more and better-quality food), we must take advantage of all the technology available to us, including GMOs. To insist on “natural” agriculture and livestock is to doom people to starvation, and there’s no logical reason to prefer the old ways, either. Moreover, the reason why big companies dominate the industry is that anti-GMO activists and policymakers have made it too difficult for small startups to enter the field.

Moreover, the reason why big companies dominate the industry is that anti-GMO activists and policymakers have made it too difficult for small startups to enter the field.

what's out there right now that we can look at as a positive example?

I think the unmentioned nightmare behind GMO crops is also the patenting of said crops allowing for corporations to have ownership of food

Yeah, I read that. It makes sense to me, sorta, but the terrible business practices of Monsanto can't be blamed on anti-gmo activitists. If Monsanto somehow had good and fair business practices, people's opinions of GMO food might not be so negative.

And I get that the reason they were able to get so evil is because of lack of competition, but that doesn't really explain why they're so evil, just why it was so easy for them to get that way.

Golden rice has the potential to save millions of lives - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_rice

The papaya industry was in trouble until they developed a transgenic papaya - http://www.agbioforum.org/v7n12/v7n12a07-gonsalves.htm

Herbicide resistant crops allow for minimal or no-till crops which prevents a huge loss of topsoil - http://www.isaaa.org/resources/publicat ... efault.asp

The US has the ability to feed the world even without GMOs. But we pay farmers to not grow food which is probably the bigger evil.

Amen to this! I am also a firm believer that food as nature intended it i.e. not GENETICALLY modified which is different they hybridization is the best for our bodies.

I understand the fear that comes with anything new and unknown, but at some point we have to get over our emotional reponse and look at the evidence.

My guess is the recanter has joined the payroll of an industry group.

Do not ever eat Haas avocados, named for the farmer who created them. They are not a naturally occurring variety. We do lots of things to crops that is not part of what would happen without our tinkering.

Not that I'm saying it's the exact same thing as GM crops mind, just that phrases like 'nature intended' really don't mean anything when it comes to our current food situation.

Our food security relies in crop diversity, not placing all eggs in the basket of one type of rice, etc.