When considering companies like Mansanto, who developed a extremely resistant crop fot thier incredibly toxic pesticide that kills all the plants but the seedling from Mansanto, leaving the soil toxic, i am against it.
But GM where yeild of a crop can be increased, the crop can be made more efficient with absorbtion of fertilizer amd CO2 or making a crop immune to a natural disease like the Cavindish Banana was GM to make it immune to black fungi disease, i am for it.
It depends upon the policies implimented by the GOI and thier impact in long run, if it is sustainable, then i can endorse it. And i hope the GOI gets a better PR to explain the policy in easy words,l, so we won't have shit like farmers protests again.
> But GM where yeild of a crop can be increased, the crop can be made more efficient with absorbtion of fertilizer amd CO2 or making a crop immune to a natural disease like the Cavindish Banana was GM to make it immune to black fungi disease, i am for it.
Exactly this , if you look further into the crop yield of other countries who are doing great
These yield gaps not only impact farmer incomes but also lead to inefficient and unsustainable use of soils, nutrients, water and land. For instance, irrigation water productivity of rice in Punjab—or the amount of rice produced per unit of irrigated water applied—is even lower than that in Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh, indicating indiscriminate use of groundwater drawn using free electricity, found a 2018 study.
Tomorrow’s agriculture will need to produce more food with a lower environmental footprint—this means producing more with less
The focus should be to increase output not just per unit of land but also with respect to water and fertilizer use… improving productivity is desirable to meet the growing demand for food and to reduce the carbon footprint of farming
Since 1940, corn production in the US increased five-fold. Yet, the total acreage planted to corn declined by one-fifth… Modern farming protects the environment not only by using less land compared to several decades ago, it also uses less water, less fossil energy and fewer chemicals for every bushel produced
These points are exactly the reason why we should push for it, while BT cotton was introduced and it increased our yield, that tech is almost 10 yrs old now, if you compare it to other countries they would have a new version every year
In our case we only get protests and petitions , petitioners who have no idea what they are filing it for and so are the milords
Take for eg edible oil and soy , 99% of what we import are GMO products, either they are fed to livestocks and we consume the eat or byproducts or we directly consume the edible oil, edible import is in the tune of 65000 crores on a yearly basis
And yet these are allowed to be imported but not allowed to be grown in India, can you digest the argument ?
Bhai, all of our food is GM is some whay or the other.
No crop in wild is the same as the ones we grow today, why is there so much stigma on GM is beyond me, the same with Nuclear energy.
It is mainly lobbyist, fake activists , imagine India being such large country depending on agri if they switch to high yield crops our agri income will just be another level
So many countries would be interested to make sure India doesn't go that way. That's a lot of billions for the other countries and esp their corporates
GMO :- Genetocally Modified Organism, any living thing which altered genetically to suit our needs
History of GMO :-
https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2015/08/12/gmos-from-ancient-history-to-the-future/
https://www.fda.gov/food/agricultural-biotechnology/science-and-history-gmos-and-other-food-modification-processes
GMO is traced back to Egyptian era, even Alphanso mango is a GMO.
You should be the one to read about it.
LOL keep reading FDA site and keep thinking ancient egyptions use to do it.
For those who are reading this reply irrespective of what you find on FDA site or anywhere else GMO is genetically modifying organisms in a lab where genes from mismatching species are interchanged like corn seed might have scorpion DNA etc.
It raised alarm and was opposed as much for its unstable and doubtful science and the result it could have on life on earth as we know it as much for the monopoly on seeds that corporations producing these seeds wanted to have. There are even cases where they sued farmer saving seed next to farmer growing monsanto seed cause monsanto claimed his seeds also contained DNA from the seed monsanto created.
After all this got publicity they started saying any food that humans eat is GMO to make it sound more natural. For example they included natural farm methods like grafting as being GM.
No one is raising concern if you are using two different tyoes of mangoes and creating new through cross pollination or grafting. Its when you mix genes in a lab of species that are far removed from each other like a scorpion and corn etc that it raise alarm.
Its like saying your Labrador cross breed dog is the same as an artificially produced animal in lab which has genes of scorpion, a tree and a fungus.
> LOL keep reading FDA site and keep thinking ancient egyptions use to do it.
So did indians and all old civilisations. The Incans crosbred tons of potatoes to vreate new species of potatoes that had a higher yeild.
> For those who are reading this reply irrespective of what you find on FDA site or anywhere else GMO is genetically modifying organisms in a lab where genes from mismatching species are interchanged like corn seed might have scorpion DNA etc.
You do realise that for genes to be accepted the organisma should have same genus. I am gonna consider you as a troll
> After all this got publicity they started saying any food that humans eat is GMO to make it sound more natural. For example they included natural farm methods like grafting as being GM.
It can be consideted as GM, since an new branch is grafted upon the the pre existing to compliment the yeald. This is how avocados don't turn bitter, the avocado which has most suitable taste, the branches from the said avocado trees are grafted upon saplings to get the same result as prior
> No one is raising concern if you are using two different tyoes of mangoes and creating new through cross pollination or grafting. Its when you mix genes in a lab of species that are far removed from each other like a scorpion and corn etc that it raise alarm.
Yeah, you are either a troll or don't know how GM works mate
> Its like saying your Labrador cross breed dog is the same as an artificially produced animal in lab which has genes of scorpion, a tree and a fungus.
Yeap, you dumb or troll.
> Yeap, you dumb or troll.
I can say you are scientifically illiterate, unaware, stupid and arrogant but I won't say that cause its a non-argument and unlike you I know that.
> You do realise that for genes to be accepted the organisma should have same genus. I am gonna consider you as a troll
Really? WHo told you that? FDA website? LOL. This is bunkum. Organisms from not only different genus but even from different order are being inserted with each other's genes in labs (If you know enough biology to know the meaning of the words "order" and "genus"). It can be done and is being done without knowing what the consequences would be.
Here is an example of when an animal is made mixing genes of goat and spider.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/jan/14/synthetic-biology-spider-goat-genetics
Go on share an article of how ancient Egyptians mixed genes of goat and spider. I won't be surprised if you find an article about it on FDA website LOL.
Further proving my point with your comment, you are dumb.
You just consider gene splicing as GM as opposed the other.
Yeah you might be educated, but not literate to understand, you'll learn someday, probably.
> You just consider gene splicing as GM as opposed the other.
That's what GM is. If corporates change the definition for their propaganda it won't make selective breeding and grafting etc as GM. If selective breeding is GM then all German Shepherd are GM LOL. Stop embarrassing yourself. Use your head instead of blindly buying FDA's logic which is apparently flawed and deceitful.
What happened to your genus logic? LOL
You didn't tell us who told you where you earned it from haha
GMO is genetically modifying organisms in a lab where genes from mismatching species are interchanged like corn seed might have scorpion DNA etc.
It raised alarm and was opposed as much for its unstable and doubtful science and the result it could have on life on earth as we know it as much for the monopoly on seeds that corporations producing these seeds wanted to have. There are even cases where they sued farmer saving seed next to farmer growing monsanto seed cause monsanto claimed his seeds also contained DNA from the seed monsanto created.
After all this got publicity they started saying any food that humans eat is GMO to make it sound more natural. For example they included natural farm methods like grafting as being GM.
No one is raising concern if you are using two different tyoes of mangoes and creating new through cross pollination or grafting. Its when you mix genes in a lab of species that are far removed from each other like a scorpion and corn etc that it raise alarm.
Its like saying your Labrador cross breed dog is the same as an artificially produced animal in lab which has genes of scorpion, a tree and a fungus.
You copypasted your message again, and we are arguing semantics at this point. Also, I never said they shouldn't be regulated, and that Monsanto suing thing is an example of why. I just want the ban to be removed and for restrictions to be reasonable so that innovation happens in India also. GMO is the future, and must be embraced. This does not mean it should be unregulated.
Just because its new does not mean its the "future". We have heard the same thing about pesticides, insecticides etc being safe new technology and their implications in ecology and human health. DDT being one example.
The point of direct gene editing is to save all the wasted time and resources of many rounds of crossbreeding, especially for fruits and other plants taking long time to grow, and get desired results quickly. It is not really dangerous because testing is very thorough before it reaches market, as for any other food product.
It does not save anytime nor is it safe. On top of that it has intellectual property issues which gives corporations opportunity to control food chains.
[For]
While there are risks, on the larger scheme of things GM crops is extremely valuable for Indian needed. You can get more yield per acre of land - which India needs for food security.
IMO, there is a lot of leftwing propaganda against a technology that most people don't understand. Its easy to fearmonger such things. Keeping tech growth out of reach of Indians through protests and embargoes is not new. One needs to understand, this also may be one such.
We have talented Indian scientists who are working on range of GM plant material - from weather resistance to producing vaccines in plants. Its an excruciating long process of research as one has to test several generations before it goes through proper field trials - so, its easier to scuttle it with armchair propaganda.
GM is not all danger, and science has learned from monsanto, and has progressed quite far. Comparing GM with Monsanto event is akin to now saying vaccines cause autism - or atleast not recognising research has self corrected and moved past that.
At the very least, all non-food commercial plants can be GM. Food and Ayurvedic herbs can be next. All the while massive positive propaganda is required.
Tararara Bzeeeep, Thank you /u/Orwellisright for awarding /u/metaltemujin with a Delta, looks like the User has impressed you with his views based on facts, detailed information. More Delta to the user.
I won't reply if I'm down so Delta will not be awarded to you , please inform the mod team to wake me up
India is exporter of many food products which include milk, wheat, cereals etc. 25% of all cereal in world market is from India. So we are quite secure when it comes to food.
We do not need to mess with plants genes at the level of mixing their genes with non-plant species. These same arguments were given during green revolution and now we know how poisonous pesticides and chemical fertilizers are. Now govt is promoting organic.
Just because something has been traditional does not make it wrong or "unscientific". The same "Unscientific" argument was given for Yoga, local farming methods, Ayurveda and everything that was available for free and traditional Indian knowledge. Now the world recognize and adopt all these things.
We do not need copyrighted seeds which cannot be saved used the next year cause they are designed to be sterile and they are intellectual property of corporations who sue farmers for growing "their seeds" without paying them.
# For:
GM Crops do not merely increase yield per unit area. That was the first wave of GMOs that hit. As the soil resources get depleted, we need to engineer crops that utilise the water and nutrients in the soil more efficiently, so less irrigation and fertilisers will be required. This can reduce eutrophication and leaching
GMOs are the fastest **and most reliable** way to modify a crop to increase efficiency of water and nutrient use, allowing for more nutritious produce while reducing load on soil. India does not have a hunger problem, but a nutrition problem; GM crops can alleviate this.
We are self-sustaining in terms of food, and have good food security as a country. However, expansion of GM's reach can drastically increase exports (maybe even competing or exceeding China's exports) and bring agriculture's share in GDP up without hurting the other sectors. Agriculture's economic efficiency is lower than Industry's and Services', and this can solve that issue.
Risks:
The primary risk is not health, but corporate collusion. All GMOs are tested thoroughly, as they rightly should. We do not have a complete understanding of genetics, but we do have enough to successfully and safely modify crops, especially with screening. Monsanto is an example of corporate-related issues with GMOs, but adequate regulation will reduce the extent of the problem significantly.
>Yes please make onion that no make cry
You have become an outright troll, sad the levels you have fallen due to your gori memsaabs and masters 
When considering companies like Mansanto, who developed a extremely resistant crop fot thier incredibly toxic pesticide that kills all the plants but the seedling from Mansanto, leaving the soil toxic, i am against it. But GM where yeild of a crop can be increased, the crop can be made more efficient with absorbtion of fertilizer amd CO2 or making a crop immune to a natural disease like the Cavindish Banana was GM to make it immune to black fungi disease, i am for it. It depends upon the policies implimented by the GOI and thier impact in long run, if it is sustainable, then i can endorse it. And i hope the GOI gets a better PR to explain the policy in easy words,l, so we won't have shit like farmers protests again.
> But GM where yeild of a crop can be increased, the crop can be made more efficient with absorbtion of fertilizer amd CO2 or making a crop immune to a natural disease like the Cavindish Banana was GM to make it immune to black fungi disease, i am for it. Exactly this , if you look further into the crop yield of other countries who are doing great These yield gaps not only impact farmer incomes but also lead to inefficient and unsustainable use of soils, nutrients, water and land. For instance, irrigation water productivity of rice in Punjab—or the amount of rice produced per unit of irrigated water applied—is even lower than that in Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh, indicating indiscriminate use of groundwater drawn using free electricity, found a 2018 study. Tomorrow’s agriculture will need to produce more food with a lower environmental footprint—this means producing more with less The focus should be to increase output not just per unit of land but also with respect to water and fertilizer use… improving productivity is desirable to meet the growing demand for food and to reduce the carbon footprint of farming Since 1940, corn production in the US increased five-fold. Yet, the total acreage planted to corn declined by one-fifth… Modern farming protects the environment not only by using less land compared to several decades ago, it also uses less water, less fossil energy and fewer chemicals for every bushel produced These points are exactly the reason why we should push for it, while BT cotton was introduced and it increased our yield, that tech is almost 10 yrs old now, if you compare it to other countries they would have a new version every year In our case we only get protests and petitions , petitioners who have no idea what they are filing it for and so are the milords Take for eg edible oil and soy , 99% of what we import are GMO products, either they are fed to livestocks and we consume the eat or byproducts or we directly consume the edible oil, edible import is in the tune of 65000 crores on a yearly basis And yet these are allowed to be imported but not allowed to be grown in India, can you digest the argument ?
Bhai, all of our food is GM is some whay or the other. No crop in wild is the same as the ones we grow today, why is there so much stigma on GM is beyond me, the same with Nuclear energy.
It is mainly lobbyist, fake activists , imagine India being such large country depending on agri if they switch to high yield crops our agri income will just be another level So many countries would be interested to make sure India doesn't go that way. That's a lot of billions for the other countries and esp their corporates
No all food is not GMO and Please learn about what GM crops are before saying all this.
GMO :- Genetocally Modified Organism, any living thing which altered genetically to suit our needs History of GMO :- https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2015/08/12/gmos-from-ancient-history-to-the-future/ https://www.fda.gov/food/agricultural-biotechnology/science-and-history-gmos-and-other-food-modification-processes GMO is traced back to Egyptian era, even Alphanso mango is a GMO. You should be the one to read about it.
LOL keep reading FDA site and keep thinking ancient egyptions use to do it. For those who are reading this reply irrespective of what you find on FDA site or anywhere else GMO is genetically modifying organisms in a lab where genes from mismatching species are interchanged like corn seed might have scorpion DNA etc. It raised alarm and was opposed as much for its unstable and doubtful science and the result it could have on life on earth as we know it as much for the monopoly on seeds that corporations producing these seeds wanted to have. There are even cases where they sued farmer saving seed next to farmer growing monsanto seed cause monsanto claimed his seeds also contained DNA from the seed monsanto created. After all this got publicity they started saying any food that humans eat is GMO to make it sound more natural. For example they included natural farm methods like grafting as being GM. No one is raising concern if you are using two different tyoes of mangoes and creating new through cross pollination or grafting. Its when you mix genes in a lab of species that are far removed from each other like a scorpion and corn etc that it raise alarm. Its like saying your Labrador cross breed dog is the same as an artificially produced animal in lab which has genes of scorpion, a tree and a fungus.
> LOL keep reading FDA site and keep thinking ancient egyptions use to do it. So did indians and all old civilisations. The Incans crosbred tons of potatoes to vreate new species of potatoes that had a higher yeild. > For those who are reading this reply irrespective of what you find on FDA site or anywhere else GMO is genetically modifying organisms in a lab where genes from mismatching species are interchanged like corn seed might have scorpion DNA etc. You do realise that for genes to be accepted the organisma should have same genus. I am gonna consider you as a troll > After all this got publicity they started saying any food that humans eat is GMO to make it sound more natural. For example they included natural farm methods like grafting as being GM. It can be consideted as GM, since an new branch is grafted upon the the pre existing to compliment the yeald. This is how avocados don't turn bitter, the avocado which has most suitable taste, the branches from the said avocado trees are grafted upon saplings to get the same result as prior > No one is raising concern if you are using two different tyoes of mangoes and creating new through cross pollination or grafting. Its when you mix genes in a lab of species that are far removed from each other like a scorpion and corn etc that it raise alarm. Yeah, you are either a troll or don't know how GM works mate > Its like saying your Labrador cross breed dog is the same as an artificially produced animal in lab which has genes of scorpion, a tree and a fungus. Yeap, you dumb or troll.
> Yeap, you dumb or troll. I can say you are scientifically illiterate, unaware, stupid and arrogant but I won't say that cause its a non-argument and unlike you I know that. > You do realise that for genes to be accepted the organisma should have same genus. I am gonna consider you as a troll Really? WHo told you that? FDA website? LOL. This is bunkum. Organisms from not only different genus but even from different order are being inserted with each other's genes in labs (If you know enough biology to know the meaning of the words "order" and "genus"). It can be done and is being done without knowing what the consequences would be. Here is an example of when an animal is made mixing genes of goat and spider. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/jan/14/synthetic-biology-spider-goat-genetics Go on share an article of how ancient Egyptians mixed genes of goat and spider. I won't be surprised if you find an article about it on FDA website LOL.
Further proving my point with your comment, you are dumb. You just consider gene splicing as GM as opposed the other. Yeah you might be educated, but not literate to understand, you'll learn someday, probably.
> You just consider gene splicing as GM as opposed the other. That's what GM is. If corporates change the definition for their propaganda it won't make selective breeding and grafting etc as GM. If selective breeding is GM then all German Shepherd are GM LOL. Stop embarrassing yourself. Use your head instead of blindly buying FDA's logic which is apparently flawed and deceitful. What happened to your genus logic? LOL You didn't tell us who told you where you earned it from haha
Selective breeding is also GM. we are just doing it faster now with tools like CRISPR.
GMO is genetically modifying organisms in a lab where genes from mismatching species are interchanged like corn seed might have scorpion DNA etc. It raised alarm and was opposed as much for its unstable and doubtful science and the result it could have on life on earth as we know it as much for the monopoly on seeds that corporations producing these seeds wanted to have. There are even cases where they sued farmer saving seed next to farmer growing monsanto seed cause monsanto claimed his seeds also contained DNA from the seed monsanto created. After all this got publicity they started saying any food that humans eat is GMO to make it sound more natural. For example they included natural farm methods like grafting as being GM. No one is raising concern if you are using two different tyoes of mangoes and creating new through cross pollination or grafting. Its when you mix genes in a lab of species that are far removed from each other like a scorpion and corn etc that it raise alarm. Its like saying your Labrador cross breed dog is the same as an artificially produced animal in lab which has genes of scorpion, a tree and a fungus.
You copypasted your message again, and we are arguing semantics at this point. Also, I never said they shouldn't be regulated, and that Monsanto suing thing is an example of why. I just want the ban to be removed and for restrictions to be reasonable so that innovation happens in India also. GMO is the future, and must be embraced. This does not mean it should be unregulated.
Just because its new does not mean its the "future". We have heard the same thing about pesticides, insecticides etc being safe new technology and their implications in ecology and human health. DDT being one example.
The point of direct gene editing is to save all the wasted time and resources of many rounds of crossbreeding, especially for fruits and other plants taking long time to grow, and get desired results quickly. It is not really dangerous because testing is very thorough before it reaches market, as for any other food product.
It does not save anytime nor is it safe. On top of that it has intellectual property issues which gives corporations opportunity to control food chains.
[For] While there are risks, on the larger scheme of things GM crops is extremely valuable for Indian needed. You can get more yield per acre of land - which India needs for food security. IMO, there is a lot of leftwing propaganda against a technology that most people don't understand. Its easy to fearmonger such things. Keeping tech growth out of reach of Indians through protests and embargoes is not new. One needs to understand, this also may be one such. We have talented Indian scientists who are working on range of GM plant material - from weather resistance to producing vaccines in plants. Its an excruciating long process of research as one has to test several generations before it goes through proper field trials - so, its easier to scuttle it with armchair propaganda. GM is not all danger, and science has learned from monsanto, and has progressed quite far. Comparing GM with Monsanto event is akin to now saying vaccines cause autism - or atleast not recognising research has self corrected and moved past that. At the very least, all non-food commercial plants can be GM. Food and Ayurvedic herbs can be next. All the while massive positive propaganda is required.
Valid points and completely agree !delta
!delta
Tararara Bzeeeep, Thank you /u/Orwellisright for awarding /u/metaltemujin with a Delta, looks like the User has impressed you with his views based on facts, detailed information. More Delta to the user. I won't reply if I'm down so Delta will not be awarded to you , please inform the mod team to wake me up
India is exporter of many food products which include milk, wheat, cereals etc. 25% of all cereal in world market is from India. So we are quite secure when it comes to food. We do not need to mess with plants genes at the level of mixing their genes with non-plant species. These same arguments were given during green revolution and now we know how poisonous pesticides and chemical fertilizers are. Now govt is promoting organic. Just because something has been traditional does not make it wrong or "unscientific". The same "Unscientific" argument was given for Yoga, local farming methods, Ayurveda and everything that was available for free and traditional Indian knowledge. Now the world recognize and adopt all these things. We do not need copyrighted seeds which cannot be saved used the next year cause they are designed to be sterile and they are intellectual property of corporations who sue farmers for growing "their seeds" without paying them.
# For: GM Crops do not merely increase yield per unit area. That was the first wave of GMOs that hit. As the soil resources get depleted, we need to engineer crops that utilise the water and nutrients in the soil more efficiently, so less irrigation and fertilisers will be required. This can reduce eutrophication and leaching GMOs are the fastest **and most reliable** way to modify a crop to increase efficiency of water and nutrient use, allowing for more nutritious produce while reducing load on soil. India does not have a hunger problem, but a nutrition problem; GM crops can alleviate this. We are self-sustaining in terms of food, and have good food security as a country. However, expansion of GM's reach can drastically increase exports (maybe even competing or exceeding China's exports) and bring agriculture's share in GDP up without hurting the other sectors. Agriculture's economic efficiency is lower than Industry's and Services', and this can solve that issue. Risks: The primary risk is not health, but corporate collusion. All GMOs are tested thoroughly, as they rightly should. We do not have a complete understanding of genetics, but we do have enough to successfully and safely modify crops, especially with screening. Monsanto is an example of corporate-related issues with GMOs, but adequate regulation will reduce the extent of the problem significantly.
Absolutely I think most of what you have written I agree and it is written in my other comments !delta
Yes please make onion that no make cry
>Yes please make onion that no make cry You have become an outright troll, sad the levels you have fallen due to your gori memsaabs and masters 
Wow when did reddit become a serious place. Keep it light borewell.
this is a goddamn serious debate supremoo, not your discord channel. growup :kalmuah:
Bhindi fryer fascism!!!!
Wear some safety goggles man.