Comments on: What would ‘Malthusian years’ bring?

By: chris

chris — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 03:24:10 +0000

The problems with genetic modification of the food supply are related to three facts:
1. That genes express multiple traits.
2. These traits aren’t even close to being understood in a comprehensive framework.
3. The viruses that are used to insert the DNA can have unforeseen consequences.
Ask any geneticist what they call 95% of all DNA they come across in their daily functions: Junk DNA. This “Junk” has evidently just been hanging around not doing much. This “filler” is just what nature puts around it’s creamy center of DNA that actually does anything they say. I say it’s function is as yet unknown.

They just realized some of this “Junk” was actually the source of the Epigenetic behavior that had been observed since 1942, but whose mechanism was unknown. This portion of the “Junk” was shown to directly effect the expression of traits of later generations based on the conditions of the parents prior to conception. So people who were exposed to pesticides could condemn their family to four generations of cancer. Greed and unforeseen consequences can be poor mix for the public at large.

By: Sergey

Sergey — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 17:25:49 +0000

“Malthusian years” are not about food supply.
It is all about social development and population growth.
The painful truth is, that in developing countries population growth is only checked by food supply. As soon as food production drops hanger comes. But extra food immediately leads to population hike to unsustainable level. Most Africans communities cannot sustain current population with current development level. But next development level only comes with more stable societies.

Sending food to Africa will change result in more starvation, we must finance nation building.

By: Anon

Anon — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 02:06:55 +0000

I am afraid your argument does not add up. Were these massive stockpiles sufficient to combat the food crisis, there would be no starvation in Africa.

But there is. There is not enough food, even with all the cheap stuff from Europe. And according to the law of demand and supply, that means there is plenty of demand for African farmers to sell their own food, were they capable of meeting that demand.

So what is the solution? Sell the stockpiles at a realistic price which Africans can’t afford? Give all the food away for free, and remove the very incentive for producing stockpiles in the first place? Genocide or population control, when the population refuses to control their own growth?

My argument is that the food problem is going to get much worse in the future, for a variety of reasons. Global warming is a possibile factor. Fuel crisis and population growth are a guarantee.

And it is absolutely true that GM companies only look out for their own profits and interests. But that in itself does not have any relevence to a possible food crisis, or the fact that GM crops may be the only practical solution.

By: Peter H

Peter H — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 16:41:33 +0000

Anon, there are already “stock piles” of butter, milk, sugar, tomatoes and a welter of other products being brought by the EU by over-producing farmers, who over-produce certain products in the knowledge it will be brought with tax-payer funds. Then there are yet other farmers being paid by the same organisation NOT to produce anything!
Some of these over-produced products ends up in “emerging markets” such as can be found in Africa (where most of your starving people are to be found) which knocks their own farmers into oblivion as they can’t compete with subsidised products that are dumped on them. These products are sold at uncompetitive prices and aren’t used to feed starving people at all, they simply undermine the farmers who should be being encouraged, not undermined.
The suggestion that unfortunate starving people in the third-world can only be saved by GM just doesn’t stack up. GM food producers want to control the markets for their own benefit, not anyone elses.

By: Anon

Anon — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 13:49:37 +0000

Perhaps, Peter.

But a new bug can be fought, assuming the possibility even arises. Humans are good at wiping things out. And even if we can’t, quarantine can still manage the problem.

But if people are starving, and we don’t have enough food to feed them, then they will starve. Simple as that.

So until we make the flesh-eating corn which will wipe out mankind in the early summer of 2037, I would say GM crops and cattle are the lesser of two evils.

By: Peter H

Peter H — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 09:23:22 +0000

In the spirit of creating future scenarios to scare the worlds citizens to meekly accept the corporate food company products…
The year is 2034 and a high-rise multi-storey grazing building hums with the sound of cattle happily fattening themselves on bio-tech feed grown completely within the confines of the new farm model which only takes up a quarter of an acre footprint. There are 2,000 identical cloned cattle who grow predictably and at the end of their growth-cycle line up for the transport to the local abbatoir.
The “farm” manager notices something not seen for over twenty years, one of the cows appears to be lethargic and is having trouble walking. He scans the cow and makes a notes in his log of the product identity number and makes a call to the company to send out a technician for an investigation. The next day the technician arrives, but by this time all the cows are having trouble walking and seem lethargic.
The technician hasn’t seen anything like this before and calls in his supervisor on an emergency call out. By now there is a swarm of insects not seen since the successful elimination of parasites back in 2022. These insects seem to be a more aggressive form of their predecessors, and in reality have mutated into a “super parasite” impervious to the genetic enhancements which very nearly wiped out their ancestors.
The next day the entire herd is dead, and the epidemic is spreading like wild-fire throughout all the neighboring farms as they also farm identical cloned animals whose superior resistance isn’t sufficient to protect them from the newly mutated parasites. Humanity face doom… again.

By: Satan

Satan — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 04:06:50 +0000

How about GM foods that ARE birth control?

By: Anon

Anon — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 01:47:28 +0000

The future is already here. The starvation we see now will increase, and will be much worse by next decade.

Global warming, oil prices and population growth are inevitable. They will only make the current food crisis worse.

Nothing we do to stop global warming will prevent the effects of the next few decades, if they happen at all. And population control, while it is easy to rant about, is simply not a workable solution that we will be able to bring about.

So that leaves a simple choice:

Use GM crops and try to get a solution ready for when the food crisis finally hits it’s peak, or

Forget GM crops. Those with food will survive, at the expense of those who live in the third world. And you yet to watch as millions die on the news during 2010-20.

Pick a future. Which one is the least palatable?

And for those who decry the evils of GM crops? I would say that GM crops are no different to nuclear energy or pollution.

It is easy to object, when you have the luxury to do so. But you will be surprised what humans can be ready to accept, once it becomes a necessity.

By: Victor

Victor — Sun, 19 Jul 2009 18:10:08 +0000

These folks have blinders on. We need genetic crops to survive Global Warming? It’s gonna dry up regions.

Let’s just create a fictional situation to scare everyone into accepting genetically manipulated food. Corn is a great example. They created a corn that got a better yield to acre ratio. The problem was it was not eatable. So they soak it in lye to soften the skin so you can eat it. Well guess what, they made more corn than they can sell. So besides getting the government to pay them not to grow it they made corn syrup and got every food company to put corn syrup in everything they make. Result…great profits and an epedimic of diabetes.

The solution is new advancements in desalination. Why not take salt out of the water to have an abundance of water to grow whatever we want. People don’t need to drink water, we got soda for that, it helps sell the corn syrup.

A desalination plant to treat ocean water to irrigate wheat fields that in turn feed huge chicken farms and to make bread products is not a viable option. We need to make food better than God did.

Oh I forgot there are a bunch of scientists that want government money to keep doing research to make a living. This is not about the future, it is about money. Crops will be in trouble starting 2016 and 2017? That will give them funding for another 10 years. Nice!!!

By: Stewee Griffin

Stewee Griffin — Sun, 19 Jul 2009 17:57:38 +0000

Earth, as an organism, has an ultimate way to resolve the human crisis: total (or partial) elimination. Before any procurers of genetically modified plants, biodegradable products, green energy and so on come up with an ultimate solution, the real cure is already being brewed,–thanks to an overgrowing population of man,– by Mother Earth. H1N1 is one form of it, which, with the help of mother nature, will significantly mutate in the nearest future yielding yet another former of a deadly virus that will effectively wipe out half of the planet’s population. Problem solved. Keep in mind, this is just one meager form of species control on our planet.
To avoid this, we must implement proper education in the countries of 3rd and 2nd worlds that are the source of overpopulation, so that the next generations will exercise some sort of birth control aside from AK-47 as somebody suggested. Working on solutions to feed the overcrowding planet will only speed up our extinction through diseases or man-induced natural disasters.