Transgenic corn farm vandalized

[Wr4i7h]

in Algarve, Portugal. Unfortunately, I was unable to get any mention of this in an english-speaking website, so here's a google translation. There are some better articles, but somehow they would just refuse to be translated...

Anyway, this is awful: a bunch of spoiled kids band up to wreck someone's farm, while smoking their joints and dressing like clowns, and proclaiming to be fighting for some ideal. They even got the nerve to say this was just a protest, and to quote some constitutional rights in their memo to a press agency. It's known that this kind of vandalism has been going on in other countries for a while, but considering the state of this country's economy (read: in the gutter), could they have chosen a worse place in Europe to perform this stunt? Will the owner, who almost had a heart attack, be properly compensated for this?

Furthermore, is their cause even right at all? While it was proven that some transgenic crops were toxic, all the stuff in the market has been tested and is safe for consumption. Cheap crops that required less water and pesticides could theoretically solve famine in poorer nations. Pesticides themselves are an ecological problem. This technology, if well applied, could do a lot of good, despite the dangers of toxicity and vendor lock-in.

Most technologies have dangers, but in the long run that never prevented them from being exploited for good and bad applications. This could be regulated to prevent abuse, while allowing legitimate business.

 

[Zaij]

The world already has a massive overproduction of food. All we need is for people to be a little more generous. It's not needed yet. Sure, keep the testing going, but frankly don't bring up famine areas because half the time it doesn't mean squat.

 

[Wr4i7h]

There is overproduction in wealthy countries, but it ends up cheaper to bury food than to export it for free, callous as this might sound. I see one benefit in this in allowing poor countries to at least produce some for themselves.

 

[SuAside]

don't be too naive Wraith... while vandalism solves nothing, i do believe transgenic stuff are a danger, not a solution.

as Specialist said, we already overproduce a shitload of food. tons and tons of vegetables are being destroyed in Belgium each year, because if they hit the market the entire market would simply collapse due to low prices and high supply.

transgenic food is 'evil' in various ways in my eyes:
- vendor lock in: users are not allowed (or even just unable) to use their harvest to reseed their fields. in the first case it's just economical terrorism, in the second it's ecological terrorism (selling plants so modified that they cant even have offspring).
- unresearched effects on the foodchain: several studies have already shown that some transgenic foodstocks fed to pigs changes the amino acid type and balance in the pigs. corporations say it is safe, but have you ever done any research on the past of said corporations? they're the same guys that claimed milk was safe (which caused severe birth defects) etc. one of them is also claiming ownership off a certain variety of pigs that they say they engineered (and all the offspring). they've got a patent pending, if accepted, they own 33+% of the world population of pigs and all farmers owning these (LEGALLY) shall have to pay royalties for offspring.
- exploitation: these crops are often sold to africans or asians in a tough spot. they're told it solves all their problems. yet, ecological cotton plants make way more profit than transgenic ones. this is without any pesticide etc.

anyhow, you say they were tested and safe? how can you be sure? this is kinda like medicine that was thought safe 20 years ago, but now seems to have had adverse effects.

of course, you cant see immediate effect on human beings, but how can you be sure it is safe? the reality is that we don't need these transgenic crops. AT ALL...
then why even stand the risk?

 

[Wr4i7h]

transgenic food is 'evil' in various ways in my eyes:

No technology is inherently evil, it all depends on the use... more on that below.

- vendor lock in: users are not allowed (or even just unable) to use their harvest to reseed their fields. in the first case it's just economical terrorism, in the second it's ecological terrorism (selling plants so modified that they cant even have offspring).

This should be regulated by laws. The inability to have offspring isn't inherent to modified crops, afaik.

- unresearched effects on the foodchain: several studies have already shown that some transgenic foodstocks fed to pigs changes the amino acid type and balance in the pigs. corporations say it is safe, but have you ever done any research on the past of said corporations? they're the same guys that claimed milk was safe (which caused severe birth defects) etc. one of them is also claiming ownership off a certain variety of pigs that they say they engineered (and all the offspring). they've got a patent pending, if accepted, they own 33+% of the world population of pigs and all farmers owning these (LEGALLY) shall have to pay royalties for offspring.

Research by universities, or other independent groups, should continue. While it was proven that some of these crops are dangerous, the technology can yet mature, if given a chance.

- exploitation: these crops are often sold to africans or asians in a tough spot. they're told it solves all their problems. yet, ecological cotton plants make way more profit than transgenic ones. this is without any pesticide etc.

No argument there, unscrupulous business practices are everywhere, especially where there's no regulation.

anyhow, you say they were tested and safe? how can you be sure? this is kinda like medicine that was thought safe 20 years ago, but now seems to have had adverse effects.

I can't test anything for myself, there's always implicit trust when reading something. We'll have to see.

of course, you cant see immediate effect on human beings, but how can you be sure it is safe? the reality is that we don't need these transgenic crops. AT ALL...
then why even stand the risk?

Just looking at the global numbers, yes, there's no need for it right now. But the surplus in wealthy nations never gets to where it's needed.

 

[SuAside]

Just looking at the global numbers, yes, there's no need for it right now. But the surplus in wealthy nations never gets to where it's needed.

you misunderstand.

the west destroys this food not because it is too costly to export it to where it is needed, but because it would totally destroy the economy of those regions.

cases in point would be much of the american 'aid' (lulz) or the 'frozen chicken' debacle (west exports excess frozen chicken to a certain region africa. local farmers cant beat the price of the surplus chicken. chicken farmers go out of business and even other farmers because their meat cant compete. egg production is down, other meat production is down, food diversity is down. at the same time, the frozen chicken delivered by the west is unfrozen and stored that way because people cant pay for a freezer in the first place. sickness goes up. etc.).

Research by universities, or other independent groups, should continue. While it was proven that some of these crops are dangerous, the technology can yet mature, if given a chance.

certainly, but when things start to revolve around money, corners are cut and lies are told. i dont trust the open market to keep it under review. the government has to step in.

This should be regulated by laws. The inability to have offspring isn't inherent to modified crops, afaik.

it isnt. most engineered crops are too strong and too dominant.

but corporations sometimes design it to be 'impotent', this way the farmers cant sustain their own seeding and have to buy new seeds, crop after crop.

No technology is inherently evil, it all depends on the use... more on that below.

i did not mean technology to be evil but of course it's present use.

 

[Wr4i7h]

the west destroys this food not because it is too costly to export it to where it is needed, but because it would totally destroy the economy of those regions.

Both points are true; remember that the west doesn't act totally based on altruism, neither on profiteering.

cases in point would be much of the american 'aid' (lulz) or the 'frozen chicken' debacle (west exports excess frozen chicken to a certain region africa. local farmers cant beat the price of the surplus chicken. chicken farmers go out of business and even other farmers because their meat cant compete. egg production is down, other meat production is down, food diversity is down. at the same time, the frozen chicken delivered by the west is unfrozen and stored that way because people cant pay for a freezer in the first place. sickness goes up. etc.).

By exporting crops that the beneficiary country didn't have in the first place, economic impact can be reduced, and food diversity would increase. Cereals can be relatively easy to store. There is also the case of countries with hardly any agriculture at all, though in these countries there is also the issue of whether they'd actually use this resource to solve famine, or just as another excuse to fuel their internal wars...

certainly, but when things start to revolve around money, corners are cut and lies are told. i dont trust the open market to keep it under review. the government has to step in.

Agreed, this needs regulation.

it isnt. most engineered crops are too strong and too dominant.

but corporations sometimes design it to be 'impotent', this way the farmers cant sustain their own seeding and have to buy new seeds, crop after crop.

That's one of the things governments should regulate. A modified plant should produce viable seeds, to avoid vendor lock-in. The problem of contamination could be harder to avoid, though, with neighboring fields, but that is a moot issue in poor countries.

i did not mean technology to be evil but of course it's present use.

Take for example the "radioactive pills" or "radioactive water" that was peddled in the twenties as treatment for every disease. That was complete bullshit, but today radiotherapy and imaging are perfectly normal. This technology shouldn't be killed out of fear for its bad uses.