David - where is the evidence of increased productivity with GE crops? Why has the government (not to mention the industry) refused to release all the data to the public of trials conducted of GE crops in Australia? Where is the evidence that the companies that own GE, derive profits from seeds, chemicals and royalties are going to give that away in order to feed the world's hungry? Where is the evidence that politically, there is the will to feed the world's hungry when food surpluses have been available? It is such patent (literally) nonsense that Ge is about anything other than corporate profits. What is most despicable about this scam, is the academics and so-called scientists who become the prosletysers for an industry that is as corrupt as they come.
next

Hello Folks

It has been awhile since I posted here. I see the critics of GM crops are as active as ever.

Just a couple points for now.

Since every year the acreage of GM crops increases by atleast 10% and 20% in the developing world, is it fair to say farmers like what they see on the ground, (pun intended) and continue to increase the planting of GM crops.

India is a prime example of PPP agreements that will definitely benefit the poor.

China is about to commercialize a whole raft of GM crops and will quickly be far larger than any one company.

Over 70 countries have active research programs in GM crop development.

If Bt is so bad then why is it widely used in organic agriculture?

Hi Rob
Bt in organic agriculture is sprayed on when required and breaks down quickly.

Bt GM plants express the Bt toxin in every cell all the time. A field of Bt plants is producing a huge ammount of Bt.

The negative effect of Bt GM plants on aquatic life could be either from the increase in Bt from the GM plants or because the plants are producing some unknown substance.

GM Crop uptake in the developing world:
S America had illegal growing of GM plants that polluted crops. Royalty payments are required when the crops are sold.Farmers pay the royalties as they are probably polluted and can't fight the patents.

India had a massive GM promotion campaign using Bollywood Stars. One of them refused to continue to promote them when GM crops were linked to farmer suicides and crop failures.

The GM watch site has newsclippings from around the world. Current stories are: how Poland is trying to keep out GM animal feed, how civil society groups in India are trying to keep out Bt Brinjal (eggplant), how the biotechs are trying to force approval of a GM potato in S. Africa.

Many Governments have sided with biotech companies to authorise GM food and crops even though there is no evidence of their safety. Farmers and consumer rights and concerns are ignored.

Research
GM has been promoted as the way to go in plant breeding. However there have not been many successes as the genome is very complex and not well understood.

Genes work in "networks" and so swapping one gene around causes unpredictible effects. Patenting has encouraged GM research with the promise of profits. Many plant breeding techniques are patented and so research institutes find it cheaper to team up with private GM companies and not do conventional plant breeding.

US farmers
Farmers in the US are forming groups as they realise the power of agribusiness. For example Monsanto will raise the price of corn by $100 a bag (35%) as there is no competition. Read what is happening here http://www.competitivemarkets.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogsection&id=3&Itemid=20

hi all,

I see the usual GM V Non-GM bun fight is ensuing.

I would appreciate it if the somewhat paranoid, highly defensive pro-GM lobby team just relax for once and try to stand back to allow a broader perspective to perhaps enter their realm.

If I hear another ProGMer go on about how emotional or irrational NoGMers are, or that NoGMers should even dare question anything GM at all , I'll puke.

Food supply is a core survival issue - so everyone has a god / atheist-nongod given right to all the information that is available, regardless of commercial interests ( these can be safeguarded in other ways apart from blanket secrecy, it's not hard to organise )- as it affects the survival of everyone and everything.

There is no personal "hate agronomist' campaign ( mentioned by another here ), only anger at the disrespect and disregard to those who want full information disclosure about what other people want to do to, and put into, their food.

Seems a perfectly normal and fair enough reaction and reason to me, wouldn't you say ?

If you want NonGMers to have a chance of agreeing with you - then let's see what you've got to offer - ALL of it, for once - and let the facts speak for themselves.

And if the studies aren't mutually agreed to be there ( health / environment etc ) then let's do them in a mutually agreeable way and then we'll all know, once and for all.

This is also a genuine, official invitation for all parties to come together in a filmed, open and public debate / forum in the next few months. I'll pay for your accommodation , and any international or national airfares. There'll be no editing or broadcasting of any info out of context. Only verifiable data will be accepted into the debate.

For more details post your responses and some form of genuine means of contact here and I'll get in touch.

So, I say put up or shut up. I'm sick of the goddam bickering.

lillian, since you asked, and as i'm unaware of any fine print precluding Australian cotton growers from discussing GM cotton performance, it's faring very well. About 80% of cotton plantings are now GM, either Bt, round-up ready or "stacked". While only marginally higher yielding in an average year, the reduction of insecticides for the Bt cotton is in the order of 80%. Measured by money alone the return is neither here nor there, but the positive effect on the environment and ease of management is GM's selling points.
Round-up ready technology, certainly in our operation, has reduced the amount of residual herbicides applied. Chemicals that by their very nature are designed to work for weeks or months. Replaced by RR used when and if required, not as a blanket preventative.
Anecdotal evidence suggests better water use efficiency, most likely through effective weed control and the plant not dropping "fruit" due to insect damage.
"When pests develop immunity to the toxin pesticide use rises." sure, when and if that happens, but what about those interim benefits. Certainly no worse than being without Bt cotton in the first place. Funnily enough these wacky people in the research facilities have thought of resistance too, which is why we have stipulated non-Bt refuges to actually breed insects, and on-going developments to stay ahead like the two-gene Bt cotton.

Under ideal conditions with no insects and no weeds perhaps conventional cotton still is king in the yield dept. Unfortunately I'm not lucky enough to have those conditions, and benefit from GM technology.

"There are reports that Bt cotton is causing a fungal disease "fusarium wilt" in the soil."
Only from idiots. Fusarium has been around for a lot longer than GM cotton. good try though.

My latest article on GM crops. If you have questions please ask.
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/opinon/2008/07/137_28530.html

Cheers