Genetically Modified Sorghum

[gmoafrica]

I have never understood why Africans still harbor xenophobic tendencies towards genetically modified foods. To most Africans, benefits of genetically modified foods is exaggerated and not worth any consideration. What they don’t know is that Americans and Europeans, who apparently they loathe, readily eat these foods. They make billions of dollars from trade involving them. The elites in Africa, unfortunately, have not done much to educate the lay people about the potential benefits of genetically food. So, blind opposition to genetically modified food continues, to the detriment of the masses.

 

I am making this post because of some events that are currently unfolding in South Africa. There, Dr. Florence Wambugu, an icon of modern agricultural biotechnology, has received a grant of US$400 million from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to develop genetically modified sorghum. As a start, Dr. Wambugu would like to set up a state-of-the-art laboratory to research on GM sorghum, but the South African government has told her NO. To justify its actions, the government has expressed fears that genetically modified sorghum might contaminate indigenous sorghum varieties.

 

This sounds funny to me. Fears of cross-contamination, first of all, are unfounded. Secondly, if they really do exist, such must not be used to deny Dr. Wambugu a license to set up her lab. The lab has nothing to do with cross-contamination. Indeed, Dr. Wambugu’s lab can be used to prove that genetically modified sorghum poses no threat to conventional varieties.

 

Let’s also note that South Africa is an old hand on the issue of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Already, the country has a well-developed biosafety law, which has facilitated the commercialization of genetically modified cotton and corn. With genetically modified crops already being grown in South Africa, the last thing one should expect is unbearable pre-conditions for the introduction of genetically modified sorghum. James authors the blog Gmo Africa (http://www.gmoafrica.org).

[gcol]

South Africa is not the only country to have grave doubts about the long term environmental effects of GM crops. Here in the UK the debate heatedly continues. Our gloriously open and honest government has changed the rules so that GM crops can be grown in relative secrecy, because now a grower has only to notify an adjacent farmer within 30 metres.

 

Some of us see GM as less than an effort to reduce possible future food shortages and more a race for Seed grower profits by locking in gullible growers to high price seed.

 

The dangers of cross-contamination and reduction in biodiversity have not been sufficiently addressed and investigated.

 

There is, in my opinion, a powerful multinational long term plan to force GM on us by hook or by crook. I suspect more crook and less hook.

[Dr. Dalek]

Very pessimistic, though not unfounded

I recently read of a company developing terminator genes for plants so people cannot constantly resuply themselves with seeds from their own plants. They have to keep buying them from the company over and over

Most unnatural

 

I like the idea of trying to increas food production efficency, and even plan to be a genetic engineer, however some people in the feild of bio-industry just irk me with all of their irksome behavior.

The 30 meter rule would work great in the USA. I wonder if a crop were to be contaminated with terminator genes, and the non GM grower were not notified of the nature of the adjacent crop, could the farmer sue for property damage?

[gcol]

I recently read of a company developing terminator genes for plants so people cannot constantly resuply themselves with seeds from their own plants. They have to keep buying them from the company over and over

Most unnatural

 

The 30 meter rule would work great in the USA. I wonder if a crop were to be contaminated with terminator genes' date=' and the non GM grower were not notified of the nature of the adjacent crop, could the farmer sue for property damage?[/quote']

 

1. The terminator gene is the lock-in strategy, and seems completely natural behaviour for multi-nationals.

 

2. I think the 30m rule is grossly inadequate. If there was nothing to hide, why try to hush it up? I suspect commercial confidentiality would be a nice legal get-out. The lemming rush for agricultural gold is trampling on common sense caution, and indeed the "scientific method".

[Dr. Dalek]

The lemming rush for agricultural gold is trampling on common sense caution, and indeed the "scientific method".

agreed

Multinationals should be far more reserved and careful when it come to their actions in the feild of biotech.

[SkepticLance]

Guys,

Watch your sources. If they come from Greenpeace or other anti-GM organisations, take what they say with a VERY big pinch of salt.

 

First : the terminator gene.

This was developed by contract to the American government. The people behind it were, in fact, trying to find a way to satisfy the demands of the anti-GM movement for preventing cross fertilisation with non-GM plants. The very word "terminator' was invented by the anti-GM movement as part of their emotion-laden campaign. Always suspect terminology that carries emotional connotation. We know that the anti-GM mob reacted against the honest efforts of the government, by spreading the lie that the 'terminator' gene was invented by multi-nationals to protect their market.

 

As to the 30 metre line ...That depends on the crop.

An experiment in Australia involved a field of GM canola being planted right next to a field of non-GM canola. The degree of cross fertilisation was measured, and came to 0.1%. At that rate it is seriously unlikely to 'take over.'

 

Corn cannot cross fertilise over that distance. Rice is self fertilising, and makes that not an issue. Etc etc.

 

The British aproach has been forced by the actions of anti-GM vandals. These hooligans learn of a GM crop and rush to pull them out. They are instrumental by their own actions in forcing high degrees of secrecy.

[Dr. Dalek]

First : the terminator gene.

This was developed by contract to the American government. The people behind it were' date=' in fact, trying to find a way to satisfy the demands of the anti-GM movement for preventing cross fertilisation with non-GM plants. The very word "terminator' was invented by the anti-GM movement as part of their emotion-laden campaign. Always suspect terminology that carries emotional connotation. We know that the anti-GM mob reacted against the honest efforts of the government, by spreading the lie that the 'terminator' gene was invented by multi-nationals to protect their market.

 

As to the 30 metre line ...That depends on the crop.

An experiment in Australia involved a field of GM canola being planted right next to a field of non-GM canola. The degree of cross fertilisation was measured, and came to 0.1%. At that rate it is seriously unlikely to 'take over.'

 

Corn cannot cross fertilise over that distance. Rice is self fertilising, and makes that not an issue. Etc etc.

 

The British aproach has been forced by the actions of anti-GM vandals. These hooligans learn of a GM crop and rush to pull them out. They are instrumental by their own actions in forcing high degrees of secrecy.[/quote']

 

Greenpeace?

Holly shit I take it back.

GM foods rule!

 

So the enviromentalists are responsible for Terminator genes.

Another reason for me to dislike that crowd.

 

Multinationals should be far more reserved and careful when it come to their actions in the feild of biotech.

I take this back because I thought at the time that the multinationals were responcible for terminators.