Recent comments by: Lainey
A matter of opinion
The comments here are really naïve. Consumers are already eating GM. Almost every processed product on the supermarket shelf contains ingredients that are GM derived that includes Asia and Europe. Moratoriums are on production not consumption and only punish farmers.
Very sad that SA farmers are being denied access to technology that will improve productivity and sustainability for no scientifically or economically credible reason.
Well said !. The science is clear. Its time for politicians like Bignell to act responsibly for SA and not chase green votes.
Increasing efficiency of production and reliability of production are as important as productivity per se. Australia agriculture has traditionally been at the forefront of research and adoption. However farmers access to biotech technology gains is probably a key limitation compared to other countries like the US, Canada and Brazil.
Varied Genetic solutions used in conjunction with agronomy is and has proven to be sustainable.Farmers have a vested interest in adopting and deploying multiple technologies. Non GM and GM genes are subject to the same principles of genetics and gene flow ! This argument is irrelevant. Weed management needs a whole farming systems approach of which novel genetics is a part off.
Herbicide tolerance genes are subject to breakdown and need to be managed as part of a whole farming systems strategy and in combination with other genetics (like biomass). GM, non GM, Crispa, mutant derived is irrelevant !
You can't argue with 20+ years of science> GM are a proven safe innovation> Government is making an informed decision.
This case regards negligence not GM in food. GM products deemed safe for consumption or for medicinal use (i.e insulin) are already in the food and drugs system globally. The anti GM bandwagon is not helping consumers or farmers, by making this about what they feel is right.
Gov't moratorium is an intervention. So are import restrictions. Yes Niche markets are there. But given all the intervention there is no real premium. Growers in other states are reducing non GMO because they less profitable in the farming system. This is a real market signal and indicates the opportunity cost to SA.
The reality is the so called premium is not driven by a consumer price signal or demand but rather gov't regulations / intervention. Nothing to do with marketing ability of SA farmers or segregation. Its more profitable to grow GM canola and better environmentally in terms of utilizing available water. This is why there is diminishing non GM canola grown in other states were growers have a choice.
People are happy to poor carcinogenic chemicals directly onto there scalp to dye the colour of the hair, including many so called greenies. There is enough history and science that proves this chemical is safe to use as recommended.
GM is part of the solution for more sustainable agriculture, environmental management and human nutrition. Its not just about productivity for farmers. Besides this shifts in population and climate need to be addresses urgently with innovative science not just socialist gov't policies !
Yeah Humans do eat GM cotton in the form of cotton seed oil and we have for decades. One of the major vegetable oils used in cooking and food processing> Also cotton seed meal is a major stock feed and proven safe by our consumption>
And if they could use GM technology they would increase there yields another 40% and have sustainable use of chemicals> All good just means they will import more product to eat from places like the US and Australia.
WTF you question qualifications of doctors of Science, but yet you speak as if your have medical training, which you obviously don't. Your arguments are neither objective or scientifically credible.
Organisations like Greenpeace and Peta need to be accountable for denying science that is safe and able to deliver better nutrition and more sustainable and economic agriculture. Well done Senator !