4 ms·

Organic food is fine. But it is, fundamentally, an anti-technology approach to growing food. You should be free to eat it if you want. The point is simply that

Organic food is fine. But it is, fundamentally, an anti-technology approach to growing food. You should be free to eat it if you want. The point is simply that firms that reject technology should not be described as "tech" companies simply because they use the Internet in some way. I'm not suggesting in any way that companies should not exist if they don't solve planet-scale problems.

akamaka 11y ago
I think folks underestimate how much agricultural science and technology there is that doesn't fall under the very narrow categories of genetic engineering and chemical pesticides. Modern society is built on top of the massive productivity improvements in agriculture that occurred before those were introduced, and there is plenty of room to innovate without using those methods. GMO crops are limited[1] in Europe, yet they continue to be a leader in agricultural innovation. [1] edited, see dragonwriter's correction
- zenbowman 11y ago
  Of course there are other aspects to agricultural science and technology. However, there is nothing in this company that indicates they are advancing technology in any sense. This is not to say they are not providing a worthwhile service. Even my local farmer's market provides a worthwhile service to me, but I don't call it a "tech market" just because some of the vendors have an online presence.
  - akamaka 11y ago
    I see where you're coming from, but I think there are still a lot of possibilities for innovation here. We waste 50% of food, with a big portion of that waste happening at the retail level. Food distribution services like Good Eggs have a pretty good shot at eliminating that waste. Just to give an idea of the potential, attacking only food waste, without any other improvments to our food system, would comfortably allow earth to have a population of 10 billion.
    - bwilliams18 11y ago
      Right, but that still doesn't mean there is innovative technology involved. Can I call a tailor a technology company because they have a website?
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  > GMO crops are banned in Europe No, they aren't. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_genetically_modified_organisms_in_the_European_Union https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_genetically_modi...
  - technotony 11y ago
    They are 'effectively' banned in Europe though. As you can see from this infographic[1] approval of a GMO requires a political vote in the European Commission. This takes place after a very expensive risk assessment, and you can't get that money back. It's a tough business case to spend a ton of money on the risk assessment and then be at the whim of politicians who are publicly against the technology and know they win votes by being against it. My company makes GMO plants and until the situation changes there's no way we'd considered trying to get approval. I conjecture they setup this system because an outright ban, which would be unscientific, would violate international trade treaties, instead they just use this process. [1] http://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/docs/decision_making_process.pdf http://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/docs/decision_making_process....
    - dragonwriter 11y ago
      > They are 'effectively' banned in Europe though. There quite a number specifically approved, which is inconsistent with an "effective" ban. > My company makes GMO plants and until the situation changes there's no way we'd considered trying to get approval. Demonstrably -- that is, from the list of products that are approved -- that's not true of the major players in the industry (e.g., Monsanto, Bayer, Dow, Syngenta) and even some smaller players. Your company not having the resources to compete in a given market doesn't mean that that market has banned GMOs.
      - technotony 11y ago
        Even Monsanto is giving up: http://www.euronews.com/2013/07/18/monsanto-re-thinks-its-gmo-strategy-in-europe/ http://www.euronews.com/2013/07/18/monsanto-re-thinks-its-gm... http://www.gmeducation.org/government-and-corporations/p213451-monsanto-s-gm-retreat-from-europe:-don-t-believe-a-word.html http://www.gmeducation.org/government-and-corporations/p2134...
Retric 11y ago
The world produces ~three times as much food as we need to feed the world. Sure, we can push efficiency up further, but there is no real need for more calories and current practices create huge short and long term problems. Not that fuel ethanol is drinkable, but you can get similar amounts of energy with other processes. Anyway, just the US ethanol production is over 2 gallons of per person on the planet. We are talking ~23,000 calories per person on the planet produced in a horribly inefficient process which is then burned.
- CPLX 11y ago
  > Not that ethanol is drinkable Ethanol is eminently drinkable, in fact I enjoyed some with tonic water and lime just the other night.
codingdave 11y ago
You have to know that organic vs. Monsanto is a hot button to push, so throwing that into your initial comment is a sure way to derail the conversation into arguments. If you really just want to talk about the "tech" label, then you should just stick to that point.
- zenbowman 11y ago
  It's a hot topic, yes, but an important one. We are in an age where policy is decided by a scientifically illiterate public, with potentially devastating consequences for people outside the developed world. That needs to be confronted head on, not shied away from. http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/05/18/pew-vaccine-gmo-climate-change-science-column/27184389/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/05/18/pew-vaccine... Not being willing to talk about these issues is what allows fearmongers to win the day.
  - akamaka 11y ago
    One of the problems is this idea that opposition to GMOs and growth in demand for organic food is fueled by scientific illiteracy. There an oft-repeated lament of "I can't believe people think GMOs are unsafe!", but why not instead start by asking why purchases of organic food increase alongside increased education level?
    - zenbowman 11y ago
      Having gone to college is not evidence that your opinion is any more important than anyone else's. What matters is: what does the data say about GMO safety? Are your views informed by the consensus of scientific studies? If not, then the position is still scientifically illiterate, even if the individual has a Masters degree. Resisting vaccinations is also quite common among educated, affluent people. http://www.chicagomag.com/city-life/March-2014/Why-Is-Vaccine-Refusal-More-Prevalent-Among-the-Affluent/ http://www.chicagomag.com/city-life/March-2014/Why-Is-Vaccin... The issue is precisely that we have an "educated" public (based on credentials) that is also scientifically illiterate.

akamaka 11y ago

I think folks underestimate how much agricultural science and technology there is that doesn't fall under the very narrow categories of genetic engineering and chemical pesticides. Modern society is built on top of the massive productivity improvements in agriculture that occurred before those were introduced, and there is plenty of room to innovate without using those methods. GMO crops are limited[1] in Europe, yet they continue to be a leader in agricultural innovation. [1] edited, see dragonwriter's correction

zenbowman 11y ago
Of course there are other aspects to agricultural science and technology. However, there is nothing in this company that indicates they are advancing technology in any sense. This is not to say they are not providing a worthwhile service. Even my local farmer's market provides a worthwhile service to me, but I don't call it a "tech market" just because some of the vendors have an online presence.
- akamaka 11y ago
  I see where you're coming from, but I think there are still a lot of possibilities for innovation here. We waste 50% of food, with a big portion of that waste happening at the retail level. Food distribution services like Good Eggs have a pretty good shot at eliminating that waste. Just to give an idea of the potential, attacking only food waste, without any other improvments to our food system, would comfortably allow earth to have a population of 10 billion.
  - bwilliams18 11y ago
    Right, but that still doesn't mean there is innovative technology involved. Can I call a tailor a technology company because they have a website?
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
dragonwriter 11y ago
> GMO crops are banned in Europe No, they aren't. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_genetically_modified_organisms_in_the_European_Union https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_genetically_modi...
- technotony 11y ago
  They are 'effectively' banned in Europe though. As you can see from this infographic[1] approval of a GMO requires a political vote in the European Commission. This takes place after a very expensive risk assessment, and you can't get that money back. It's a tough business case to spend a ton of money on the risk assessment and then be at the whim of politicians who are publicly against the technology and know they win votes by being against it. My company makes GMO plants and until the situation changes there's no way we'd considered trying to get approval. I conjecture they setup this system because an outright ban, which would be unscientific, would violate international trade treaties, instead they just use this process. [1] http://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/docs/decision_making_process.pdf http://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/docs/decision_making_process....
  - dragonwriter 11y ago
    > They are 'effectively' banned in Europe though. There quite a number specifically approved, which is inconsistent with an "effective" ban. > My company makes GMO plants and until the situation changes there's no way we'd considered trying to get approval. Demonstrably -- that is, from the list of products that are approved -- that's not true of the major players in the industry (e.g., Monsanto, Bayer, Dow, Syngenta) and even some smaller players. Your company not having the resources to compete in a given market doesn't mean that that market has banned GMOs.
    - technotony 11y ago
      Even Monsanto is giving up: http://www.euronews.com/2013/07/18/monsanto-re-thinks-its-gmo-strategy-in-europe/ http://www.euronews.com/2013/07/18/monsanto-re-thinks-its-gm... http://www.gmeducation.org/government-and-corporations/p213451-monsanto-s-gm-retreat-from-europe:-don-t-believe-a-word.html http://www.gmeducation.org/government-and-corporations/p2134...

Retric 11y ago

The world produces ~three times as much food as we need to feed the world. Sure, we can push efficiency up further, but there is no real need for more calories and current practices create huge short and long term problems. Not that fuel ethanol is drinkable, but you can get similar amounts of energy with other processes. Anyway, just the US ethanol production is over 2 gallons of per person on the planet. We are talking ~23,000 calories per person on the planet produced in a horribly inefficient process which is then burned.

CPLX 11y ago
> Not that ethanol is drinkable Ethanol is eminently drinkable, in fact I enjoyed some with tonic water and lime just the other night.

codingdave 11y ago

You have to know that organic vs. Monsanto is a hot button to push, so throwing that into your initial comment is a sure way to derail the conversation into arguments. If you really just want to talk about the "tech" label, then you should just stick to that point.

zenbowman 11y ago
It's a hot topic, yes, but an important one. We are in an age where policy is decided by a scientifically illiterate public, with potentially devastating consequences for people outside the developed world. That needs to be confronted head on, not shied away from. http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/05/18/pew-vaccine-gmo-climate-change-science-column/27184389/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/05/18/pew-vaccine... Not being willing to talk about these issues is what allows fearmongers to win the day.
- akamaka 11y ago
  One of the problems is this idea that opposition to GMOs and growth in demand for organic food is fueled by scientific illiteracy. There an oft-repeated lament of "I can't believe people think GMOs are unsafe!", but why not instead start by asking why purchases of organic food increase alongside increased education level?
  - zenbowman 11y ago
    Having gone to college is not evidence that your opinion is any more important than anyone else's. What matters is: what does the data say about GMO safety? Are your views informed by the consensus of scientific studies? If not, then the position is still scientifically illiterate, even if the individual has a Masters degree. Resisting vaccinations is also quite common among educated, affluent people. http://www.chicagomag.com/city-life/March-2014/Why-Is-Vaccine-Refusal-More-Prevalent-Among-the-Affluent/ http://www.chicagomag.com/city-life/March-2014/Why-Is-Vaccin... The issue is precisely that we have an "educated" public (based on credentials) that is also scientifically illiterate.