 |
| Seedlings and rows of plants in a field. |
G’day everyone,
Frankly,
I didn’t care about genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and perceived
their detractors to be a pack of trolls and Chicken-Littles. I still
can’t be convinced that modifying the genetic structure of foodstuffs is
harmful. That argument remains a power struggle for mega-corporations,
their downtrodden suppliers, and ... the French government.
In
the post, “Demystifying GMOs: New Research Shows Unexpected Changes to
Plant DNA” (link below), scientists are said to have found severe
modifications to plant DNA that isn’t likely beneficial to the plant nor
to its consumers.
Of
concern are unknown effects of having too much, too little, or the wrong
sections of DNA modified, added, or removed. It seems that the enzymes,
proteins, and the host of tools currently used to modify plant DNA
haven’t been as precise as anticipated.+
Better
techniques and tools are being developed, but has harm already been
done to our food supply? Not likely as of today, but if the trend
continues without improvements being made to the processes, then GMO
foods might fall short of their necessary production levels. Such a
possibility could spell disaster for our global populations of humans
and animals. Our species, alone, is rapidly approaching the 10 billion
threshold. Demand for greater crop yields and greater nutritional value
will push agri-businesses to implement better technologies quickly.
No,
I don’t see this issue as the end of GMOs. Rather, with or without the
buy-in of critics, genetically altered crops are here to stay. FIt’s no
longer a novel approach to yield improvements, GMOs will become an
ever-increasing necessity for our food production.
Have a nice day.
~~RJ
In a way we've been genetically modifying our food for as long as mankind has been harvesting food. Our forefathers and foremothers would consistently pick the largest piece of fruit, largest berries, largest pumpkins to feed the flock. Keeping seeds from these larger pieces of food then planting them produced a greater number of large fruit, the seeds of which were kept and the original plant's genetics were changed again. Corn is a good example.
ReplyDeleteFrom Google: "Scientists believe people living in central Mexico developed corn at least 7000 years ago. It was started from a wild grass called teosinte. Teosinte looked very different from our corn today. The kernels were small and were not placed close together like kernels on the husked ear of modern corn."
Certainly the corn we have today is vastly different from that wild grass in Mexico even though they share DNA. I agree GMO's are here to stay if we wish to support the world's growing population.
In the Christmas Story, Scrooge speaks: " If they will die, let them die and decrease the surplus population." Feeding the multitudes has been on our collective minds for many years. Through technological advances in machinery, chemistry & botany we've met the challenge to feed all the population. There's no doubt in my mind we'll continue to do so with the advances possible, in part, through GMO food.