Ronald and Adamchak, “Organically Grown and Genetically Engineered: The Food of the Future”

The idea of GM seeds working in an organic (or other sustainable production system) is an interesting one. I work in the field of organic cotton, and would welcome seeing trials. GM seeds will need to work within the production system in a balanced way. Like the author here, I agree it is unlikely there will ever be GM seed allowed in organic, but other labels are possible.
However, the statement on the 25% of cotton pesticides used to control the cotton bollworm is factually incorrect. There used to be a quoted figure of 25% of all pesticides being used on cotton; however, this percentage has fallen substantially in recent years.

I think it would be difficult to have a discussion about Sustainability and GM crops without talking about the elephant in the room, Intellectual Property rights concerning transgenic organisms. My personal concern with GM crops comes not from it’s biological validity, but from the agricultural practices that are forced upon growers who are required to purchase GM seeds year after year. The major sustainability concern stems from an Intellectual Property regime that enables ownership of Life and Nature. Where are the Open Source GM seeds?

Re. “Organic food is no healthier, study finds”

Alexander,

Have you read Paula Crossfield’s rebuttal “Organic Versus Conventional Food: UK Report Flawed” in the Huffington Post?
http://bit.ly/42NNZG

About the Food Standards Agency (FSA) who commissioned the article to which Paula wrote her rebuttal, I found the following on Jill Richardson’s website http://bit.ly/O5OH1:

Quote:
“The FSA is a branch of the government of the United Kingdom, but states on it’s website that it “works at ‘arm’s length’ from Government because it doesn’t report to a specific minister and is free to publish any advice it issues.” With no oversight, influence over the selected research could have been a factor in the outcomes. A look at the profiles of the head of FSA reveals former employees of agribusinesses like Arla Foods (now part of Europe’s largest dairy), Sarah Lee Corporation, and UK grocery giant Sainsbury’s. Therefore it is not hard to assume that the perspective may lean towards what is best for agribusiness interests.

The FSA report was commissioned to determine whether or not the nearly 4 billion dollar organic industry in Great Britain could claim higher health benefits when selling its products. By rendering the playing field equal for conventional farmers, the government and the agricultural sector wouldn’t have to begin the difficult work of shifting the unwieldy agricultural system towards sustainability.”

End quote.

Mmm, make me wonder…

Sincerely,
Sambodhi Prem

Y’all have got to link to the mp3 file from the blog post. It’s so key and so easy and it’s never there.

I’m trying to download the video but it keeps giving me a non-video file. Can you guys look into that?

@Deborah: If you are talking about the Terminator technology, it isn’t in use. Here’s a nice discussion of that with some actual facts: http://geneticmaize.com/blog/2009/8/3/continued-confusion-about-the-terminator.html

There have been studies on insects and some studies actually show increased biodiversity on the GM fields. Pam Ronald did a really great blog post once that addresses many of your concerns: http://pamelaronald.blogspot.com/2008/08/10-things-about-ge-crops-to-scratch.html

And you do know, of course, that Round Up is off patent, right? And that many of the GE crops that academic researchers like Pam are developing have nothing to do with applied pesticides but are about climate adaptations (flood or drought tolerance for example) or increased nutrition, too, of course.

It’s so frustrating that everyone hears GE and thinks Monsanto because there’s much more going on than that. The fog of Monsanto interferes with any rational discussion on the topic.