In a perfect world monsanto would be working towards the greater good by reducing poverty and hunger but in the end they are a corporation with shareholders who are trying to monopolise the market, they make these 'improved' crops that are resistant to their herbicides so all of the farmers (rich or poor) have to buy their products, they then ban the practice of seed saving (common practice in poor countries) so they can then sell more of their seeds. And so the cycle continues. There will come a day when they release seeds which are sterile and will not grow new plants, they already have the technology. I hate to think of the implications of that on a large scale. Aaaaarrrgh
+ Reply to Thread
Results 31 to 40 of 67
19-03-2012 16:33 #31
19-03-2012 16:39 #32
If Mother Nature will sort it out as she always has done, maybe we should go back to the good old days of smallpox. If people back then had had the right to choose not to be vaccinated, smallpox would still be with us. Would ANYONE choose that?
The GM debate, like the vaxxing "debate", is fuelled by mass hysteria and zero science. Yes, there are good and bad applications of the science, like any science (ie nuclear medicine vs the atomic bomb) but it has huge capacity to address our global food security issues. Monsanto is not the only organisation with access to this technology!
I remember when the Frankenfoods debate erupted in the 1990s, The Times in the UK did a simple poll which illustrates this perfectly. The question was something like this:
True or false: GM tomatoes have genes, organic tomatoes do not have genes.
Something like 50% of readers said that statement was true. It's breathtaking to think these were the same people marching around with banners when they didn't have even the most basic understanding of what's involved. It's my belief that the general understanding hasn't progressed very far since then.
And the thing is that genetic modification IS NOT NEW. Every time a human farmer breeds two strains of a crop for a favourable quality, that is genetic modification. Just look at domestic animals - they look/behave/taste the way they do because human farmers have performed genetic modification on them over many many generations, selecting for qualities favourable to humans. As scientific knowledge progresses our capacity to finesse and speed up this process increases. That doesn't make it intrinsically bad.
Science has brought us EVERY luxury we enjoy in the developed world. Yet the scientific community is demonised by a small but hysterically vocal minority with far more sway over policy than is justified by their small numbers. The rest of us enable this by saying nothing.
Back to the OT - my opinion is that vaccinations should be mandatory for every man, woman and child - maybe then we'd be able to wipe out a few more diseases like we did smallpox.
19-03-2012 16:44 #33
19-03-2012 16:45 #34
19-03-2012 16:50 #35
19-03-2012 17:10 #36Senior Member
- Join Date
- Nov 2007
19-03-2012 17:18 #37
as it always has done, find it's equilibrium.
Regardless of the loss of life.
The Earth doesn't need humans as much as our over inflated egos seem to think it does.
I never once advocated starvation???
Why is the answer to these problems given to the select few corporations, who's main aim is to control the world's food supply, do you not see how dangerous that is?
Scientists, paid by colossal corporations for their "research" are not always going to give the absolute truth either, whether under threat or under the influence of money.
You gotta look at the people who have something to say with nothing to gain before you listen to the big boys who are money driven, just my gut feeling on it.
Just this week the WHO reported on how, in the future, antibiotics may not work anymore. Mostly because of the OVERUSE and WRONGFUL use of antibiotics. (In our food supply would be one example of wrongful use that springs to mind)
The Following User Says Thank You to Phony For This Useful Post:
Stiflers Mom (19-03-2012)
19-03-2012 17:22 #38
19-03-2012 17:22 #39
I never said he was full of it, I don't agree with his promotion of GM foods.
End of, I don't have an opinion on the man himself.
My point in reference to Gates was more to do with the fact that Mia Freedman was idolising him because of his money, and the "he should know better" because of it???
19-03-2012 17:31 #40
The Following User Says Thank You to tiggerfields For This Useful Post:
By Claire86 in forum General Child Health IssuesReplies: 10Last Post: 29-05-2012, 17:22
TribalanceTriBalance is a physio, yoga & pilates studio in Brisbane's inner north, offering specialised women's health ...
LATESTToilet training: when is the best time to start?Why it is OK for your child to be differentWhat is a blessing way? How is it different to a baby shower?
POPULARWhen can I start giving chores to my children?New baby nursery checklist – a guide to newborn essentialsWhat to pack for labour and hospital – a checklist
FORUMS - chatting now ...
Dr Antony Lighten - Appreciation threadpregnancy and babies through IVF
Funniest thing your kid has said to youGeneral Chat
Rude 10 year old. Ideas?General Chat
Egg/donor code discussion - South AfricaEgg Donation
Happiness thread.General Chat
Awesome Mums of Autistic kids-how many of us are there (#3)????????Parents of Children with Special Needs
Support out there? ED issues, ttcMale Infertility Issues