I would like to strictly oppose the message of Jeffrey Reel from 15.May.
1) I would agree that "GM-foods will not dramatically increase food production" but the addition "if at all" is polemical and therefore does not support objective discussion.
2) "It is hoped, but not proven,": this is a good start if you try to make a statement of general truth (dogma), but is again polemic. Nobody can today prove what will happen in the future.
3) "GM-foods and biotech in general" I do not think that GM-foods should be used to agitate against biotech in general. A conference like this is the right place to stop generalisations but have a close look at different methods in biotech and evaluate their proīs and conīs in different contexts.
4) "maintain the gains realized from the use of chemically-driven agricultural methods"
To my knowledge the gains in food production we achieved during the last hundred years are realized by breeding and chemicals in approximately equal amounts. (This can be easily checked if we grow old landraces with chemical fertiliser or new cultivars without.chemical fertiliser). This means breeding has a substantial contribution to today's food supply and security.
A lot of biotech methods (e.g. marker technology) are simply a promotion of traditional breeding with new tools (This may be arguable with GM-crops, but not with Marker Assisted Selection).
Breeding has proven itīs ability to dramatically increase food production in the past ! Therefore, a technique that enhances breeding has a very good prospect of increasing (not only maintaining) food production in a similar way, and I think this substantiates much more than vague hopes. Personally I am absolutely convinced, that biotech can help to increase and maintain food security in the world.
5) Finally I would ask to stick to one's own statements and not extend a statement to general by phrases like "It has been fairly well acknowledged" or "has been acknowledged by most". I believe the interested reader has the chance to read all contributions to this conference and get his own idea on what is "acknowledged" or not.
Werner Schenkel dipl.Ing.agr.
Technical University Munich Chair for Agronomy and Plantbreeding Alte
Akademie
12 D 85350 Freising-Weihenstephan, Germany
Tel. xx49 8161 713749 Fax. xx49 8161 714419
schenkel@pollux.weihenstephan.de
[To contribute to this conference, send your message to biotech-room1@mailserv.fao.org For further information on the Electronic Forum on Biotechnology in Food and Agriculture see http://www.fao.org/biotech/forum.asp ]
-----Original Message-----
From: Biotech-Mod1
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2000 8:48 AM
To: 'biotech-room1@mailserv.fao.org'
Subject: Re: Biotech and developing countries food security in world context
Comments on Jeffrey Reel's messages [15 May]:
If farmers in the US and Argentina adopted fairly quickly the genetic modification (GM) innovations, it means that they saw clear cost advantages. This is saying that they could produce the same quantity at lower cost which eventually would find its way into lower prices for the consumer, hence good for food security of the poor, as these countries produce mostly for export. This is a clear advantage for food security as it creates some slack, which is useful if the growing demand will be pressing against production capacities in the main exporting countries in the future, leading to rising prices.
Another related aspect is that with growing environmental restrictions in developed countries, e.g. on pesticides, the risk exists that farmers will have to cut back on their use, and production (or production growth) could be negatively affected. If the GM crops can deliver the same output with less pesticides then the risk of cutbacks is accordingly reduced. But can they ?
In the end, I guess that in order to evaluate the significance of GM for production capacity in the main exporters and for food security, we need to form an idea of what such capacity would be without GM.
Nikos Alexandratos, FAO, Rome, Italy
Nikos.Alexandratos@fao.org
[To contribute to this conference, send your message to biotech-room1@mailserv.fao.org For further information on the Electronic Forum on Biotechnology in Food and Agriculture see http://www.fao.org/biotech/forum.asp ]
-----Original Message-----
From: Biotech-Mod1
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2000 8:54 AM
To: 'biotech-room1@mailserv.fao.org'
Subject: Re: Biotech and developing countries food security in world context
Computers took time to influence people and change the way of life. Genetic engineering (GE) will also take time. The challenge therefore is how to reduce the gestation period.
Increase in food production is not just increase in the tonnage. We can consider the following possibilities: two per cent increase in the specific amino acid content or incorporation of novel ingredient such as pro-vitamin A or iron or Zn (e.g. rice of Potrykus) Food security has a component of access to food. Increased farm income by increased oil content or starch content or enhanced keeping quality or reduced cost of cultivation by reduced number of sprays means increased capacity to buy food. (We may remind ourselves that the world has enough food for all, it is only that the food is not accessible to all).
GE has three tasks cut out. One, to maintain the momentum of production heralded by "chemical agriculture". Two, to accelerate it in accordance with the increasing population size. Three, to correct the environment ruined by our own previous efforts. Internet brought the revolution in computer applications. Hopefully Jeffrey Reel's comments [15 May] buoy up people to extend the frontiers of GE applications.
Sunil Archak,
Scientist,
National Research Centre on DNA Fingerprinting,
National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources,
New Delhi, 110 012,
INDIA
sarchak@nbpgr.delhi.nic.in
[To contribute to this conference, send your message to biotech-room1@mailserv.fao.org For further information on the Electronic Forum on Biotechnology in Food and Agriculture see http://www.fao.org/biotech/forum.asp ]
-----Original Message-----
From: Biotech-Mod1
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2000 12:00 PM
To: 'biotech-room1@mailserv.fao.org'
Subject: Re: Biotech and developing countries food security in world context
I would like to respond to Jeffrey Reel's contribution [15 May].
I do not agree that during the course of this conference that it has been generally acknowledged that GM-foods will not increase production. Nor do I agree that no proof has been offered to substantiate these claims of hopes of increased food production of GM-foods.
Brenda Wingfield
Dept. Genetics
University of Pretoria, South Africa
Phone +27 12 420 3946
Fax +27 12 420 3947
Brenda.Wingfield@fabi.up.ac.za
[To contribute to this conference, send your message to biotech-room1@mailserv.fao.org For further information on the Electronic Forum on Biotechnology in Food and Agriculture see http://www.fao.org/biotech/forum.asp ]