Re: GM

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Newsgroup ]

Posted by Papa Samaritan on June 21, 2000 at 02:38:51:

In Reply to: Re: GM posted by Sally Whind on February 24, 19100 at 11:02:06:

Im sorry but I would have to dissagree with you, as a biology student I can say that Chemicals have no part of this whole debate... say the exaple used earlier about food growing with little need of water, th way this would be achived would be by changing the plants DNA so that it doesnt require so much water mabye by inserting the gene of a cactus or so forth. the reason the patent would be put on these seedd Is so that if you want a seed that requires less water you HAVE to pay company X for it.

: What I mean by needed is the need for the treatments for that particuliarly patented (excuse my spelling) GM food. With many, many new strains of plant species, ie GM foods, the farmer must aquire the "whole package." One can not just plant these strains without using the "ingredients" that come with it. Do you understand what I am saying? ;] Everything is patented. The farmer must grow the patened GM variety and must use the patented pesticides or chemical treatments, or whatever the company choose to go with it. The farmer makes a pact with that company, say Monsanto, and must by law use the "whole package." He/she can not just grow the food with his/her methods.

: : :what do you mean by needed? what you do with a GM, e.g. treat it w/ chem.s is a different issue

: : There are chemical treatments needed for most GM foods and farming thereof.

: : : : who said anything about chemicals?

: : : : : Have you ever thought that foods grow in the regions they are supposed to grow? I would love to grow pineapples here in Pennsylvania, but I can't and would hope that no one would ever plant them here. Third world countries definitly do not need U.S. chemicals to further disrupt their health. What they might need is different cultivation techniques.

: : : : : : Your sentiments are noble, but how realistic is it to think we can turn back the clock and, say, tell a third world farmer that he/she should abandon farming a GM fruit that grows w/ very little water/resources (that he/she otherwise wouldn't be able to produce)? b : As a chef and a human being living on this vast and resourcefull Earth, my responsibility is to assure myself, my family and my customers the purity and nutrition of the food they eat. GM foods might at this point be safe, but we don't know. Long term testing can not be done for many, many years. I personally belive in not messing with Nature. We all love food and the richness it brings to our lives. Why try to synthetically make it better? Why keep concentrating on large-scale, chemical using farms? As a chef, I know that my love for the food that I cook is felt and tasted by the person who eats it. I also know that smaller, organic farms, for the most part, offer better tasting, more variety and superior quality of the food. This has a large part on the love that is shared between the farmer and his/her food. Sure, consistency and quality of our food is important and vital to chefs. However, Nature is a powerful entity and will hurt any farmer's foods. Please consider the impact that GM foods have on the Earth that we need to survive, the impact that could be felt by our children or even us in 20 years, and just the goodness that Nature already provides for us.

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup




[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Newsgroup ]

Main Menu | Recipesearch | Newsgroups | Rumbles & Murmurs | Culinary Careers
QuickMeals | Secret Ingredients | Help Wanteds | Archives | Feedback

Copyright © 1998 StarChefs. All rights reserved.