Still plenty of unharvested crop in some areas

[charliep]

Would be cautious in trying to relate biotech and feeding the world to date. The crops that have used biotech has mainly been industrial crops used in the developed world as livestock feed (corn/soybean meal) and recently biofuels. Increasing middle class/increasing meat consumption has impacted in some parts of the developing world are benefiting somewhat as they improve income/diets.

Vegetable oil is perhaps a different story given this is one of the first places the developing world is spending money to increase calorie intake. That brings in palm oil however. A general comment is the growth is world vegetable oil consumption has been what could best be described as astounding.

Third world biotech has been more through things like golden rice, Bt cotton, etc.

[parsley]

If you believe that genetic modification of grain will feed the starving masses, you are only fooling yourself.

'Starving Third World I' from this past decade will be refilmed, in real time, in 2029, as 'Starving Third World III'

Surely you will acknowledge that starvation is not a food production problem; rather it is a food distribution problem; hence, a political problem.

The African continent planting alone, could feed the world for many moons.

Don''t try and sell us the starving people crap. It taints your future argument as suspect. Pars

[parsley]

"Epoxidized" vegetable oils charlie p, form the base of a lot of industrial products; hence the demand increase by %. An industrialized nation basic ingredient.

<p></p>
<p class="EC_style8ptBK"><strong>[URL="http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=Epoxidized vegetable oils &btnG=Google Search&meta=&aq=null&oq="](Not all veggie oil is swallowed)[/URL]</strong></p>

[charliep]

Agree 100 %. Bio plastics, biofuels (including additives and fuel for environmentally sensitive areas), newspaper ink, etc, etc.

Will also disagree that issue is not a food production problem in third world.

I highlight the expression - Give a person a fish and they are full for day. Teach a person how to fish and they are full for lifetime.

The needs of third world agriculture are capital, resources and knowledge first. Then comes the application of technology. That brings the discussion back to the thread topic and how much/little biotech should be used in growing food. Biotech (however is defined) to date has been used in industrial crops or feed converted to meat.

[parsley]

Teach a man to fish?

Ethiopians, for centuries knew more about growing crops and about cooking varieties of crops than even today, we can begin to fathom. Asia, too. Somalians know how to grow food, charliep, know how to fish!

The problem is they get butchered by machettes when they are holding the fishing rod. That is what I mean by a political problem

If food supply was the main reason for genetic modification, then in a country like India where there are truly some hungry children, ...the priority would be on the modification staple FOOD crops. Cereals for example, that would feed the masses.

It isn't. In fact, Monsanto's priority in India is to mofify the genes of cotton and brinjal. Yes, cotton. And brinjal! Brinjal or eggplant as we call it, is NOT a staple of (Like fran eating beets. LOL)

If you argued that genetic modification should go forward because cheap cotton from India in voluminous quantities will benefit me as a mutual fund shareholder, I agree.

Or argue that the economic activity from growing the cotton and resulting employment in India will trickle down slowly but surely and benefit all, compared to what they now have. I agree.

Promoting the noble benefits of modifying traits in genes that poor people cannot afford, is not logical, nor is introducing them to third world agriculture under the guise of teaching the locals how to read gps.

[parsley]

Ianben

You asked "why".

The point is you chose not to take the H1N1. I did. Ironic, isn't it?

We each had our own reasons for making the choice we did.

The reason(s), is not important to anyone except ourselves.

As it should be.

I want the same choice with my food.

[ianben]

An interesting program just shown on TV here. Do not know if the link will work in Canada

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00pdjmk/Horizon_20092010_How_Many_People_Can_Live_on_Plane t_Earth/

[bduke]

ianben.... Your link accessed the BBC ... but a
message says "BBC iPlayer TV programmes are
available to play in UK only".

Could you summarize the message from this
program?

About 3 or 4 years ago "World Population" was
discussed at the World Economic Forum in Davos.

The message was that our Globe is basically
overpopulated above 4 1/2 billion people.

I think this was based upon factors such as
pollution, food availability and security, natural
resources, cultural harmony etc..... but I wasn't
their. This info is was passed on to me.

I am curious about the message being
communicated on the program you suggested we
access.

Thank you.... Bill

[charliep]

Always interesting to deal with someone who only views the world as black and white when there are many shades of grey. I highlight the foodnavigator article on potatoes developed by mutagenics.

What would a mutagenic wheat variety mean that had drought tolerance to Africa? The reality is the cost benefit and from there risk assessment means this type of research will not occur. Big boys look at poor payback and high risk. Others - not enough resouces to even consider playing in this game.

But maybe the answer is to work with plant breeders in the third world to develop breeding technology that fits their needs.

[charliep]

ianben

Are there herbicide tolerant crops in the UK/Europe. Clearfield crops are developed in Canada through mutagenssis - manipulating gene structure through things like radiation, sometimes bacteria (getting into science I am not too familiar with). The main idea is not new genetic material is introduced but rather genes can be reorganized or manipulated within a plant species type.