Why Africa needs GMO crops

[Lupus]

Does organic mean no GMO, I thought organic just meant without pesticides, I'm looking for a source on that?

Firstly organic doesn't mean no pesticides so you'd be wrong on that. Organic is the use of synthesised chemicals or as they like to say chemical free but nothing is chemically free.

 

[Lupus]

According to the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements it defines organic farming as:
"an integrated farming system that strives for sustainability, the enhancement of soil fertility and biological diversity whilst, with rare exceptions, prohibiting synthetic pesticides, antibiotics, synthetic fertilizers, genetically modified organisms, and growth hormones."

Well that is a load of hooey, sustainable not, enhanced soil fertility not.

 

[Lupus]

Organic farming covered 12.6 million hectares of agricultural land in the EU-28 in 2017. This corresponds to 7 % of the total utilised agricultural area of the EU-28
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Organic_farming_statistics#Key_messages
You may want to rethink your argument... 7% does not an argument make Sir.

Don't forget they import 48% of their vegetables while only exporting 22% so if you're doing well on your yield why would you import?

 

[rietrot]

Organic farming covered 12.6 million hectares of agricultural land in the EU-28 in 2017. This corresponds to 7 % of the total utilised agricultural area of the EU-28
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Organic_farming_statistics#Key_messages
You may want to rethink your argument... 7% does not an argument make Sir.

There's more than just organic and GMO. Most of the EU has conversational non GMO farms.

Hint the EU has banned a lot of the GMOs.

 

[rietrot]

Don't forget they import 48% of their vegetables while only exporting 22% so if you're doing well on your yield why would you import?

Because of money. Other people in the 3rd world can farm on the cheap-cheap.

 

[Lupus]

Because of money. Other people in the 3rd world can farm on the cheap-cheap.

Yes because they don't have useless bans on GMOs.

 

[rietrot]

Yes because they don't have useless bans on GMOs.

You sure that's the only reason or even the main reason?

Keep in mind you specifically said vegetables.

 

[access]

you dont have to be a botanists to duct tape a tangerine branch to a mandarin tree. aka grafting...

 

[Swa]

The trend of larger less nutrient dense crop been around before GMOs became mainstream, there were cases where they tried to make those types of crops more nutrient dense. Then there are cases where staple foods like rice where they fortify them.

I think the thinking with the drought resistant crop their thinking is less nutrition is better than no nutrition.

Never said it hasn't but that doesn't prove it doesn't happen with GMOs. You're welcome to research this but when GMOs were introduced on a large scale to combat poverty it usually resulted in nutrient deficiencies after a while. The problem isn't always the amount of nutrients but also their bio-availability as our bodies weren't made to digest them. Fortification is also not the same thing and done in other ways to GMOs.

Because they don't, they've been around 20 years there is more research and I don't know what's up with you conspiracy nuts and thinking the world is out to get you, but it's not. In fact in the last 100 years the human population has gotten stronger, we have people living longer, babies and mothers making it passed child birth, less mass famines, less everything that was bad. Until recently when suddenly people started hoping on to the anti-science brigade.
Yes cancer has seemed to be on the rise, this is due to better screening techniques, unfortunately pollution plays a big role in it as well. Allergies have been actually shown to possibly be linked to a few things, one of them is the rise of the overly cautious and clean environments and the odd belief of parents introducing certain foods to kids later then they should and also pollution again. If you want to blame these things on anything it's pollution.

We just don't know. Cancer rates and other diseases have been on the increase. It's hard to pinpoint exactly why but you can't exclude any one thing. It's also possible that everything we've introduced have had an impact.

Firstly you realise with an increase in overall population, there will be an increase in things like cancer. Secondly just because there is an increase in cancer it doesn't mean you get to assume its gmos, for instance we know pollution can cause cancer so it becomes easier to attribute rises in pollution with rises in cancer.

That's not how it works. Cancer rates (as well as other diseases) are reported as a percentage. Precisely because populations can increase or decrease.

View attachment 617926

Is that a herfs kommando wurm? Those things are pretty much resistant to everything so not really a good comparison.

 

[access]

You're welcome to research this but when GMOs were introduced on a large scale to combat poverty it usually resulted in nutrient deficiencies after a while

i did have a look quick and its the opposite of what youre saying.

it states gmo combats nutrient deficiencies, as in the plants contain more nutrients from being modified and feeds better in poor conditions. the normal food had insufficient nutrients due to poor soil quality and weather.

also, i remember watching some show explaining why breakfast cereals had gmo in the early 1900s when there were problems with rickets. and it worked..

 

[Swa]

i did have a look quick and its the opposite of what youre saying.

it states gmo combats nutrient deficiencies, as in the plants contain more nutrients from being modified and feeds better in poor conditions. the normal food had insufficient nutrients due to poor soil quality and weather.

also, i remember watching some show explaining why breakfast cereals had gmo in the early 1900s when there were problems with rickets. and it worked..

Maybe you should look again. First you're not going to get around poor soil quality. Secondly these nutrient rich GMOs are not available commercially. It's like I said, there's a universal law that you can't have all the good qualities. So GMO crops are either easy to grow or they are nutrient rich but not both. Interesting that foodstuffs started to be fortified when GMOs became commonplace and people were found to generally experience nutrient deficiencies.

I'm not aware of GMO cereals to combat rickets. I know bread and staple foods started to be Vitamin D fortified from external sources when it became known Rickets is due to Vitamin D deficiency.

 

[access]

Maybe you should look again. First you're not going to get around poor soil quality. Secondly these nutrient rich GMOs are not available commercially. It's like I said, there's a universal law that you can't have all the good qualities. So GMO crops are either easy to grow or they are nutrient rich but not both. Interesting that foodstuffs started to be fortified when GMOs became commonplace and people were found to generally experience nutrient deficiencies.

I'm not aware of GMO cereals to combat rickets. I know bread and staple foods started to be Vitamin D fortified from external sources when it became known Rickets is due to Vitamin D deficiency.

ah yes, fortified sounds right. my bad.

who said anything about all the good qualities, you can certainly have more/better ones.. it is the point of gmo.

 

[Swa]

ah yes, fortified sounds right. my bad.

who said anything about all the good qualities, you can certainly have more/better ones.. it is the point of gmo.

It may be the point but it doesn't seem to be succeeding. It's usually just one or two nutrients. Even then it took decades to develop golden rice. First versions you'd need to take in kilograms per day to achieve the desired intake of beta carotene. It's more acceptable now but only barely. Nobody really wants it though as it doesn't give the desired yields. The failure of GMOs isn't a regulatory one but rather a failure to deliver. It seems we're all just better off eating carrots.

 

[MiW]

What? Actually the seeds don't self destruct, so not really sure where you go that. Also roundup is a pesticide designed to kill weeds, sometimes these weeds are the same makeup as the crops, therefore the crop is roundup resistant due to this reason. Kill the weed keep the crops safe. Also where are you getting it that the crops are covered in glyphosate? Even if it is, you wash your fruit and vegetables before consuming, do you think "organic" is pesticide free? If so you need your head examined.
Good remove their products, I would prefer we move on with science instead of regressing, I'd prefer the cheaper, hardier and more nutritious goods in store, which 99% of the time is the GMO or non-organic.

Roundup | Allergies | Unsafe for Consumption
Roundup

Concerns about the effects of genetically engineered foods on health have to do with both the crops themselves along with the toxicity of the herbicide Roundup. The EPA currently regulates the allowable concentration of glyphosate in the drinking water, and says that glyphosate is safe for humans in small concentrations. However, with the use of Roundup on the crops, consumers may be ingesting more of the chemical than they realize.

http://web.mit.edu/demoscience/Monsanto/impact.html

Eureka is the only flour which doesn't give me health problems. Eating the normal flour bread gives me respiratory and other health issues.
Went to Europe last year in countries with more GMO restrictive laws, I could eat everything without needing to read labels, or feel **** for the next 8h.
My Endocrinologist told me to stop eating pasta, bread etc. I asked him , but how Italians , French and others live on such a diet healthily, he said GMO. And he is all for science, just he have huge data base of patiences with health issues, getting glutten intoleranse and other allergies , which used to be very rare and now are very common.

 

[MiW]

View attachment 617998

 

[Polymathic]

Roundup | Allergies | Unsafe for Consumption
Roundup

Concerns about the effects of genetically engineered foods on health have to do with both the crops themselves along with the toxicity of the herbicide Roundup. The EPA currently regulates the allowable concentration of glyphosate in the drinking water, and says that glyphosate is safe for humans in small concentrations. However, with the use of Roundup on the crops, consumers may be ingesting more of the chemical than they realize.

http://web.mit.edu/demoscience/Monsanto/impact.html

Eureka is the only flour which doesn't give me health problems. Eating the normal flour bread gives me respiratory and other health issues.
Went to Europe last year in countries with more GMO restrictive laws, I could eat everything without needing to read labels, or feel **** for the next 8h.
My Endocrinologist told me to stop eating pasta, bread etc. I asked him , but how Italians , French and others live on such a diet healthily, he said GMO. And he is all for science, just he have huge data base of patiences with health issues, getting glutten intoleranse and other allergies , which used to be very rare and now are very common.

I wouldn't jump to GMOs as the culprit. Chances are you were consuming a much more balanced diet while in Europe. Anyway dietary issues are extremely complex are there could be multiple causes for your issues

 

[LazyLion]

 

[LazyLion]

 

[MiW]

I wouldn't jump to GMOs as the culprit. Chances are you were consuming a much more balanced diet while in Europe. Anyway dietary issues are extremely complex are there could be multiple causes for your issues

Its not the GMO I am blaming , its more the pesticides and herbicides, but the 2 are connected. And while on holiday , I was eating all the breads pastries and other 'junk' I could never digest here.

 

[access]

It may be the point but it doesn't seem to be succeeding. It's usually just one or two nutrients. Even then it took decades to develop golden rice. First versions you'd need to take in kilograms per day to achieve the desired intake of beta carotene. It's more acceptable now but only barely. Nobody really wants it though as it doesn't give the desired yields. The failure of GMOs isn't a regulatory one but rather a failure to deliver. It seems we're all just better off eating carrots.

huh? it did succeed, rickets declined.

also,

Carrots are orange because oranges are orange." ... And they grew carrots in the traditional hues of purple, yellow, and white. In the 17th century, a strain of carrot was developed that contained higher amounts of beta carotene -- the first orange carrot