6 ms·

"It's because they're optimised to withstand heavy pesticide use" Actually, GMOs need less pesticides than non GMO crop. Some of them produce their own pestici

by 7sigma 10y ago

"It's because they're optimised to withstand heavy pesticide use" Actually, GMOs need less pesticides than non GMO crop. Some of them produce their own pesticide (BT corn and BT cotton). "Pesticides are bad." Thats kind of the point, they are bad to pests that try to eat the crop "GMO are generally sterile" You are confusing GMO with hybrids and no they are not sterile, the just lose vigour after a few generations, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F1_hybrid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F1_hybrid ", so you have to buy seeds every year from Monsanto. Great business model for Monsanto, not so much for the farmer." Most farmers in the developed world buy new seed every year because of the hybrid thing, and do so because its convenient. At the end of the day its a choice the farmer makes: they could re use their own seeds and hybridise them, but for most its not worth the hassle.

DanBC 10y ago
> > "GMO are generally sterile" > You are confusing GMO with hybrids and no they are not sterile Monsanto did have the (terribly named) "terminator gene". They said this was to protect the environment from spilled seed.
- 7sigma 10y ago
  Terminator gene was never commercialised
lolive 10y ago
What happens when you eat this BT corn?
- XorNot 10y ago
  The extremely acidic and enzyme rich system in your stomach demolishes the chemical structure, DNA, and proteins into constituant amino acids.
  - tomp 10y ago
    You say this as if there was no organic poison that could kill you if you eat it...
    - Dylan16807 10y ago
      You didn't ask about poisons. You asked about the corn. It does what corn does.
      - tomp 10y ago
        If the corn produces pesticides, which are poisons, it's a reasonable question to ask "what happens when you eat the corn" - are the ears/kernels covered with it as well, or could they even contain it?
        XorNot 10y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_maize#Insecticide-producing_corn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_maize#Ins... Short answer: it's not a pesticide which affects humans. Discussions about poisons fundamentally have to include a discussion about mechanism of action, because plenty of poisonous things to one species are completely harmless to another - i.e. chocolate is toxic to dogs, but harmless to humans in fairly massive quantities. Debate over GMOs is in no way helped by attempts to broad-brush, and in fact reveals some rather startling and unfounded biases - i.e. the idea that "natural" is healthy is completely absurd - the vast majority of plants, and animal meats, are toxic for humans to eat. If you ever go ocean fishing, you'd be incredibly stupid to eat a fish you couldn't identify.
        deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
        ptaipale 10y ago
        Very many things are poisons, but not all poisons are equally harmful to different organisms. A substance that is extremely harmful to insects, for instance (pyrethrin), is not very harmful to mammals, particularly humans. Even within mammals, there are differences: chocolate is toxic to dogs and cats, but considered a delicacy by humans and the main adverse effect is excess energy content.
ansible 10y ago
Thats kind of the point, they are bad to pests that try to eat the crop And pesticides are also bad for other insects that don't eat the crops, and are necessary for our ecosystem to function. And pesticides are bad for people and animals in the longer term too.
- cmdrfred 10y ago
  >And pesticides are bad for people and animals in the longer term too. Can you source that claim?
  - ansible 10y ago
    I'm surprised I need to. Here's one I found in ten seconds of searching. http://extension.psu.edu/pests/pesticide-education/applicators/fact-sheets/pesticide-safety/potential-health-effects-of-pesticides http://extension.psu.edu/pests/pesticide-education/applicato...
    - cmdrfred 10y ago
      That says large doses are potentially harmful to humans. It mostly speaks of harm potentinally coming to those who apply them. I'm looking more for a peer reviewed study that states pesticides used in GMO farming are more harmful that pesticides used in organic farming.
- 7sigma 10y ago
  Well in the case of BT (bacillus thurigensis) cotton and corn, for example, the GM plant produces the Cry toxin which is bad for the insects that eat the crop, so better than spraying it (Also BT is used in organic agriculture via spraying btw). Herbicides like roundup affect a certain pathway in plants, not humans in animals. "And pesticides are bad for people and animals in the longer term too." Not at the concentrations that are used. The amount of residue is minuscule and modern pesticides have far less toxicity than older ones that have been phased out. IIRC, the BT toxin only affects insects that have an alkaline digestive system. Animals and humans are unaffected as its acidic.
michaelt 10y ago
Actually, GMOs need less pesticides than non GMO crop. Depends what you compare it to. Roundup-resistant crops allow roundup-intensive farming [1] which does less* environmental harm than some more harmful pesticides (if you ignore the development of roundup-resistant weeds). But lower intensity, less productive organic techniques use fewer pesticides and do even less environmental harm. [1] http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/roundup-ready-crops/ http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/roundup-ready-crops/
- 7sigma 10y ago
  Where in that link does it say that organic techniques use fewer pesticides? Organic farming is restricted to naturally occurring pesticides which are often less effective than synthetic ones and so they need to be applied more often. Also, organic yields are often lower than conventional ones, so more land may be needed to compensate. Clearing land is way more environmentally unfriendly than using pesticide, so any gains from organic techniques are nullified. But i guess it depends on crop/climate and exact techniques [0]http://www.science20.com/agricultural_realism/example_how_much_pesticides_have_changed-127931 http://www.science20.com/agricultural_realism/example_how_mu...

by 7sigma 10y ago

DanBC 10y ago

> > "GMO are generally sterile" > You are confusing GMO with hybrids and no they are not sterile Monsanto did have the (terribly named) "terminator gene". They said this was to protect the environment from spilled seed.

7sigma 10y ago
Terminator gene was never commercialised

lolive 10y ago

What happens when you eat this BT corn?

XorNot 10y ago
The extremely acidic and enzyme rich system in your stomach demolishes the chemical structure, DNA, and proteins into constituant amino acids.
- tomp 10y ago
  You say this as if there was no organic poison that could kill you if you eat it...
  - Dylan16807 10y ago
    You didn't ask about poisons. You asked about the corn. It does what corn does.
    - tomp 10y ago
      If the corn produces pesticides, which are poisons, it's a reasonable question to ask "what happens when you eat the corn" - are the ears/kernels covered with it as well, or could they even contain it?
      - XorNot 10y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_maize#Insecticide-producing_corn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_maize#Ins... Short answer: it's not a pesticide which affects humans. Discussions about poisons fundamentally have to include a discussion about mechanism of action, because plenty of poisonous things to one species are completely harmless to another - i.e. chocolate is toxic to dogs, but harmless to humans in fairly massive quantities. Debate over GMOs is in no way helped by attempts to broad-brush, and in fact reveals some rather startling and unfounded biases - i.e. the idea that "natural" is healthy is completely absurd - the vast majority of plants, and animal meats, are toxic for humans to eat. If you ever go ocean fishing, you'd be incredibly stupid to eat a fish you couldn't identify.
        deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
      - ptaipale 10y ago
        Very many things are poisons, but not all poisons are equally harmful to different organisms. A substance that is extremely harmful to insects, for instance (pyrethrin), is not very harmful to mammals, particularly humans. Even within mammals, there are differences: chocolate is toxic to dogs and cats, but considered a delicacy by humans and the main adverse effect is excess energy content.

ansible 10y ago

Thats kind of the point, they are bad to pests that try to eat the crop And pesticides are also bad for other insects that don't eat the crops, and are necessary for our ecosystem to function. And pesticides are bad for people and animals in the longer term too.

cmdrfred 10y ago
>And pesticides are bad for people and animals in the longer term too. Can you source that claim?
- ansible 10y ago
  I'm surprised I need to. Here's one I found in ten seconds of searching. http://extension.psu.edu/pests/pesticide-education/applicators/fact-sheets/pesticide-safety/potential-health-effects-of-pesticides http://extension.psu.edu/pests/pesticide-education/applicato...
  - cmdrfred 10y ago
    That says large doses are potentially harmful to humans. It mostly speaks of harm potentinally coming to those who apply them. I'm looking more for a peer reviewed study that states pesticides used in GMO farming are more harmful that pesticides used in organic farming.
7sigma 10y ago
Well in the case of BT (bacillus thurigensis) cotton and corn, for example, the GM plant produces the Cry toxin which is bad for the insects that eat the crop, so better than spraying it (Also BT is used in organic agriculture via spraying btw). Herbicides like roundup affect a certain pathway in plants, not humans in animals. "And pesticides are bad for people and animals in the longer term too." Not at the concentrations that are used. The amount of residue is minuscule and modern pesticides have far less toxicity than older ones that have been phased out. IIRC, the BT toxin only affects insects that have an alkaline digestive system. Animals and humans are unaffected as its acidic.

michaelt 10y ago

Actually, GMOs need less pesticides than non GMO crop. Depends what you compare it to. Roundup-resistant crops allow roundup-intensive farming [1] which does less* environmental harm than some more harmful pesticides (if you ignore the development of roundup-resistant weeds). But lower intensity, less productive organic techniques use fewer pesticides and do even less environmental harm. [1] http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/roundup-ready-crops/ http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/roundup-ready-crops/

7sigma 10y ago
Where in that link does it say that organic techniques use fewer pesticides? Organic farming is restricted to naturally occurring pesticides which are often less effective than synthetic ones and so they need to be applied more often. Also, organic yields are often lower than conventional ones, so more land may be needed to compensate. Clearing land is way more environmentally unfriendly than using pesticide, so any gains from organic techniques are nullified. But i guess it depends on crop/climate and exact techniques [0]http://www.science20.com/agricultural_realism/example_how_much_pesticides_have_changed-127931 http://www.science20.com/agricultural_realism/example_how_mu...