Zimbabwe refuse genetically modified crops in 2002

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by Lone_Desperado, Jan 24, 2008.

  1. Lone_Desperado Registered Member

    Messages:
    68
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/2148452.stm

    I know it is an old story, and things have already played out, but at that time did the government of Zimbabwe have a moral responsibility to feed its people, despite long term problems?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    35,513
    I think that, considering it's the government of Zimbabwe, this particular moral question is moot. Mugabe is pretty much immoral in everything he does.

    However, I don't think it's necessarily a fair proposition that just because a people are in need, they should be compelled to accept as charity something that is suspect and controversial among people who aren't starving.

    Says me. I didn't follow that story closely enough to know who all the players are. Given that we've already seen gene spills despite assurances that such events won't happen, there are some reasonable concerns about turning genetically-modified products loose in Africa.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,882
    It amazes me how stupid people can be. What does they think corn is..a genetic modified crop! Native American Indians engineered that plant and it has been continually engineered ever since.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    35,513
    Oh, come now, Joe. Are you suggesting you see no difference between selective breeding and laboratory tampering with the genetic structure of an organism?
     
  8. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,882
    Nope I don't, the lab is just more efficient.
     
  9. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    Well, sorry to have to break it to you but there's a TREMENDOUS difference! Selective cross-breeding could NEVER insert genes from fish and other animal life into corn or any other plant.
     
  10. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,882
    I know, I eat fish too...no big deal.
     
  11. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,882
    They are not genetically engineering crops so that they will do harm. They are trying to improve crops. So I have no issues with engineering as long as you have disclosures so that people who may be allergic to the atlerations are warned.
     
  12. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    That has absolutely NOTHING to do with it. Nothing at all.
     
  13. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    But therein lies the BIG question! It's not a matter of allergies, either, that also has nothing to do with it. And of course they aren't purposely developing them to do harm to humans - BUT many of them ARE developed to produce toxins that kill insects. It's that and several other factors that have people concerned.

    Face it - you seem to know almost nothing (from the things you've clearly said) about genetic engineering.
     
  14. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    there are basically 3 reasons why I have a problem with GM products

    1) its unethical to give infertile grain to a poor farmer so they are constantly dependent on the developer

    2) what are the pesticides ect produced by the plants going to do to the human body

    and

    3) since drug companies are using plants to produce there products, how do people know that these crops arnt going to cross breed with food crops

    Well those are MY problems with it anyway
     
  15. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,882
    Yep, I am an idiot. You hit the nail on the head. But I am not an alarmist. Pyrethrins are natual plant produced toxins. Plants producing toxins, again, not a new thing. Plants have been producing toxins for longer than mankind has existed on the planet. So show me something new here.
     
  16. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    joe when was the last time you ATE a dasy?

    Thats the plant that produces it
     
  17. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,882
    A couple of things, in the industrial world, farmers buy their seed annually from a seed provider. This is a way of ensuring crop quality and productivity. And it works well in the industrial world.

    If the third world wants to use their own grain, fine. But their crops quality and productivity will vary annually. And the farmers will have no control over that variability. In the industrial crop productivity has improved by more that 28 percent over the last decade. So if that is immoral, ok. But it does not cause me any issues.

    Pesticide toxcity to humans. It makes no sense to breed a plant that is toxic to humans. Why would anyone do such a thing. Toxins are well understood, nothing new here.

    Your last item, controling plant breeding (your first issue) also presents unwanted and uncontrolled breeding.
     
  18. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    umm i hate to tell you but most farmers keep a percentage of seed aside in order to plant the NEXT crop. Maybe in the US where this production is alowed they dont but in australia where GM crops are banned they do. As i have posted before CSIRO are evaluating each crop on a case by case basis before alowing any to be grown in australia. I dislike Mugabe but this time he may well have a point. After all the EU wont alow any to be sold there, its not alowed in Australia, the US seems to be the only place its accepted
     
  19. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    No, I don't think you are an idiot - just considerably less than well-informed on genetic engeneering.

    Of course, MANY plants produce toxins!!! And that's why we don't eat a lot of things including most members of the nightshade family along with rubarb leaves, some very decorative flowering plants and scores of others.

    But once again, that's NOT the point at all. We're talking about plants now producing toxins that never did before - plants that are a direct and indirect part of the human food chain. Are you unable to undertand that important distinction??? :bugeye:
     
  20. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    See? I told you you weren't an idiot. You actually DO know several things - just that you know next to nothing about genetic engenerring.

    Also, you could have included some other impotant information about hybrid seeds produced each year and bought by Western farmers: not only do they produce significiantly larger crops, the plants are more insect-resistant, more drought tolerant and mature quicker. In some areas it's possible to produce two crops per year. In others, a full crop can be grown with time left to grow enough to be cut and stored and used as silage.

    There are still a few open-pollinated (meaning non-hybrid) varieties of corn, for example, available BUT they are little used for obvious reasons. And if the poor farmers want to use them, there's nothing stopping them. They can save some seed every year and never have to buy it again. But in doing so, they cheat themselves and their families in the long run.

    No, your comment about toxins being well understood is incorrect in the case of the ones being produced by GM crops. They are unique and their long-term effects on both humans and food animals has NOT yet been done. They've not been around long enough yet for that.
     
  21. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    read only, just because they are cross breed doesnt mean they are infertile and seed cant be reused where as delibretly breeding infertile crops and then saying "we are giving these to you to help you out, arnt we great" IS unethical
     
  22. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,882
    Personally, I want to see glow in the dark cereals.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    just think how much fun breakfast will be with glow in the dark foods.
     
  23. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    there is glow in the dark sausages not sure if i will be able to find a link for them but i might try later if i can be bothered. It was on one of those morning shows
     

Share This Page