[p2p-research] GM food -> buggy reasoning.

Michel Bauwens michelsub2004 at gmail.com
Sat May 23 10:07:51 CEST 2009


Dear Ryan:

not being an expert, but just read an offline article (sorry, forgot where
.. ) about the serious struggles in Africa around that issue, and how the
U.S. is practicing blackmail to force GM foods on rather unwilling
governments (though that was under bush,might have changed now)

Michel


On 5/22/09, Ryan Lanham <rlanham1963 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> David Tribe in Australia is an academic favorable to GMO and thinks its
> good...but with some reservations.  I think he would offer a good
> non-capitalist contra position to anti-GMO folks, though a small Australian
> firm's representative blogs with him.
>
> http://www.blogger.com/profile/00836804479610764429
>
> I've heard it is a nearly pure good for Africa from development
> economists.  I have heard no downsides and many upsides.  I know that in the
> US scientific community the German and, more generally, the European
> response, is considered "know-nothing" and anti-tech.  But the US green
> community (with which I typically identify) is often against GMO.
>
> With regard to patenting "improvements" that is standard in any technical
> area.  It does not block other improvements to existing stock.  One
> interesting response would be to try to breed the GMO changes in standard
> stocks.  That would take time and be difficult, but for those against
> bio-manipulation in a lab, it would offer some response.  Really it is just
> a crude form of what goes on in the lab.
>
> On a broader scale, genetic manipulation is coming very soon--it's already
> happening in many labs and medical research facilities and GM meat will soon
> be standard in the US and global markets.  I suspect Germany's position will
> not hold for most of the world, but I hope they push to protect existing
> models as much as possible.
>
> Ryan
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 3:11 AM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Dear Herve,
>>
>> thanks for this great contribution, which I'm adding to the body of the
>> blog text on the 25th, and also already copied in Ning,
>>
>> Michel
>>
>> On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 6:25 PM, Hervé Le Crosnier <herve at info.unicaen.fr
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>        Good morning,
>>>
>>>        I'm sorry, but I can't follow the way suggested by Pamela
>>>        Ronald.
>>>
>>>        First of all, we have to understand what really genetic food is.
>>>        the way seed are industrially produced from the 30's of the
>>>        preceeding century is two fold:
>>>        - one to have the only yield in focus : no matter the taste,
>>>          nutrition quality, social quality of plants... If so, nature
>>>          and farmers, from milleniums are doing their best to
>>>          get an equilibrium between yield and nature preservation
>>>          (in all senses : between plants and animals, and between
>>>          men and women living on rural area, with their social
>>>          environment).
>>>        - the other is hold up on reproduction. From hybrids to GMO,
>>>          plants are everyday considered as "property" of the one
>>>          who selected it. No matter if centuries or milleniums
>>>          of peasants have pre-selected the vast majority of
>>>          agricultural plants. This means a yearly toll for peasants
>>>          (and their consequences, as massives suicides of indian
>>>          farmers), and erosion of biodiversity (the "catalog" of
>>>          authorised alimentary plants). With the call to intrants
>>>          to replace nature biodiversity in each one field... and
>>>          many other consequences, especially on the role of women
>>>          in rural communities who for centuries uses this diversity
>>>          for family food and healing... i have no enough place
>>>          to write).
>>>
>>>        Next we have to look at the way ahead for the biotech. First
>>>        they produce buggy GMO, especially those who are
>>>        pest-resistants (more buggy again because they tend to
>>>        use more and more pest in fields).
>>>
>>>        Then they say "we need to stop propagation of these buggy
>>>        plants". So it's GURTs (Genetic Use Restriction Technologies)
>>>        the most known technic be the "Terminator", thanks to "etc
>>>        group" for naming this technology with a popular and
>>>        understandable name. Every year at the CBD, there's tentative to
>>>        uphold the moratorium on theses technologies...
>>>
>>>        In laboratories now is the "biocontainment" : plant are
>>>        genetically engineered to become dual systems : they need
>>>        an adjuvant to realize their maturity, and then can
>>>        change their own genetic trace to be as they were not GMO.
>>>        European Union is pushing studies that way in the
>>>        "transcontainer project".
>>>
>>>        This technologies put the responsability into the hands of the
>>>        farmer, who must add it's chemically produced adjuvant at the
>>>        very good time if they want their plants to be commercialisable.
>>>        No matter what nature and climate variations is.
>>>
>>>        Then will come synthetic biology. Nature will be an industrial
>>>        process, and not only a partner in nourrishing and clothing
>>>        people. This will be the upstart of "sugar capitalism".
>>>
>>>        Any scientist approach which don't take in count the whole story
>>>        is finally an agreement with the hold-up against nature and
>>>        rural communities by a very few big concentrated monopolies,
>>>        acting all along the agricultural chain. And emerging from
>>>        the North biotech giants, these monopolies, with all their
>>>        action on the intellectual property instances (WTO, WHO,
>>>        WIPO,...), are a jiu-jitsu for introduce a new world domination,
>>>        we can call bio-imperialism.
>>>
>>>        There is another very important problem with the buggy reasoning
>>>        of Pamela Ronald : it's the acceptation of the inacceptable.
>>>        If politics, and collective decisions can't help changing the
>>>        way we produce food, so we have to accomodate.
>>>
>>>        This buggy reasoning is also the one of those who think
>>>        that politics and collective decisions are not able to deal
>>>        with the climate change, and reorient our world way of living..
>>>        so they will get to a B plan : geo-engineer the whole earth.
>>>        Not only this is crazy world wide buggy experience, as the
>>>        LOHAFEX shows on the first part of 2009, but it's also a
>>>        one that depossess people of their own power on their own
>>>        individual and collective living. The exact contrary of the
>>>        organic farming experience, which is a fruit of the new
>>>        Communalism of the 70's.
>>>
>>>        Sorry to desagree so radically with this approach, i think
>>>        it will led the movement in such a wrong direction, as for
>>>        the future of farming (always remember this is more than
>>>        half of the world population) and the one of every other
>>>        who have to eat every day, and accomodate global changes.
>>>
>>> Hervé Le Crosnier
>>>
>>>
>>> Michel Bauwens a écrit :
>>> > I am very distrustful of genetic foods, not because it's inherently
>>> > evil, but because I do not trust for-profit companies to have our best
>>> > interest at heart, and in a Monsanto-dominated world, it will be used
>>> to
>>> > destroy not just the farmers, but our health.
>>> >
>>> > But what if GM foods can be combined with organic agriculture, and
>>> > divorced from dangerous private interests, does it become acceptable
>>> then?
>>> >
>>> > Here is a position on the issue:
>>> >
>>> > (the whole article, by Pamela Ronald , is at
>>> >
>>> http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2008/03/16/the_new_organic/
>>> )
>>> >
>>> > "To meet the appetites of the world's population without drastically
>>> > hurting the environment requires a visionary new approach: combining
>>> > genetic engineering and organic farming.
>>> >
>>> > This idea is anathema to many people, especially the advocates who have
>>> > helped build organic farming into a major industry in richer countries.
>>> > As reflected by statements on their websites, it is clear that most
>>> > organic farming trade organizations are deeply, viscerally opposed to
>>> > genetically engineered crops and seeds. Virtually all endorse the
>>> > National Organic Standards Board's recommendation that genetic
>>> > engineering be prohibited in organic production.
>>> >
>>> > But ultimately, this resistance hurts farmers, consumers, and the
>>> > planet. Without the use of genetically engineered seed, the beneficial
>>> > effects of organic farming - a thoughtful, ecologically minded approach
>>> > to growing food - will likely remain small.
>>> >
>>> > Despite tremendous growth in the last 15 years, organic farms still
>>> > produce just a tiny fraction of our food; they account for less than 3
>>> > percent of all US agriculture and even less worldwide. In contrast, in
>>> > the same period, the use of genetically engineered crops has increased
>>> > to the point where they represent 50 to 90 percent of the acreage where
>>> > they are available."
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Working at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University -
>>> > http://www.dpu.ac.th/dpuic/info/Research.html -
>>> > http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
>>> >
>>> > Volunteering at the P2P Foundation:
>>> > http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net -
>>> > http://p2pfoundation.ning.com
>>> >
>>> > Monitor updates at http://del.icio.us/mbauwens
>>> >
>>> > The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
>>> > http://www.shiftn.com/
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > p2presearch mailing list
>>> > p2presearch at listcultures.org
>>> > http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Working at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University -
>> http://www.dpu.ac.th/dpuic/info/Research.html -
>> http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
>>
>> Volunteering at the P2P Foundation:
>> http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net -
>> http://p2pfoundation.ning.com
>>
>> Monitor updates at http://del.icio.us/mbauwens
>>
>> The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
>> http://www.shiftn.com/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> p2presearch mailing list
>> p2presearch at listcultures.org
>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>
>>
>


-- 
Working at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University -
http://www.dpu.ac.th/dpuic/info/Research.html -
http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI

Volunteering at the P2P Foundation:
http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net -
http://p2pfoundation.ning.com

Monitor updates at http://del.icio.us/mbauwens

The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
http://www.shiftn.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20090523/ef5a2997/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the p2presearch mailing list