Germany bans Monsanto's GM maize

[Tender Branson]

Germany is to ban the cultivation of genetically modified (GM) maize - the only GM crop widely grown in Europe.

The decision, announced on Tuesday by German Agriculture Minister Ilse Aigner, is a blow to the US biotech firm Monsanto, which markets the maize.

Monsanto's variety, called MON 810, is resistant to the corn borer, a moth larva which eats the stem.

MON 810 is controversial in the EU. Several countries have banned it, defying the European Commission.

Ms Aigner, a member of the conservative Bavaria-based Christian Social Union (CSU), said she had concluded that "there is a justifiable reason to believe that... MON 810 presents a danger to the environment".

The variety has been allowed in Germany since 2005. Ms Aigner said the decision to ban it now, based on new data, was purely scientific, not political. She also said it was a specific case, and not a fundamental decision against all GM crops.

In March EU governments resisted European Commission pressure to get bans on MON 810 lifted. The commission wanted Austria and Hungary to allow cultivation of MON 810. The variety is also banned in France and Greece.

The UK was among a handful of countries that supported the commission's position, the AFP news agency reports.

Germany was planning to sow MON 810 on just 3,600 hectares (8,892 acres) for this summer's harvest, mostly in its eastern states.

Opponents of GM crops say more scientific data is needed, arguing that their long-term genetic impact on humans and wildlife could be harmful.

The biotech industry says the crops are as safe as traditional varieties, and that they would provide plentiful, cheaper food.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7998181.stm

[dead0man]

Opponents of GM crops say more scientific data is needed, arguing that their long-term genetic impact on humans and wildlife could be harmful.

The biotech industry says the crops are as safe as traditional varieties, and that they would provide plentiful, cheaper food.

Yeah, screw cheap food!  Let the poor starve like they always have.  What, there is no science to back up the dangers of genetically modified food?  Then lets say we need more testing, nobody could have a problem with that!  If they do they can easily be ignored as they are obviously in the pocket of Monsanto and don't care about the bunnies and the children.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Yeah, let's watch the results on North-Americans before eating this. That's cool, we've a large scale experiment on more than 300 millions people, why hurrying ourselves to get it...?? That's said, hey, Europeans didn't force North-America to go in this even not knowing the consequences on long term.

Let the poor starve like they always have.

Actually, several surveys shew that we can make accessible food for starving countries without GM methods, but of course the surveys don't come from Monsanto.

UN make a survey that shew that if we decided it, it could be possible to feed 9 or 12 billions (I no more remember which number it is but it's one of both) of people with organic food. So if we can do that in theory only with organic food, in practice, we can at least improve food industry, and avoid GM and continue to study it...

[dead0man]

Let the poor starve like they always have.

Actually, several surveys shew that we can make accessible food for starving countries without GM methods, but of course the surveys don't come from Monsanto.

Which is why I said "cheap".  We've always been able to feed the world, lack of food is not why people starve.  Starvation has almost always been caused by sh**tty govts.  Poor people in the west need to eat too though, they should have the option of cheaper food if we can make it cheaper for them.  Nobody is forcing you (or them) to buy GM food.  Feel free to continue looking for the "bad things" too...of course.  Hell, look harder.



(And you are aware that almost all the food we eat has been genetically modified.  Cows didn't look like that before they were domesticated.  We altered their genes.  This is not part of my argument.)

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Let the poor starve like they always have.

Actually, several surveys shew that we can make accessible food for starving countries without GM methods, but of course the surveys don't come from Monsanto.

Which is why I said "cheap".  We've always been able to feed the world, lack of food is not why people starve.  Starvation has almost always been caused by sh**tty govts.  Poor people in the west need to eat too though, they should have the option of cheaper food if we can make it cheaper for them.  Nobody is forcing you (or them) to buy GM food.  Feel free to continue looking for the "bad things" too...of course.  Hell, look harder.



(And you are aware that almost all the food we eat has been genetically modified.  Cows didn't look like that before they were domesticated.  We altered their genes.  This is not part of my argument.)

First I'm favorable to continue studies on GMOs, I'm not a fanatic against this, but well, if we can take other ways given we're not sure of that one, why taking that one?? Let's focus on studying, and let's try it if we think the benefit is higher than the risk.

Of course, everyone buys what the hell he wants as food, but that's not the problem with GMOs. The problem is that the culture in open field make that their pollens fly by winds, bees, others, and go to contaminate the cultures without GMOs. For example, I wonder of the relevance on the long term of France's interdiction when Spain allows this on our south border. Same thing for Mexican corn with US.

Then, I agree with the fact that we have already modified genes of animals and plants because of all crossings we made for thousands of years now. But, you might know the argument of the opponents concerning this, they say that that's the first time we cross genes of plants with genes of animals, they say we break a strong barrier here.

Personally the hell I don't know the relevance of this, I just think we should continue to study it with all cautions we can take for avoiding contaminations because it seems it is possible with strong cautions, even in open fields, and then use it when we think benefit is higher than risk.

[minionofmidas]

There aren't any GM projects aimed at making food cheaper, dead0man.

Nor is there any reason (stupid scare stories from years ago aside) to believe it directly dangerous for humans.

[Verily]

There aren't any GM projects aimed at making food cheaper, dead0man.

Disease-resistant crops would presumably produce more, which would result in greater supply, which would indeed make it cheaper.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Certainly true. The very notion that a minor change in the genetics of something we eat could be dangerous is frankly absurd from a scientific viewpoint and should not even be taken seriously. Anyone who thinks otherwise has no understanding whatsoever of biology (or a vested interest in thinking otherwise).

[minionofmidas]

There aren't any GM projects aimed at making food cheaper, dead0man.

Disease-resistant crops would presumably produce more, which would result in greater supply, which would indeed make it cheaper.

If they weren't proprietary, this would be theoretically true.

[Verily]

There aren't any GM projects aimed at making food cheaper, dead0man.

Disease-resistant crops would presumably produce more, which would result in greater supply, which would indeed make it cheaper.

If they weren't proprietary, this would be theoretically true.

In the long term, it would be true. But of course widespread adoption would/will not come overnight. Partially due to propriety, yes.

[minionofmidas]

I just noticed that the BBC article doesn't reference the studies the decision was based on at all.

[dead0man]

There aren't any GM projects aimed at making food cheaper, dead0man.

Nor is there any reason (stupid scare stories from years ago aside) to believe it directly dangerous for humans.

Anything done to increase yield per acre (or whatever) makes food cheaper.  If Monsanto makes their corn bigger and less likely to be eaten by bugs, they are going to get a lot more corn per area planted.  Monsanto is going to make more money because they can sell their seed at a higher price, and the farmer will gladly pay that if he knows it's going to result in the farmer getting a lot more corn than he usually does.  If a lot of farmers make the change, there will be TONS of more corn on the market.  That makes corn cheaper.  That makes your Fruit Loops cheaper.  That means more poor people can get more food/have more money to spend on other things.

I agree with you that Monsanto doesn't do this to make corn cheaper, they do it to make money.  The side benifit is cheaper corn though.  Henry Ford didn't use the assembly line to make cars cheaper to sell, he did it because it made the cars cheaper to make.

[Mint]

I'm very pro GM crops. However, considering what Monsanto pulled before with stuff like Posilac (actually, still is pulling here) I'm sort of torn. If any company deserves this level of distrust and hostility it's them.

[dead0man]

Very true.

[Earth]

Nobody is forcing you (or them) to buy GM food. 

Actually, we're very rarely told what additive, or ingredient is GM, here in the states.

Pertaining to the thread; Good for Germany.  Fúck Monsanto to hell.

[Sbane]

Nobody is forcing you (or them) to buy GM food. 

Actually, we're very rarely told what additive, or ingredient is GM, here in the states.

Pertaining to the thread; Good for Germany.  Fúck Monsanto to hell.

What's so bad about GM food?

[Verily]

Nobody is forcing you (or them) to buy GM food. 

Actually, we're very rarely told what additive, or ingredient is GM, here in the states.

There's no reason to. Not only is there no evidence for there being any danger, it is in fact biologically impossible for there to be any danger. We're not talking about weird hormones or pesticides here. Demanding information about whether something is GM or not is just plain ignorant. There's no kinder way to put it.

[Earth]

Nobody is forcing you (or them) to buy GM food.

Actually, we're very rarely told what additive, or ingredient is GM, here in the states.

Pertaining to the thread; Good for Germany.  Fúck Monsanto to hell.

What's so bad about GM food?

In and of itself, possibly nothing, but forgive me for not being trusting. My main problem is Monsanto itself, and their business practices; outrageous lawsuits, and the creation of "terminator seeds". It disgusts me.

Nobody is forcing you (or them) to buy GM food.

Actually, we're very rarely told what additive, or ingredient is GM, here in the states.

There's no reason to. Not only is there no evidence for there being any danger, it is in fact biologically impossible for there to be any danger. We're not talking about weird hormones or pesticides here. Demanding information about whether something is GM or not is just plain ignorant. There's no kinder way to put it.

Regardless of whether or not GM foods are safe or unsafe, that they are GM should be disclosed, just like the rest of foods labeled organic or "conventional". People should know exactly what they're eating, and make their decisions knowingly. The idiocy is wanting to keep people in the dark.

[Sbane]

Nobody is forcing you (or them) to buy GM food.

Actually, we're very rarely told what additive, or ingredient is GM, here in the states.

Pertaining to the thread; Good for Germany.  Fúck Monsanto to hell.

What's so bad about GM food?

In and of itself, possibly nothing, but forgive me for not being trusting. My main problem is Monsanto itself, and their business practices; outrageous lawsuits, and the creation of "terminator seeds". It disgusts me.

The corporation isn't something to be admired but I don't see any problems with the food itself. These are just changes in the nucleic acid sequence which cause changed protein expression. All these proteins are broken down in your stomach anyways so I don't see the problem here. In the end they are just Amino Acids.

[Earth]

While I wouldn't knowingly chow down on GM foods, I'm almost certain I eat it regularly. The food's pretty secondary to Monsanto itself in my mind.

[Sbane]

While I wouldn't knowingly chow down on GM foods, I'm almost certain I eat it regularly. The food's pretty secondary to Monsanto itself in my mind.

But why wouldn't you eat GM food? Irrational fear?

[Earth]

But why wouldn't you eat GM food? Irrational fear?

Haha, no, it's not out of fear, I know I eat it, but I don't know what's different about it, and I don't know if it is GM or not. That's my problem.

[Sbane]

But why wouldn't you eat GM food? Irrational fear?

Haha, no, it's not out of fear, I know I eat it, but I don't know what's different about it, and I don't know if it is GM or not. That's my problem.

The thing is that there is not much different about it. Many of these varieties could have occurred due to just natural selection, but it would have taken some time. Genetic modification is just a shortcut.

[John Dibble]

But why wouldn't you eat GM food? Irrational fear?

Haha, no, it's not out of fear, I know I eat it, but I don't know what's different about it, and I don't know if it is GM or not. That's my problem.

http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-02-566

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So, currently there are no differences. Most the changes right now are for making stuff easier to grow. However, in the future some GM foods will be engineered for increased nutrition.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Monsanto is a nasty, horrible corporation, though this is still an inexcusable infringement on free market competition.

[Earth]

So, currently there are no differences. Most the changes right now are for making stuff easier to grow. However, in the future some GM foods will be engineered for increased nutrition.

All well and good, but I'd like to know if what I buy is GM, and what sort of modifications that particular food has. Until then, I won't knowingly buy or consume GM food.