@feld @feld yeah, sure, that's correct. That doesn't mean that introducing non-sterile GMOs into the enviornment isn't flat-out pollution

@alrs @feld

This is a common misconception - that some GMO plant can suddenly take over the whole area or something. This doesn't work this way - no cultivated plant is better adapted to the local biosphere than the local wild plants (we call them "weeds"). This is precisely why farmers need to put a lot of effort into weeding to keep their plants cultivated. Leave a nicely cultivated orchard for a decade, and it will all turn back into wilderness.

@kravietz @alrs @feld That decade timeframe is part of the problem. Look at all the government subsidized commodity farms in the mid-west growing GMO crops. It takes at least 5 years for the soil to recover and have the ability to produce something that’s not corn or soy.

Follow

@middlepath @alrs @feld

What you are talking about is monocultures and they're certainly bad, but they have nothing to do with GMO. If anything, modern GMO crops reduce land usage *and* reduce pesticide usage. In case of Bt brinjal in Bangladesh it was some crazy numbers - like 80% reduction in herbicide usage and 50% increase in harvest.

Β· Β· 1 Β· 0 Β· 1

@kravietz @alrs @feld There is also an extremely important distinction between commodity farming and food farming.

But we’ve probably hit the point in the discussion where no one is going to change anyone’s mind, so it’s a bunch of bloviating ;)

@middlepath @alrs @feld

Please note that I did not disagree with any of your points - it's just that the fact that they're using GMO crops is orthogonal to the fact what they're growing is a monoculture.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon πŸ” privacytools.io

Fast, secure and up-to-date instance. PrivacyTools provides knowledge and tools to protect your privacy against global mass surveillance.

Website: privacytools.io
Matrix Chat: chat.privacytools.io
Support us on OpenCollective, many contributions are tax deductible!