Organic farming could feed the world (says 20-year study)

[Ecofarm]

if the gene is safe.

First, good write-up and welcome to the sustainable farming team.

Now, I'll discuss the "safety" a little.

1. Glyphosate resistance (one of the top three splices, those being bt legume and glyphosate resistence).
a. Allows for post-emergence (of crop) spraying. Theoretically, this allows farmers to spray less before the crops come up since they can spray after, using less total herbicide. In reality, the farmer can hose his field as much as he like and often errs on the weed-eradication side of the equation.
b. Affect on non-target plants. Glyphosate (round-up) is a broad range herbicide, killing indescriminatly all vegetation (except the GM) for thousands of acres... creating a bio-desert.
c. Herbicide resistence is increasing drastically as a result of exposing weeds to glyphosate on a year-round basis. We already have "super-weeds" that show a naturally derrived resistence to glyphosate similar to the GM crops.
d. Gene-movement is possible. Through many means, it is possible for the GM genes to find their way into other species... from horizontal gut transfer to pollination between varities.

2. Bt producing crops
a. Insects develop resistence, but the chemical companies assure us that they have even better stuff 'in the pipe'.
b. Millions of acres of plants producing Bt dimishes the usefullness of it as a natural pesticide. As a main pesticide for organic farmers, diminishing its effectiveness seems almost like sabotage.
c. Bt is broad range. It kills indescriminantly, see: Monarch Butterfly.

3. Legume splice.
a. Not much of a problem with this one, but it doesn't work much.

One should note that all of the GM "improvements" have been geared to helping the farmers on their chemical treadmill. None of the GM varieties are for improved nutrition, reduced water use or better taste. There is no consideration for the consumer in first generation GMCs.

Aside from the specific variety problems, we should look at the "chemical treadmill" and its impact on a farm's economic, social and ecologic systems.

Lastly, consider the loss of biodiversity. While in a conventional monoculture, at least there is variety between individuals, in a GM monoculture each individual is genetically identical. Combined with glyphosate, there could be only one surviving strand of plant DNA for thousands of square miles that appear lush and healthy.

 

[DNK]

They're free to do so, if they choose. If the world decides that it wants more organic farmers, then so be it, it doesn't bother me. As I've said, I don't oppose people setting up organic farms (in fact I've encouraged Narz to do exactly that).

What I object to is the claim that organic farming will magically solve world hunger, or the outrageous and baseless claims that organic farms have higher yields than modern farms. That's been debunked many times in this thread, and simple maths will show how shockingly the OP's article has corrupted the statistics (which, frankly, is something I'd expect from a New Scientist article).

If the additional labour required for organic farming could solve world hunger, then the additional labour required might be worth it, and I would not keep harping on about it.

Unfortunately, that's not true. The fact is, organic farming requires more labour and produces less food.

Well, I don't outright disagree with anything there.

Personally, I'm an organic person. It's more for environmental reasons than anything. I think there's a lot to be said for crop diversity, reduced fossil fuel usage, sustainable practice, reduced pollution, and potentially safer food.

Of course, nothing like veganism to help world hunger

 

[Shaihulud]

It hasn't been mentioned yet, but I feel that it is needed. GMO food shouldn't be conflated with the Green Revolution that increased food capacity for the whole world. GMO are a more recent phenomenon. It is a very improtant distinction.

 

[El_Machinae]

I think the genes I'm most in favour of would be nutrition genes. It must be easier to modify local crops to contain better nutrients than to import new crops. With intercropping, there're even more opportunities for good nutrition genes.

 

[Mountain-God]

Not once have I twisted your words, I only shot down your whole alarmist argument down. And "rubbish" sorry I only believe in scientific studies not in some fearmongering bias, and garbage newspaper.

I was curious about GM when the whole thing blew into the media - my parent's are scientists and I learned not to take media too seriously, but to research it myself.

It's a shame, though, that so many people have to turn a simple difference of opinion or experience into a kind of 'who's right' contest requiring put downs and one-upmanship.

 

[sp1023]

There are supposedly hundreds of edible plants that we aren't utilizing at the moment. And many of them die off in the rainforests.

 

[negZero]

There are supposedly hundreds of edible plants that we aren't utilizing at the moment. And many of them die off in the rainforests.

Edible yes but useful as crops no.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

Edible yes but useful as crops no.

Do you think teosinte was useful as a crop?

 

[negZero]

Do you think teosinte was useful as a crop?

Depends on which teosinte species your talking about? But am pretty sure your talking about corn.

I was curious about GM when the whole thing blew into the media - my parent's are scientists and I learned not to take media too seriously, but to research it myself.

Please give me a 1 reason why I should believe this? You haven't provide a single source yet and when I tried finding your claimed sources I found nothing.

It's a shame, though, that so many people have to turn a simple difference of opinion or experience into a kind of 'who's right' contest requiring put downs and one-upmanship.

Provide a source, non-fiction agruement or your alarmist

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

Depends on which teosinte species your talking about? But am pretty sure your talking about corn.

Yes I was talking about Zea mays.

And are you attributing those two other quotes to me? I don't remember saying anything like that.

 

[negZero]

Yes I was talking about Zea mays.

And are you attributing those two other quotes to me? I don't remember saying anything like that.

No forgot to put a name

 

[Narz]

Organic > GM

www.thestarphoenix.com/business/Study+debunks+myths+organic+farms/5462520/story.html

 

[Terxpahseyton]

So why do I pay more for organic fruits and vegetable?

 

[Old Hippy]

So why do I pay more for organic fruits and vegetable?

because they taste better... having been grow for their taste...
not shelf life,

 

[Shaihulud]

If organic farming was all that great, every farmer would be doing it in time. There are alot of contradictory statements about the superiority of the claims of organic versus non-organic farming, im not sure which side to believe anymore.

 

[Eat_Up_Martha]

So why do I pay more for organic fruits and vegetable?

My guess is that the market has already established that the average organic customer is willing to pay that price.

From the article:

More important than yield, from the farmer's perspective, is income, and here organic is clearly superior. The 30-year comparison showed organic systems were almost three times as profitable as the conventional systems. The average net return for the organic systems was $558/acre/ year versus just $190/acre/year for the conventional systems. The much higher income reflects the premium organic farmers receive and consumers pay for.

Why would anyone willingly decrease their prices if consumers have already shown that they're willing to pay the extra peace-of-mind premium?

 

[White Elk]

So why do I pay more for organic fruits and vegetable?

Because it is still a "specialty" market. And organic does not get the massive subsidies that the competition gets. But that's finally beginning to change. Local Farmers Markets are experiencing rapid growth across America. Consumers are slowly becoming aware of the consequences of their consumption. And people organize against the corruption in our food system. It's a long time in coming, but I think we might finally have a chance to correct this problem of wide spread poisoning of our food, water, and environment.

Here is an article talking about the practicality of bringing local food, to local markets...

"Making Local Food Real"
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/29/making-local-food-real/


And just cuz...

Here is an eleven year old talking about the problems of our industrialized food systems...


Link to video.

"So next time your at the grocery store, think local, choose organic, know your farmer, and know your food." Birke Baehr

.

 

[Murky]

We not only need to go organic, we need to start buying local. Too much of our food travels a long distance before getting to the grocery store.

 

[Tee Kay]

Here's a solution to the organic vs GM issue: collectivise agricultural research.

 

[Zelig]

Organic > GM

www.thestarphoenix.com/business/Study+debunks+myths+organic+farms/5462520/story.html

So why not grow organic GM food?