would you like somehting to go with that whine...maybe some fries?

/GM crops will be critical to feeding the ever increasing human population on this planet, it needs to be done responsibly but it cannot be ignored.

come on, potato trifecta!



/yeah!

Where's that new low-carb potato I need in my life?

It is with your low carb water.

Potato trifecta right now!!!

GM crops will be critical to feeding the ever increasing human population on this planet, it needs to be done responsibly but it cannot be ignored.


I reckon we're bound to have a spare non-GM potato mountain knocking around somewhere. If people don't want GM crops, why force them?

Was I the only one to find the headline totally incoherent?

potato trifecta in 3...2..1..

Whatever! I just want my potato surfeit!

Are these assholes channeling Malthus or something? Feeding people is good, starvation is bad.

NubianzWithAttitude

ummm...no

probably should be : -

Anti-GM court angered by secret potato trials presided by Judge Spud...

i did notice...but i'm too busy being angry at Fark for approving crap like this (and the fact i havent got one greenlight yet : p)

Let the envirementalists admire my gas gusling car engine.

potato trifecta! do it!

Two articles on potatoes? What are the odds of that (see large numbers theory article)?

I was wondering why General Motors was appealing potatoes until I RTFA.

GizmoMkI

Me too. Still DRTFA.

I just got out of bed at 4:30 AM because I couldn't sleep after having a sex dream about an unrequited love who is now married with a kid to another guy. She made me speak at her wedding ceremony.

/random heartache

I thought GM just made lemons

We have been genetically modifying food crops (both animal and vegetable) for centuries. Why do people make such a fuss when it is done by people in white coats instead of muddy wellies?

The GM Potato: "Like a rock"

We have been genetically modifying food crops (both animal and vegetable) for centuries. Why do people make such a fuss when it is done by people in white coats instead of muddy wellies?

I love that rationalization. It's almost as idiotic as saying, "We put chemicals in our bodies every day, with no ill effects. Why do people make such a fuss over this heroin stuff?"

I don't get it. US consumers reject GM and companies back off?!? Since when do companies turn down making a profit off consumers? Companies have been scamming over corn syrup and soybeans/soybean oil for decades now. (Check your labels!)

at80eighty
Maybe the key to getting something listed is not making sense...

Bonobo62

not quite - they are not saying the equivalent of saying "We put chemicals in our bodies every day, with no ill effects." and then comparing it to heroin beacuse you are comparing chemicals as a general term and relating it to one specific bad example

when they say that GM is similar to methods previously used they talking about a specific technique which has proven beneficial in the past without any harm (unlike heroin) - your analogy may therefore run as such "some people put *caffeine/(cannabis) if you want to be controversial)* in our bodies every day, with no real major ill effects to the masses (hey whats a cardiac dysrhythmia or two between friends). Why the fuss with GM? Thus your argument would fall flat.

Comparing GM crops to heroin is silly. People are dying every day from malnutrition and many go blind and suffer other nutrition related ilnesses. GM crops like fortified rice are making a huge positive impact on human health in developing countries while delusional hippies in the US biatch about Montsanto while eating some crappy vegan "GM free, organic, free range, biodynamic, certified macrobiotic" cookie while waiting for their welfare check in between hackey sack games. Flame on!

"GUILTY!"

/Potato Judge

Northern: Of course it's silly. That's why I didn't do it. If you'll notice, those are two separate analogies. I don't know what the rest of your post is supposed to convince me of, unless you somehow concluded from my post above that I'm against GM foods (In truth, I'll eat just about anything. I just find retarded logic amusing as all hell).

Al Sicandar: No, it's a false analogy no matter what. You seem to be hung up on the heroin example, so I'll be a little more general here. Making the claim that "Some methods of genetic manipulation are safe, so all methods of genetic manipulation are safe" is as retarded as saying "Some drugs are harmless, therefore all drugs are harmless."

My dog doesn't bite me, therefore, that dog over there won't bite me.

Bonobo62

I agree with the point as made in your response that
"Some methods of genetic manipulation are safe, so all methods of genetic manipulation are safe" is a poor argument, unless they use the exact same methods are used or the new species created are exactly the same as created by the old mehtod albeit at an accelerated rate (therefore it would not apply for instance if new genes were introduced for example by a viral vector)

banal_spex

The average consumer has a fairly low understanding of scientific concepts such as genetic modification. Rather than attempting to grasp the positive effects that GM crops have (drought resistance, higher crop yield, etc...) most people will listen to the anti-GM pundits that make ludicrous claims that field mutations of GM crops could cause terrible things to happen that were never considered by the scientists that created these abominations, blah blah blah... So from a consumer aspect, I think that has a lot to do with why GM foods haven't been popularized.
From a farming point, GM crops are proprietary and farmers can't save back seeds to plant next year's crop. Each individual year must be purchased from the seed company. That is one reason that small farms are having a tough time if they want to get into the GM market. Another is large farms buying and planting GM fields adjacent to a small farm non-GM crop. Plants can still cross pollinate, and small farms have been sued by the GM seed companies for planting a reserve seed crop that happens to turn up with specific genetic attributes of the GM crop that was upwind of it the year previous, even though there was no way of knowing this had happened.
With consumers, it breaks down to a trust issue. With farmers, (as with most of life,) it's all about the money.

GM crops are needed and will be needed in the future (unless you favor mandatory sterilization of humans). We simply cannot grow the food that we need, on the land that we have without developing crops that produce greater yields per acre.

Genetic modification has been happening since humans started in agriculture. Almost all of the foods we eat today were created using some sort of genetic manipulation (mostly selective breeding).

When a scientist genetically modifies a food in a lab they are being more efficient. Instead of randomly hoping that a trait gets passed on (like what we've been doing) they specifically use that gene. A lot of people get bent out of shape because they think people are taking animal genes and putting them in plants and creating some sort of mutant plant (cactus growing hair :) ). Of course there is no basis for this, while scientists may have fooled around with this in a lab, NO product has ever made it to market (or probably ever will make it) that has contained animal genes (not sure whether this includes bateria or not, but either way its only single genes).

I'm not saying that there isn't a possibility of a problem occuring, but the FDA and such do a very good job deciding whether a food is safe. Why shouldn't I listen to them? I think it was Penn & Teller who pointed out that most people that are against GM/GE foods are actually anti government and the food isn't their top priority. Of course it's whackos like that who convince 3rd world countries to refuse grain that they could use to fee their starving people.

/rant

To all you "foil hattes" out there: humans have been GM'ing food for 600 years now. The only difference is that it is done in a lab instead of cross breading live plants.


/Gets hotdogs ready for the flames

A judge "presides" over a trial. Not "resides" over a trial. Not that the one simple change would fix that train wreck of a headline. I think we need an independent fark commission to see what could have been done to stop the tragic event of that headline getting greenlighted. No doubt that "Crappy Intelligence" would come back as one of the root causes of the disaster.

It matters where this person resides?

lolleepop

not make sense ehhh???

wait a minute!! is this your submission??

*shakes fist and goes back into cave*

American consumers were quite accepting and well educated about GM crops and their potential until the anti-GM environmentalists, emboldened by European technophobes started preaching over here too.
Labeling is fine, as far as I'm concerned. Banning GM crops is more about politics and anti-globalization than science.
Europeans would rather let Africa starve than Monsanto get a dime.

i-likes-maple-syrup I had one of those dreams a couple of years back, then I ran into her and her husband at a store about a month later and she looked nothing like the dream anymore. The kid had done her in.

The biggest problem with GM crops is that their seed will spread naturally (even if genetically modified not to), yet it is still owned by the "creators."

There have been cases where a field of regular wheat (was it wheat? whatever) was contaminated by the GM crops, yet the farmer was held responsible and had to pay the owners of the genetically modified crop. Even though they didnt WANT this contamination.

All of my GMs have been lemons. Same with Mopars. Should I give Ford a chance or go directly to a Toyota?

Three cheers for technophobia!

Could it be... the rare but ever so special... POTATO TRIFECTA????

banal_spex

We have been genetically modifying food crops (both animal and vegetable) for centuries. Why do people make such a fuss when it is done by people in white coats instead of muddy wellies?

I thought the problem was with creating a few monocultures and single plant types the world over (and thus the control given to a few seed producing agencies) and the problems that occur when GM plants are introduced into areas in which they are not wanted (from fields of other farms to areas in which the strengthened plants would be hard to dispatch).

/no comment

I love how people who have never gone hungry a single day in thier lives rabidly protest the use of GM foods.

I hate to sound like the Borg but this is a case where controversy is irrelevant and resistence is futile.

A lot of folks think that Malthus was wrong in predicting imminent famine. His specific predictions were wrong but his logic wasn't. The reason we haven't hit a Malthusian crisis yet is precisely because agricultural technology has allowed food production to keep pace with exponential population growth.

In order for this to continue, though, we are going to have to continue to push the agricultural envelope. Right now, that means embracing GM. If we don't, we will, sooner or later (more likely sooner), find ourselves in a genuine Malthusian emergency. If that happens, I think that it's a safe bet that the emotional resistence to GM will crumble.

Hungry people are a lot less choosy about what they're eating.

Remember, if you don't like the idea of eating untested GM foods, you are anti-science and thus ignorant!

Someone please provide evidence that non-GM crops are inadequate to feed the growing population. Starvation is about distribution, not supply per se. The USDA pays people to NOT farm, vast piles of food rot next to grain elevators, and American restaurant chains throw away enough food every year to feed millions.

This GM shiat is all about some transnational corporations mucking about with genetic codes in order to enslave farmers.

What could go wrong?