4 ms·
Patenting and privatizing is different from GMO itself. Food surplus means nothing if it can't be distributed reliably. It matters nothing if you can spread fo
by vlehto 10y ago
Patenting and privatizing is different from GMO itself.
Food surplus means nothing if it can't be distributed reliably. It matters nothing if you can spread food nice and even in 2017 if we get famines in 2018. Transporting and trading food makes it vulnerable to problems in transport and economics. So nothing beats locally grown high yield nutritious crops. And GMO can improve yields and nutritional values.
- fovc 10y agoDo you have a source for GMO improving yield and nutrition? I thought most GM was Roundup Ready and similar, designed to be herbicide resistant. I've heard of e.g., Golden Rice being more nutritious with beta carotene, but was under the impressioname that yields weren't great. Even with non-GMO there's a well known tradeoff between yield and nutrition (search dilution effect), so this would be a big deal
- Kristine1975 10y ago>Do you have a source for GMO improving nutrition? Golden Rice comes to mind: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_rice https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_rice >Golden rice is a variety of rice (Oryza sativa) produced through genetic engineering to biosynthesize beta-carotene, a precursor of vitamin A, in the edible parts of rice. But see: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12015708 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12015708
- tomp 10y ago> It matters nothing if you can spread food nice and even in 2017 if we get famines in 2018 That's exactly what happens with sterile GMOs if you throw away all your non-GMO seeds then can't pay next year's GMO licencing costs.
- vlehto 10y agoSome of the most productive varieties of traditionally bred plants are sterile already. Patent laws are completely different set of problems. They don't necessarily need to have anything to do with GMO as process.