Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on November 7, 2013
GM food will be essential for a hungry world
During the recent Festival of Ideas hosted by the University of Melbourne a distinguished panel of researchers working at the forefront of food security discussed the often controversial issue of genetic modification for food crops. Katherine Smith canvasses the views they shared with their audience.
“We know that by 2050 the world population will grow to 10 billion, and most people will have higher disposable income, meaning they’ll want to eat more food, especially meat,” says Dean of the Melbourne School of Land and Environment, Professor Rick Roush.
“To feed our growing population the world will need to create 70 per cent more food, especially grain, using fewer resources. Can we feed the world without ruining the planet?” he asks.
“Can we find new ways to produce more with less, assuring benefits to all; can a hungry world afford biofuels; can genetically modified crops safely reduce the biological footprint of agriculture, help us adapt to climate change, reduce greenhouse emissions and help with global food security?”
For panelist Agnes Ricroch, Associate Professor at the AgroParisTech in the French capital, and Adjunct Professor at Penn State University in the USA, the solution to the issues lies squarely in the realm of agrobiotechnology.
“Agrobiotechnology is a science of employing the tools of modern genetics, bio informatics, and sequencing genomes to enhance beneficial traits of plants and their food components,” she says.
“It is one of the tools in the riddle of food security’s toolbox of solutions, and in some cases, the only tool to meet the needs.”
Associate Professor Ricroch explains that the world is warming and humans are among the reasons for the warming.
“Warming to dangerous levels will occur by mid-century,” she says.
“How can a world of limited resources possibly adjust to the food and sustenance needs of its people when its numbers will increase by more than one third in such a relatively short period of time?
“In the context of a warming world therefore, our challenge is to more than double food production and achieve nutritional security by 2050 using less land, less water, less fertiliser and fewer pesticides.”
She says that decreasing fertiliser and pesticide use in agriculture would also have a positive effect on wildlife, reduce farmers’ exposure to chemicals, reduce greenhouse gas emission and contribute to a cleaner water supply.
“Agrobiotechnology is among the most successful of ways to address these issues, and promises even further advances, using a range of processes to enhance food through a various plant breeding techniques, and other techniques like agro ecology and integrative pest management.”
In support of technical interventions – known to consumers as genetic modifications (GM) – Associate Professor Ricroch says that the rate of increase in current yield of major food crops is not fast enough to meet demand on existing farmland.
“Genetically modified varieties can improve yields,” she says.
“We have already observed five per cent increases in corn yields in the US, and 24 per cent in the Philippines, while cotton yields have increased 10 per cent in the US, and 50 per cent in India – influenced by the agroclimatic conditions of each region.
“And in addition to increased yields, GM varieties can improve nutrition.
“The food itself can be more healthful and nutritious by providing higher levels of omega-3 fatty acids, and vitamins. This food can help combat chronic disease by providing higher levels of antioxidants and vitamins, and scientists are also starting to target allergy-creating toxins,” she says.
Professor Roush says part of the reason consumers have been traditionally so suspicious of GM foods – and anti-GM activists so passionate – is that when first introduced, such modifications were designed specifically to benefit the seed companies and farmers, with a misconception that their health and safety attributes were of secondary importance to profits.
“We now need to demonstrate that GM helps consumers, farmers and those in the developing world through improved yields, improved nutrition and more reliable incomes,” he says.
“Nutrient-fortified crops can save lives if they are given a fair opportunity.”
A compounding problem is that GM varieties are being produced mainly through five major seed companies, and consumers are concerned about monopolies, as well as about diversity of species.
“The risk assessments and development of such products are time-consuming and expensive,” Professor Roush says, “so until now only large companies had the resources to work in the area. It’s now time for small companies and public institutes to get into GM, and be encouraged to collect, preserve and enhance a wide diversity of varieties of food crops, without harming the environment.”
18 Comments on "GM food will be essential for a hungry world"
Mike on Thu, 7th Nov 2013 1:01 pm
I wrote a long piece debunking all this horse shit then realised I had wasted my time. It’s like trying to debunk communism to a communist, capitalism to a capitalist or God to a Christian. Utterly fucking pointless.
rollin on Thu, 7th Nov 2013 2:15 pm
“To feed our growing population the world will need to create 70 per cent more food, especially grain, using fewer resources. Can we feed the world without ruining the planet?” he asks.”
No you can’t.
mike on Thu, 7th Nov 2013 3:06 pm
Basically the simple version to why this won’t happen is as follows.
A Company produces genetic hybrid that has higher yields, but the information in that hybrid also contains a weakness. So they try to fix that weakness by changing something else, yields may then drop again or a weakness to a news disease may be encountered. You see nature has spent the last few million years perfecting plants and animals to be at their optimum level for the environment they exist in. Optimum for a plant means a trade off between yields of seeds/fruit and health and vitality.
Biochemists have blustered in like drunken baboons and tried to change the genetic makeup of plants towards what they “believe” to be best for humans, that being higher yields. This has weakened them towards disease ( a trade off) so man then needs to change the entire environment these weak pitiful plants need to survive by plastering poison and fertilizer everywhere. This of course upsets the ecosystem until the diseases or pests evolve to live in the new environment, this time making a trade off for a resistance to pesticide for something else. What we are currently doing is making sure that one those pests and diseases evolve fully they will wipe out the worlds now undiverse food supply
In fact it’s already starting to happen. See how they blame ecologically sane reasons like no till for the problems rather than the stupidity of their own inventions
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/01/science/earth/a-disease-cuts-corn-yields.html?_r=1&
The big question here is why does a musician (me) who has a keen interest in ecology and has observed this all happening on his small allotment have more of an insight than the most intelligent geneticists and biochemists creating these wastes of time?
bobinget on Thu, 7th Nov 2013 3:16 pm
Many times while eating I mix several foods together on my plate. You see, as I became an adult, I began to realize these foods (and other substances) were bound to get amalgamated in my tummy.
Don’t bother expelling this to a child who is determined to keep foods from touching.
bobinget on Thu, 7th Nov 2013 3:18 pm
(edit)
That’s “explaining”, expelling comes later.
GregT on Thu, 7th Nov 2013 4:06 pm
“We know that by 2050 the world population will grow to 10 billion, and most people will have higher disposable income, meaning they’ll want to eat more food, especially meat,”
I stopped reading the article after reading this statement. Utter nonsense.
J-Gav on Thu, 7th Nov 2013 4:36 pm
“We know that by 2050 world population will grow to 10 billion and most people will have higher disposable incomes ..”
We know nothing of the kind.
“A compounding problem is that GM varieties are being produced mainly through 5 major seed companies and consumers are concerned about monopolies, as well as about diversity of species.” No shit Sherlock?!
Calling it “agrobiotechnology” doesn’t change things.
J-Gav on Thu, 7th Nov 2013 6:04 pm
GregT – Hadn’t read your comment before posting mine (it wasn’t up yet where I live). Taking out the same quote does show we’re on the same wave-length there, not that I’m surprised, given your previous posts on this site. What we’re up against looks kinda unforgiving, eh?
bobinget on Thu, 7th Nov 2013 6:26 pm
What we anti GMO folks need are victims.
One useful tool could be a telethon. We simply borrow
a few inflicted from so called ‘orphan’ illnesses.
We never actually directly SAY these unfortunates were
made the way they are because of GMO. That would be dishonest. But, an entire evening of GMO discussions
and parading sick people on gurneys and old fashioned wheelchairs will still offer a powerful message and collect tons of contributions for our favorite political slush funds.
Another tactic that has worked so well for one political party and their spokespeople, FOX ‘News’.
Politicize it!
How many people paid the slightest attention to ‘Global Warming’ before we discredited the messengers, changed nomenclature to ‘Climate Change’ and demonstrated clearly so called Global Warming is a Left Wing conspiracy designed, like
universal Health Care to bankrupt the middle class.
As Americans have been consuming over 200 pounds of GMO “so called food” every year for 12 years, our tactics need changing. Point to how overweight children have become, how Wal-Mart had to strengthen its flooring to accommodate GMO consumers.,
Lets call GMO a “farmer’s conspiracy” or my old favorite,
“Frankenfood” no one will understand why, so much the better.
Northwest Resident on Thu, 7th Nov 2013 6:29 pm
@mike — Thanks for spelling it out in layman’s terms. GM is an abomination and a perfect analogy for the human belief that technology can conquer the world and solve every problem — exactly the false belief that has brought us to the edge of catastrophe. “We know that by 2050 world population will grow to 10 billion…”. And the witless lemmings who believe that crap march on.
SteveK on Thu, 7th Nov 2013 7:00 pm
Fascinating interview: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/12/10/dr-don-huber-interview-part-1.aspx
DC on Thu, 7th Nov 2013 8:44 pm
The only ones that GM food is ‘essential’ to, is the tiny corporate criminal cartel that profits from them.
So, yes, Monsanto ‘needs’ GM ‘foods’. Human beings-not so much.
Shaved Monkey on Thu, 7th Nov 2013 9:36 pm
Surely if we wanted to feed our expanding populations we should devote more time to inventing a fully functioning cornucopia.
GregT on Thu, 7th Nov 2013 11:14 pm
J-Gav,
“What we’re up against looks kinda unforgiving, eh?”
I used to believe that there were solutions, but the deeper I dug, the more predicaments I found. One, big, complex, intertwined, convoluted mess, we humans have created.
Short of divine intervention, we are in for some serious trouble here on Planet Earth, and relatively soon, I think. The big kicker for me? Most people are completely unaware of what is going on, and many of those that do have a clue, still believe that we can somehow techno-fix our way out of this mess.
PrestonSturges on Thu, 7th Nov 2013 11:48 pm
Plant diseases spread pretty easily now, and we’re doing a pretty good job of preventing major crop failures like The Potato Famine. GMOs are going to be essential to avoid big crop failures.
PrestonSturges on Thu, 7th Nov 2013 11:50 pm
“……What we anti GMO folks need are victims. One useful tool could be a telethon. We simply borrow a few inflicted from so called ‘orphan’ illnesses…..”
If the best you can come up with discussing the most effective ways to lie, maybe you could find a more concrete problem to work on, or at least find a more pleasant way to waste your time.
BillT on Fri, 8th Nov 2013 1:39 am
The AGE is an Australian Corporate Media outlet. Typical MSM propaganda for the Western masses.
GMO is deadly to humans and the planet. We need a world wide financial collapse so these people are closed down permanently. The end of globalization, as we know it, would be a good thing for the planet and us.
Gwynevere on Fri, 8th Nov 2013 11:07 am
@PrestonSturges – Plant diseases spread easily because
a) the genetic make-up is the same in each crop
b) The crops are planted in huge monocultures
The “answer” is genetic diversity and polycultures, not GMO copy and paste.
Do you know how/why diseases come about? They come about because nature abhors a monopoly as much as it abhors a vacuum. That’s something they don’t teach people
I don’t worry about GMO any more because it is destined to fail within this decade and nature will continue on it’s course of creating the most efficient organic systems it has done for millions of years. GMO is a portion of a religion preached by pasters at the church of progress