Greg,
I am by no means a spokesperson for the "evil empire", but I will try to
answer your questions.
> Where are the benefits to the consumers in these convenience
> driven genetically manipulated products? All I see are a bunch
> of farmers buying Monsanto product cause its easier to spray it
> with Round up than use any other means including other chemicals
> to control their weeds.
I think you pretty much hit the nail on the head. The current generation of
GMO varieties are targeted to our primary customers, farmers. Part of the
reason is that these traits (RR, Bt, glufosinate tolerance) are "low-hanging
fruit" biologically, they are the easiest transgenic varieties to make. But
that is changing as we develop traits like better milling properties,
improved nutrient content, reduced mycotoxin.
> How about the food security issue? Is it safe to allow a handful
> of multi-national corporations own the genetics that feed the world?
At Pioneer, we like to think that we have the best corn varieties, and we
probably do. But the differences are measured in a few bu/A. 99% of the
genetics that feeds the world are in the public domain. That is not likely
to change. We may have assembled them into "cadillac" varieties, but the
building blocks are there for everyone to use.
> How about the ethical dilemna of messing with things that should be left
to God?
Where do you draw the line? In an edenic sense, all agriculture is probably
unnatural. I think that if you follow this line of reasoning carefully, you
will see that appeal to natural law cannot provide a firm foundation for
these judgements.
> Genetic manipulation is not the same as traditional plant breeding.
In terms of social and environmental impact, GMO's are insignificant
compared to the domestication of crops and livestock, the commodification of
grain and seed, and the hegemony of the hybrid seed production system. The
action is mostly over, the transition has already been made.
> How about explaining that testing procedure?
The key is the polymerase chain reaction or PCR:
http://www.accessexcellence.org/AB/IE/PCR_Xeroxing_DNA.html
In a nutshell, a large sample of grain, seed, or food is ground up and a
small bit put in a little plastic tube. This is subjected to PCR assay
using a primer cocktail that can detect DNA from any of the GMO crops on the
market. It is real sensitive, and is a yes/no test. Sensitivity is
adjusted by changing the initial sample size in the case of grain or seed.
> How about explaining when or even why the corps would ever
> produce a genetically manipulated product that will
> actually benefit the hungry of the world?
I personally know of many, many people with genuinely good motives in the
seed industry, who really do want to help feed the world. But of course the
reason this is in the private sector is because people will pay money to buy
food. Not very much of the money actually gets to the seed companies, but a
little does. And the market for seed is very, very competitive. Tiny
differences in service, performance or flexibility cause major shifts in
market share. We are striving for excellence (so we can have a job in 5
years).
> There could be potential for genetic engineering by the right
> people but I don't ever see the corporations of the world ever
> using it for anything besides selling more product.
Of course we want our varieties to be so good that people will buy them!
Don't you try to produce the best hogs so people will pay a premium? I'll
bet you bust your butt in the pursuit of excellence. I do too.
Dale
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/san/htdocs/hypermail
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Mar 12 2000 - 14:00:29 EST