Biotechnology (Round 2!)

So, last week we checked out many of the different crops, both cash and food, which were genetically modified, and I think everybody will agree with me when I say it's a very positive direction for science to be going.

Some of the many benefits include:
- Genetically resistant plants; resistant to diseases, insects, weeds, and critters that could normally ruin a harvest.
- Reduced use of pesticides; people won't have to worry as much about all of the many cancers and sicknesses which some pesticides could potentially cause.
- More nutrition from everyday items, such as the enhanced beta-carotene in golden rice which the body uses for Vitamin A. Nutritional items that some people normally would miss out on would then be healthier from there on out without having to drastically change their diet.
- Some GM crops are designed to grow in no-till farming conditions, which saves the environment in fossil fuels, ground nutrients, and less runoff of soil and fertilizers.

The major cons I've seen so far are:
- People may be allergic to a certain product that has been added into a crop, but with them not knowing it's there they could be in trouble from eating these.
- If a genetically modified strand of crop was accidentally mixed with an original crop field, the original crop could be lost.

Opposition still stands, but will it forever? Biotechnology is creating major benefits to the inhabitants of our earth mother and is preventing many disasters from happening (imagine: the Irish Potato famine being completely erased from history because of earlier discoveries).
-

Biotechnology

"Tobacco plants growing in a hospital laboratory in London, genetically modified to include an algae gene, are said to provide an effective anti-HIV drug" (http://spicycauldron.com/2007/04/30/the-gm-tobacco-that-could-save-lives/).

With new technologies progressing rapidly, it's no surprise that something previously known to kill so many has been mutated into a tool to help people with HIV. By a gene placed into the DNA of the plant, a protein is created, even though the plant has no use for it specifically.

Now, currently, it seems as though this sort of plant is only being produced in a very few areas because the creation is still relatively new (the oldest news article I've found has been dated for 2005). There is no large-scale production line of these tobacco plants, as far as I know, but there are farms around the world, such as in Kent, but the project has not yet been perfected. There are huge plans in the future, however: "Once successful, each plant will be capable of providing 20 doses of an anti-HIV drug, which is enough to protect a woman from infection for up to three months" (http://www.ecofriend.org/entry/gm-tobacco-production-in-kent-could-provide-anti-hiv-drug-to-millions/).

It's easy to point out the positive effects this new method for cheap medicine will have, but there are also disadvantages. Such as with all GM plants, there is a chance that they could "infect," so to speak, the natural population of the plants, and cause them to be extinct. Also, more specifically to this crop, some may use the new medicine expecting 100% results 100% of the time, and this may not be true, causing HIV to continue to spread regardless.

Food Safety Blog

In my opinion, food safety is the consumer's responsibility. If the consumer is concerned with what he or she is eating, he or she better look into where that comes from. Sure, the companies should be somewhat concerned about it, but in the case that they'll loose business if they aren't.

A lot of people, I've noticed, try to shift responsibilities onto other people, but really, people should start stepping up. When something goes wrong, people don't want to have blame on themselves so they look for the easiest excuse, which often starts with, "It wasn't my fault-." If something is going to affect somebody, that somebody should be concerned about what it is that's affecting them and take the initiative to step up and take responsibility.

I may have veered from the topic a little bit, but essentially, the fact can be applied to Food Security as well, I'm sure.

The Green Revolution

Is new technology necessary to increase food production?

That's a relatively difficult thought to ponder. I mean, back in the day, before any of our times, people provided food for themselves and as their cultures grew, they were able to continue producing more food because their workforce grew as well. So then that comes to another road block, if we were all to produce food for ourselves, would it increase food production?

I don't believe that at the time we're in it is possible to increase food production in any way other than new technology. Imagine a person growing up with a big ol' 50 caliber sniper rifle and shooting it all their life, and then later in life having that rifle taken away and they are given a slingshot instead. Sure, they could still get their self food with this new(well, old) tool, but since it wasn't the way they grew up, it would be much more difficult to make the change.