Tuesday, September 21, 2010

sugar beat ban

sugar beat ban

I found this article very interesting because there are different viewpoints from different political agencies (mainly the courts and the USDA) based on what those agencies goals are.

What i think is most surprising and unusual is that unlike most crops and people, this sugar beat is guilty until proven innocent. this is the type of practice that is upheld in European governments for pesticides, herbicides, and similar new technologies that can effect human life. This type of "justice" protects the rights and the health of the consumer at the cost to corporations. I agree with this style of treating new entities to be introduced into the biota, but i am pleasantly surprised that there is this small victory over powerful agribusinesses by the courts ruling. As we had seen in our readings large companies like Monsanto (the producers of the GMO beat) had the power to up root many family farms and influence industrialization on farming techniques.

Unfortunately the USDA is trying to temporarily allow its cultivation under controlled conditions which "might" be an acceptable compromise, but it is still risky especially considering that the farmers have to be very wary of those blotters which could spread the genetic information of these beats to native species or other plants where farmers can be sued for patten violations. Even worse, these beats could give their herbicide resistance to weeds to create supper weeds. To top the list of risks is the unknown nutritional value and health risks of consuming GMO beats. This risk will not be fully known until years of health studies, making the consumer the guinea pig. All of these risks of GMO beats are placed on the consumers and farmers, not Monsanto.

No comments:

Post a Comment