Organic vs. Genetically Engineered food
Jun. 9th, 2003 12:48 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
weaktwosSupposedly Sacramento will be hosting a conference on genetically engineered (G-E)foods. 130 different countries are invited to attend this event. So far, I'm of the opinion that if genetically altered foods are safe enough, we should go for it. Certainly, it would be a boon for the starving nations, who need food.
At the same time, I am reading an interview in the Sun magazine of an organic farmer, Michael Ableman. On G-E foods,
Ableman says, "The book states that if organic methods were widely adopted today, millions of people would starve. But there's not a single agricultural system -- organic, biodynamic, or whatever--that can solve the issue of overpopulation. The population problem has to be viewed as a population problem, not as an agricultural problem. People make the mistake that we can deal with it by growing more food, engineered or otherwise."
I'm trying to figure out what the solution to overpopulation should be? Wars? Limitations on children? I'm also wondering if the overpopulace aren't fed, will they just wither away and die without a fight? Or will they attempt to take food if they cannot get it via normal means?
A scientist who made advances in genetically engineered foods once said, "You cannot have a peaceful world when millions are starving."
This organic farmer is a proponent of small farms that individual families can tend to themselves, and use soil techniques that allow one to use the same land for potentially thousands of years. That's all good and well, but how well would this do in Africa?
I am inclined to agree with Penn and Teller on this issue, insofar as organic farming seems to be a luxury most non-americans cannot afford.
At the same time, I am reading an interview in the Sun magazine of an organic farmer, Michael Ableman. On G-E foods,
Ableman says, "The book states that if organic methods were widely adopted today, millions of people would starve. But there's not a single agricultural system -- organic, biodynamic, or whatever--that can solve the issue of overpopulation. The population problem has to be viewed as a population problem, not as an agricultural problem. People make the mistake that we can deal with it by growing more food, engineered or otherwise."
I'm trying to figure out what the solution to overpopulation should be? Wars? Limitations on children? I'm also wondering if the overpopulace aren't fed, will they just wither away and die without a fight? Or will they attempt to take food if they cannot get it via normal means?
A scientist who made advances in genetically engineered foods once said, "You cannot have a peaceful world when millions are starving."
This organic farmer is a proponent of small farms that individual families can tend to themselves, and use soil techniques that allow one to use the same land for potentially thousands of years. That's all good and well, but how well would this do in Africa?
I am inclined to agree with Penn and Teller on this issue, insofar as organic farming seems to be a luxury most non-americans cannot afford.
