Today scientists use thermal neutrons, X-rays, or ethyl methane sulphonate, a harsh carcinogenic chemical - anything that will damage DNA - to generate mutant cereals. Virtually every variety of wheat and barley you see growing in the field was produced by this kind of "mutation breeding". No safety tests are done; nobody protests. The irony is that genetic modification (GM) was invented in 1983 as a gentler, safer, more rational and more predictable alternative to mutation breeding - an organic technology, in fact. Instead of random mutations, scientists could now add the traits they wanted.
... (Feeding a growing population) will mean either better yields or less rainforest - which is why fertilisers, pesticides and transgenes are the best possible protectors of the planet.
- The Economist, Dec 24th 2005
Sure, organically grown crops are most desirable for subsistence. But can sustainable farming exist if not for "modified" crops? Let's not forget that the world would not be what it is today if not for the "modifications" brought about by the "Green Revolution" which started in the 70s.
Here's another interesting food for thought from The Economist:
Bruce Barton, an adman turned evangelist, pictured Jesus as a savvy executive who "picked up twelve men from the bottom ranks of business and forged them into an organisation that conquered the world". His parables were "the most powerful advertisements of all time".
No comments:
Post a Comment