GM corn comes to Canberra

If you’ve eaten margarine in the last five or so years then you’ve eaten GM cottonseed oil.

I agree – the labelling of such items needs to be strengthened to ensure the consumer has the ability to decide. Once they have that ability, the market will decide if GM crops are worthwhile.

johnboy said :

Becoming a premium member will make… you more attractive to members of your personal gender preference.*

*(Well it did for me, your mileage may vary)

Mate when you at zero, where can you go but up? 😛

You can already.

Type, read, edit, then hit the go button.

Becoming a premium member will make beer taste better and make you more attractive to members of your personal gender preference.*

But just the thought of the carnage of RiotACT retro-active auto comment editing is something that keeps us awake at night, so it won’t do that.

*(Well it did for me, your mileage may vary)

utah said :

The concept of someone using an unnatural device like a computer, presumably while wearing unnaturally woven cloth, possibly made out of unnatural fabric such as polyester,

…to complain about such things, amuses me.

If I become a premium subscribers, will I be able to edit my comments?

CSIRO plant industry has been on the cutting edge of research for a lotta years now (I did work experience there as a little proto-nerd back in my school days). It seems right to me that they should be undertaking GM research. I feel far more comfortable with them doing the research and safety tests than, say, Monsanto.

The main problem with GM crops is that they are not fulfilling the extraordinary promise of GM). The majority of GM crops out there are not pest, drought or disease resistant. They’re pesticide (specifically, Glyphosate) resistant, so Monsanto can “value add” its patented pesticide (Roundup) to sales of GM crops. That way a farmer can get higher yields by reducing weed invasion; but other than the pesticide resistance, the crop is the same (i.e it won’t grow anywhere it didn’t already, needs the same amount of water, etc).

Rather than the private firms’ focus on expanding profits, CSIRO will be more focussed on making crops that actually fulfil the promise of GM (i.e. making crops that will grow in more marginal soils with less rainfall or crops with greater salt tolerance than existing crops). I’m inclined to think that’s highly laudable.

miz said :

No one objects to hybridisation, it’s the inserting of genetic material from other organisms that is problematic to me. This would never happen in nature.

The concept of someone using an unnatural device like a computer, presumably while wearing unnaturally woven cloth, possibly made out of unnatural fabric such as polyester, amuses me.

The problems include, where are the regulatory limits?
and how are these foodstuffs going to affect a person or animal who consumes them? For example, corn resistant to the pesticide roundup is likely to have been sprayed with several doses of roundup as part of the agricultural weed elimination program, whereas a non-resistant variety would die if sprayed therefore remains roundup free.

So, you’re worried about levels of Round-Up in the food we eat? Do farmers use Round-Up with most crops, and do we have measures in place to make sure that round-up doesn’t make it into the grocery store? If you never eat GM crops, does that mean that nothing you eat will have ever been near Round-Up? And if it bothers you, why not just eat organic foods only?

I can’t say that I am a big supporter of GM food.

Fair call, it’s supposed to like that though, the basic idea behind it is instead of calling things exactly like they are, which would result in them being sued for defamation, they substitute the defamation with colourful language.

No I cant watch him. The way he said shut the f###up, put me off for some reason. Im good for summaries. I don’t doubt hes got good things to say. But he put me off with the last line. Maybe down the track Ill try again.

Goes to show how easy it is to lose a message in aggressive acts.

dexi said :

Regarding the abovementionted youtube clip, I rarely pay any attention to people who have to use the F word to get their point across. Sounds like another loud American that believes all the world’s problems would be solved if it wasn’t for the Greenies-bleeding heart-loony-lefties asking questions. Never let the facts get in the way of a buck or a good story.

Maybe you should watch more Penn and Teller BS before passing judgement, it is actually quite interesting. Sure it does bash Greenpeace a bit, but understandably so – they showed an interview with the the co-creator of Greenpeace who quit because Greenpeace lost track of their true purpose and spent all their time being anti-capitalist.

Anyway, back to GM; even if people dont like the idea of eating GM products, surely they can see the benifit of GM Crops for use in Biomass Fuels, Textiles, and all that other stuff we use plants for.

Sorry Kiron22 for connecting you with any campaign. I didnt look beyond my own preconceived idea of Greenpeace being a non violent, direct action organisation, above the direct destruction of property. They have pulled up crops more than once in the UK.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2001/oct/17/activists.gmcrops

A quick search has found people all over the world doing the same in protest.

Its a shame. If you destroy or damage anything in a protest it detracts from the issue you are trying to raise. The issue becomes the destruction not what you are there to protest against.

dexi said :

A trial by CSIRO in Canberra of GM corn is a good idea. Right place, right organisation. A trial of corn in the middle of corn producing farms, by corporate scientists would not.

I agree. I would be a lot more comfortable about GM foods if not for the frenetic spriuking of the technology by companies like Monsanto, whose principal aim is, naturally, profit.

That said, there is no doubt that the introduction of GM cotton to Australia has dramatically reduced pesticide use in that industry. However, putting GM more broadly into the food chain is a much larger step, requiring much more caution.

Regarding the abovementionted youtube clip, I rarely pay any attention to people who have to use the F word to get their point across. Sounds like another loud American that believes all the world’s problems would be solved if it wasn’t for the Greenies-bleeding heart-loony-lefties asking questions. Never let the facts get in the way of a buck or a good story.

There are lots of questions with GM foods. Most of the answers so far are from corporate companies that stand to make billions from GM. They don’t necessarily have the best interests of producers and consumers at heart. There is a campaign of discreditation going on both ways.

Kiron maybe you are part of this campaign. Would you would like to name the locations of the numerous crops that Greenpeace has destroyed? Maybe you might like to look past the glossy corporate brochures and swearing loud mouths.

The jury is still out on the long term effects of GM crops. It would be a mistake to commit to the technology until we have a better idea of its benefits or otherwise. A trial by CSIRO in Canberra of GM corn is a good idea. Right place, right organisation. A trial of corn in the middle of corn producing farms, by corporate scientists would not. Full scale planting in the third world smacks of a grand experiment not a way to feed the starving.

Why would anybody be upset about it? We have a crippling drought with food shortages and anything which helps alleviate that can only be applauded. The only people who would object are pea brained greenies (is there any other kind?) and selfish opportunists like the ones who blocked the power station.

I would be more concerned with what the effects are of long term exposure to petro-chemicals such as those that are found in hair shampoo, rather than GM foods.

Kiron, although you’ve only named Greenpeace in your comments, I’m assuming you’re not seriously proposing that Greenpeace is mainly responsible for famine and starvation in these African countries!?

The myth of ‘GM foods’ saving/feeding the (3rd) world is just that. Socio-political and economic factors which limits/prevents sustainable agriculture in these countries have nothing at all to do with disease/pesticide/herbicide resistance (or any other GM traits) in food crops.

Also, for a community who shares its home with the national regulator for GM crops (here in Canberra), we sure have little idea of what the GM trials mean or what regulations are in place to control these trials. Even the ‘friends of the earth’ woman in the article understands that with no local corn cropping, this proposed trial is harmless.

I just don’t understend the rush to take this irreversible step.

I don’t want to eat GM stuff, and once it is out there there will be no way of telling.

I feel that in a democracy I should have some way of choosing.

No one objects to hybridisation, it’s the inserting of genetic material from other organisms that is problematic to me. This would never happen in nature. See CSIRO fact sheet
http://www.csiro.au/resources/WhatIsGM.html

and general info
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_organism

The problems include, where are the regulatory limits?
and how are these foodstuffs going to affect a person or animal who consumes them? For example, corn resistant to the pesticide roundup is likely to have been sprayed with several doses of roundup as part of the agricultural weed elimination program, whereas a non-resistant variety would die if sprayed therefore remains roundup free.

Which would you choose to eat – and are we going to be provided with information so we CAN choose?

S4anta, do they have GM cash crops yet??

‘rust free wheat’ – has been here since early 1800’s. GM foods is the next step in humanitys experiment with ensuring that anything it grows is as resistent as possible to disease and the like.

Get on, get over it.

To me GM corn is much like Cane Toads – some people think it is a good idea, some people don’t, but once it is introduced you can never get rid of it.

So if it turns out to be a disaster in a decade, tough luck, we are stuck with it forever more.

And then there is the fact that big business owns it, and can charge farmers for growing it, even if it in fact infested their non-GM crops, and they didn’t even want it there.

I never actually understood what people have against GM food, you do know the guy who invented it got a nobel peace prize for saving the lives of 1 billion people?, Greenpeace told african nations that GM food was poisoned so they turned away GM food aid from other countries, allowing people to starve, also Greenpeace have destoyed numerous GM food crops that were testing what effect GM foods actually have on the enviroment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIvNopv9Pa8
P&T:BS take on GM foods.