Genetic modification of corn goes back a very long time...
From the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/25/science/25creature.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Renewable energy not as costly as some think
The other day Marshall and Sol took on Bjorn Lomborg for ignoring the benefits of curbing greenhouse gas emissions. Indeed. But Bjorn, am...
-
It's been a long haul, but my coauthor Wolfram Schlenker and I have finally published our article with the title of this blog post in th... -
The other day Marshall and Sol took on Bjorn Lomborg for ignoring the benefits of curbing greenhouse gas emissions. Indeed. But Bjorn, am...
-
A couple months ago the New York Times convened a conference " Food for Tomorrow: Farm Better. Eat Better. Feed the World ." ...
You muddy the waters by calling this "genetic modification".
ReplyDeleteTraditional crop breeding/improvement has virtually none of the downsides of GMOs.
Of course it could be argued that there are benefits to GMOs. Just don't call it all genetic modification.
Below from Human Genome Project Information
Controversies
* Safety
o Potential human health impacts, including allergens, transfer of antibiotic resistance
o Potential environmental impacts, including: unintended transfer of transgenes through cross-pollination, unknown effects on other organisms (e.g., soil microbes), and loss of flora and fauna biodiversity
* Access and Intellectual Property
o Domination of world food production by a few companies
o Increasing dependence on industrialized nations by developing countries
o Biopiracy, or foreign exploitation of natural resources
* Ethics
o Violation of natural organisms' intrinsic values
o Tampering with nature by mixing genes among species
o Objections to consuming animal genes in plants and vice versa
o Stress for animal
* Labeling
o Not mandatory in some countries (e.g., United States)
o Mixing GM crops with non-GM products confounds labeling attempts
* Society
o New advances may be skewed to interests of rich countries