[p2p-research] controversy: GM foods and organic agriculture
Hervé Le Crosnier
herve at info.unicaen.fr
Mon May 25 15:35:28 CEST 2009
Ryan Lanham a écrit :
> I agree with your distinction, Michel. GMO is not bad. It is the
> corporate system that markets it that appears evil.
>
> 200,000 people go blind in Africa each year from Vitamin A deficiency.
> Almost 3000 die each DAY from hunger. I would prefer a system that
> redresses these ills, and that also builds a post-colonial economic
> system that takes people out of dependent poverty and the pitiful state
> of sending fruits and vegetables north for cheap table goods while
> suffering themselves.
>
> If GMO can do that, I am for it. I also am slightly suspect that the
> anti-GMO crowd is really pro keep Africa and Asia down, crowd.
>
Hello Ryan,
I am very sorry you answer this way to a list of references
that i suppose you don't take time to read in between.
So if you prefer believing than trying to understand,
i will shut my mouth.
Kevin Carson, in another post hit the real problem of
agricultural techniques.
Roberto Verzola also...
Suman Sahai (India) explain how GM crops, who go with pest,
are destructive of village life. Especially because what
the industrial farmer call "bad seeds" is also the basic income
for family life, for healing and feeding poultry. After
harvesting, women go into the field to this activity.
Is India in Asia ?
But I'm alway be happy to have evidences of the success of
GM crops (in fact there's no one GM crops producing
Vitamine A in the fields... it's pie-in-the-sky projects,
but i you prefer to believe marketing information than
reality...)
Remember also that a great majority of farmers even don't have
access to animal traction in their fields... let's talk about
GM crops as a way to save for hunger.....
Give them hope, not opium, even GM opium.
Hervé Le Crosnier. Stop talking now if it didn't help to have
more than two lines of this sort when trying to give
real information.
> Ryan
>
> On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 11:58 PM, Michel Bauwens
> <michelsub2004 at gmail.com <mailto:michelsub2004 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi Herve,
>
> Thanks for that, but don't forget that what is obvious for you, may
> not be for Ryan, so these things still need to be argued.
>
> However, I just realized that neither you nor Roberto really
> answered my argument, which is different from Ryan's.
>
> My point is: would it be different, if GMO where part of an open
> commons, not part of corporate profitmaking. So if we assume open
> and participative science, not under the control of privatizing
> companies, would that make GMO different?
>
> Imagine for a moment Monsanto was not there, and GMO investigations
> are practiced by farmer-scientists ... does that change anything?
>
> Michel
>
> On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 8:37 AM, Hervé Le Crosnier
> <herve at info.unicaen.fr <mailto:herve at info.unicaen.fr>> wrote:
>
>
>
> Ryan Lanham a écrit :
> > Professor,
> >
> > Care to comment? I've suggest GMO is a good thing for
> Africa--a line
> > I've been told many times by development economists. Maybe
> you could
> > give some pointers to "independent" studies. Is there an
> honest middle
> > party? How would one know an honest middle party?
> >
>
> Dear Ray,
>
> You can't say things like this in a list devoted to
> thinking the
> process of changing society with a common-based approach.
>
> Let me say in three points :
>
> 1 - GMO and Africa
> -------------------
>
> Have a look at the own Monsanto site to hear about
> a buggy OGM created in the States, and whoput South African
> Farmers on their knees.
>
> White Maize in South Africa
> http://www.monsanto.com/monsanto_today/for_the_record/south_africa_gm_corn.asp
>
> They have to apologize after a vast movement of framers.
>
> Michel recently send and interview about massive farmers
> suicide in India.
>
> Where do people get data to say GMO is good for Africa.
> I will be very please to read such an article, if based on
> data, not "pie-in-the-sky" for "future" GMO, that will
> certainly never exists.
>
> Bayer, an european chimist is near to lauch the modified rice
> LL62, which is built to resist the glufosinate weed killer.
> Problem : this pesticide is to be ride off europe, considered
> as too dangerous. But rice market is Asia, isn't it. And
> so will it be of glufosinate market. (i only got french
> reference for this)
>
> Please send us datas and articles to explain how one can
> develop
> a country with such a bio-imperialism over their heads.
>
> The IAASDT Group, a council of worldwide scientists, as
> important for future of food production as the GIEC was for
> asserting the global change, issued a real worldwide study
> on april 2008. You can have an idea with the BBC article :
>
> Global food system 'must change'
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7347239.stm
>
> And the full report
> http://www.agassessment.org/
>
> The future of food production, if we want everyone to have
> food, is aimed at small farmers... the contrary of
> the gmo-pesticides stanza... They are scientist, they
> studied real situation, and they collectively make
> proposals.
>
>
> 2 - What does it mean to ask for "independant" studies
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> Most studies that really get data against GMO are
> independant.
> They are not paid by agro-giants.
>
> When Ignacio Chapela, a scientist from Berkeley working
> with communauties in Oaxaca find existance of maize-GMO
> in the
> very cradle of maize, in Mexico, he wonders. No indian
> people never use GMO... but pollinisation is very hard to
> predict.
>
> Do you think it's university was proud of this independant
> research and findings published in the most influencials
> scientific journals ? No they just put him apart, because
> Monsanto was one of the funding partner of the agro-bio
> university center.
> The Sad Saga of Ignacio Chapela
> http://www.theava.com/04/0218-chapela.html
>
> Where is independance in research when whole monopolistic
> industries take hands on university ?
>
> 3 - the "middle party"
> -----------------------
>
> Why have we to look for a "middle party" ? Is it science ?
> No it's political negociation. Sometimes we need to
> negociate.
> But when it comes to science, we need assesment.
>
> Let's have a look at the diverses strategies used by the
> tobacco industry to say that passive smoking don't matter,
> even if scientific facts say it really.
>
> How the tobacco industry responded to an influential study of
> the health
> effects of secondhand smoke
> http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/325/7377/1413
>
> It's in the leader British Medical Journal. Not an opinion,
> a research.
>
> Let's have a look at strategies used by petrol monopolies
> to negate global change only to go on with their profits.
>
> Scientists' Report Documents ExxonMobil’s Tobacco-like
> Disinformation
> Campaign on Global Warming Science
> http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/ExxonMobil-GlobalWarming-tobacco.html
>
> And we really can go on (for example with absestos, with the
> new campaign from the platic industry against home bags,..)
>
> The GMO case will be based on the same process :
> - a "scientist" (even not) say there's controversy. Don't
> mind
> the data, medias love controversies.
> - if there's controversies, as the one about organic food
> that
> began this thread, so we're not sure, then let's go the one
> that have the power to put us in front of their wills.
>
> Because, today, there are no democratic debate, neither about
> usefullness, neither about dangerosity of GMO. The ones who
> think they can dominate the world through domination of food
> are putting their experimental buggy GMO on the fields !!!
>
> These are facts, reflexions based on studies of documents.
> I have a lot more, and some in french too... It's not
> opinion, even if I am not a biological scientist.
> I'm a computer scientist, and trained with epistemology. So
> i can use my reasonning schemes in other domains... if I take
> the time to read, to inform, to be open for surprise.
>
> But with GMO, i was not surprized. I found a new
> bio-imperialism playing with life on earth for their
> miserable
> profits.
>
> We have to take time to read, compare, understand... and
> explain
> what we have found, read, understand. Sometimes simpler than
> the complex reports and articles we read. Because the future
> on earth is at stake.
>
> Hervé Le Crosnier
>
> PS : sorry for my english writing. That's not my mother tongue,
> and it's a lot longer to think and write in english. Keep this
> in mind... it's not far away from the debate on the use of this
> list. I can't read just a glance and send back to the minute
> a two sentences reflexion. I always need to be sure I really
> understand, and take time to content information.
> That's real list governance, and collective individualism.
> And understanding the multicultural approach is also good for this.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> p2presearch mailing list
> p2presearch at listcultures.org <mailto: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/
>
>
More information about the p2presearch
mailing list