Comments on: Transgenic Cotton http://www.deeshaa.org/2007/11/07/957/ Mon, 13 Feb 2012 04:33:54 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Amit http://www.deeshaa.org/2007/11/07/957/comment-page-1/#comment-111405 Amit Wed, 07 Nov 2007 19:45:37 +0000 http://www.deeshaa.org/2007/11/07/957/#comment-111405 Atanu, when you have time, I'd invite you to do some research on food production and malnutrition, and write a post on it - whether lack of food is because of insufficient production, or asymmetrical distribution and inefficient use of crops/food. Because it's a very popular sentiment that's paraded out every time a case is made for biotech crops - that it is the solution to world hunger. Would be interesting to read your take on it. Atanu, when you have time, I’d invite you to do some research on food production and malnutrition, and write a post on it – whether lack of food is because of insufficient production, or asymmetrical distribution and inefficient use of crops/food. Because it’s a very popular sentiment that’s paraded out every time a case is made for biotech crops – that it is the solution to world hunger. Would be interesting to read your take on it.

]]> By: Amit http://www.deeshaa.org/2007/11/07/957/comment-page-1/#comment-111404 Amit Wed, 07 Nov 2007 19:38:29 +0000 http://www.deeshaa.org/2007/11/07/957/#comment-111404 Atanu, here's <a href="http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/July06/Bt.cotton.China.ssl.html" rel="nofollow">one more piece of information</a> regarding long-term effects of using Bt cotton in China, in addition to the cheer-leading piece by Mr. Das in TOI. Seems like any gains by using Bt have been eroded by the emergence of secondary pests which require even more pesticides than before. So is this technology fix really a "solution" to the pest problem, as touted by the companies selling the seeds? Or does it simply place the farmers (and researchers) on a treadmill they can never get off of - all because of the theory of evolution? That pesky Darwin, I tell you. But then again, I wonder if continuing to use pesticides and non-Bt seeds also makes the pests immune over time, and requires even more powerful (or greater quantity of) pesticides. I'm also assuming that you've considered in your analysis any decrease in the price of cotton due to increased yield (according to your theory of LOSAD) and it will still come out more profitable for the farmers to justify the use of Bt cotton. In the long term. BTW, would you know if Bt seeds need to be bought every year, or how does their cost compare to non-Bt seeds? I think as long as a. the farmers and local community are involved as partners in the technological changes and decisions that affect them b. they make informed decisions without pressure (which involves <a href="http://www.poptel.org.uk/panap/latest/alter.htm" rel="nofollow">corporations not secretly and illegally planting bio-tech crops</a> in fields next to regular crops - that just leads to mistrust and further ideological divide), c. there is enough testing done regarding safety (though when it comes to bio-tech crops - who knows how long it'll take for any negative effects to manifest? - as shown by the Cornell study), d. it benefits the farmers and e. the company takes responsibility for any fuck-up related to Bt/bio-tech crops, I'd be all for it. :) Though given the track record of how corporations act (Bhopal wasn't that long ago), it's quite normal for Indian farmers to be suspicious. My issue with bio-tech food in the US has more to do with full disclosure by the companies (customer's right to know what's in the food) and safety issues, and least to do with any ideological opposition to technology. BTW, is it possible to increase the size of the comment window? Thanks. Atanu, here’s one more piece of information regarding long-term effects of using Bt cotton in China, in addition to the cheer-leading piece by Mr. Das in TOI.

Seems like any gains by using Bt have been eroded by the emergence of secondary pests which require even more pesticides than before. So is this technology fix really a “solution” to the pest problem, as touted by the companies selling the seeds? Or does it simply place the farmers (and researchers) on a treadmill they can never get off of – all because of the theory of evolution? That pesky Darwin, I tell you. But then again, I wonder if continuing to use pesticides and non-Bt seeds also makes the pests immune over time, and requires even more powerful (or greater quantity of) pesticides.

I’m also assuming that you’ve considered in your analysis any decrease in the price of cotton due to increased yield (according to your theory of LOSAD) and it will still come out more profitable for the farmers to justify the use of Bt cotton. In the long term.

BTW, would you know if Bt seeds need to be bought every year, or how does their cost compare to non-Bt seeds?

I think as long as
a. the farmers and local community are involved as partners in the technological changes and decisions that affect them
b. they make informed decisions without pressure (which involves corporations not secretly and illegally planting bio-tech crops in fields next to regular crops – that just leads to mistrust and further ideological divide),
c. there is enough testing done regarding safety (though when it comes to bio-tech crops – who knows how long it’ll take for any negative effects to manifest? – as shown by the Cornell study),
d. it benefits the farmers and
e. the company takes responsibility for any fuck-up related to Bt/bio-tech crops,
I’d be all for it. :)

Though given the track record of how corporations act (Bhopal wasn’t that long ago), it’s quite normal for Indian farmers to be suspicious.

My issue with bio-tech food in the US has more to do with full disclosure by the companies (customer’s right to know what’s in the food) and safety issues, and least to do with any ideological opposition to technology.

BTW, is it possible to increase the size of the comment window? Thanks.

]]>