Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

GM crops and a herd mentality

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
nosmokes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 04:47 PM
Original message
GM crops and a herd mentality
pretty interesting study, but i think it shows more about how folks w/o much education and an easily corruptable gov't can fall prey to questionable business practices of corporations like monsanto than it does a herd mentality. though when you get into the corn belt of the US i think it's just plain greed... but i'm a cynical bastard.
--###--
original-gmwatch

GM crops and a herd mentality (26/2/2007)

GM WATCH comment: Here's another interesting piece about the Washington University researcher Glenn Stone's multiyear study of the behaviour of cotton farmers in the Warangal district of Andhra Pradesh, which found that seed fads underlay the rapid spread of Bt cotton there.

It's been suggested the study may have more general relevance to GM crop adoption in the developing world, but could there be still wider lessons?

Stone's study suggests that it's wrong to see the number of farmers growing Bt cotton as an automatic endorsement of the effectiveness of the technology. This is because he found 'social learning' was taking place rather than careful assessment ('environmental learning') - 'everyone is copying everyone else, which results in fads, not testing'.

This is totally at odds with the endlessly repeated claims by Monsanto and others that the increase in Bt cotton acres in India 'bear testimony to the success of this technology and the benefit that farmers derive from it.' (Ranjana Smetacek, Director of Corporate Affairs for India, Monsanto)
~snip~
.
.
.
complete article including link to the study here
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
formercia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 04:55 PM
Response to Original message
1. What he didn't say
was that the farmers let sheep graze on the GM cotton fields after the cotton was picked and thousands of sheep died.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sharp_stick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 05:10 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. What?
Do you have a link to show this? I'd never heard of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 05:19 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Surprise surprise
God forbid the media ever show anything about the possible risks of GE...

Here is a write-up of the sheep and goat mortality though it doesn't go nearly deep enough into surrounding mortality rates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 05:11 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. I've heard about this many times.
Edited on Mon Feb-26-07 05:11 PM by Bornaginhooligan
All from the same questionable source. Nothing in peer reviewed journals.

So speaking of herd mentality...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
formercia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-27-07 08:09 AM
Response to Reply #3
7. Peer Review?
http://www.unobserver.com/layout5.php?id=2308&blz=1

GM: Mass Deaths in Sheep Grazing on Bt Cotton, notes Dr. Mae-Wan Ho

2006-05-04 | At least 1,800 sheep reported dead from severe toxicity after grazing on Bt cotton fields in just four villages in Andhra Pradesh India

The Bt trail of dead sheep, ill workers and dead villagers over three years

At least 1 820 sheep were reported dead after grazing on post-harvest Bt cotton crops; the symptoms and post-mortem findings strongly suggest they died from severe toxicity. This was uncovered in a preliminary investigation conducted by civil society organisations in just four villages in the Warangal district of Andhra Pradesh in India. The actual problem is likely to be much greater.

This latest report confirms the findings of an earlier fact-finding investigation, also conducted by civil society organisations, on illnesses in cotton farm workers and handlers caused by Bt cotton in another cotton-growing state, Madhya Pradesh, in India (“More illnesses linked to Bt crops”, this series).

And not so long ago, we reported similar illnesses and deaths among villagers in the Philippines linked to exposure to Bt maize since 2003 (“GM ban long overdue, dozens ill and five deaths in the Philippines”, SiS 29).

It cannot be mere coincidence that similar Bt toxins from the soil bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis incorporated in the genetically modified crops are involved in all these cases; but the regulators have done nothing. Things are so bad that the European Commission levelled an accusation of bias towards the biotech industry against its own food safety regulatory body (“European Food Safety Authority criticised of GMO bias”, this series).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnyCanuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 05:54 PM
Response to Original message
5. Indian Cotton Farmers Betrayed

Indian Cotton Farmers Betrayed

SNIP

Agricultural scientists Dr Abdul Qayum and Kiran Sakkhari conducted the first independent study on Bt cotton and released their report Bt cotton in Andhra Pradesh: A three year assessment in 2005. The study involved a season-long investigation in 87 villages of the major cotton growing districts - Warangal, Nalgonda, Adilabad and Kurnool. It found against Bt cotton on all counts and was vital in getting the hybrids involved banned in AP:

* It failed miserably for small farmers in terms of yield; non-Bt cotton surpassed Bt by nearly 30 percent and at 10 percent less expense

* It did not significantly reduce pesticide use; over the three years, Bt farmers used Rs2 571 worth of pesticide on average while the non-Bt farmers used Rs2 766 worth of pesticide

* It did not bring profit to farmers; over the three years, the non-Bt farmer earned on average 60 percent more than the Bt farmer

* It did not reduce the cost of cultivation; on average, the Bt farmer had to pay 12 percent more than the non-Bt farmer

* It did not result in a healthier environment; researchers found a special kind of root rot spread by Bollgard cotton infecting the soil, so that other crops would not grow.

Co-author of the study, Kiran Sakkhari, told me that farmers buy the Bt cotton because of the extreme hype. “Farmers have been cheated before by being sold dud pesticide that looked like the real thing, and now they are trying to avoid pesticide altogether by using Bt. But the Bt gene is only partially effective against bollworm and ineffective against the dozens of other pests that routinely attack cotton, so pesticide use will continue to increase with Bt cotton. For example, the tobacco caterpillar ( Spodoptera litura) , which has caused havoc on the Bt cotton this year; though not on the non-Bt cotton, has done as much damage as any primary cotton pest.”

He also reiterated that Bt plants are intolerant of biotic and abiotic stress. “Wilt, a physiological disorder prevalent this year, is found only on the Bt crop, and tobacco streak virus, spread by the sucking pest, thrips, is a big problem; and while the non Bt cotton recovered well from excessive rain this season, the Bt crop is a shambles.” He thinks that the Bt cotton may give a good yield in laboratory conditions; but that cannot be extrapolated to larger areas. He admits this is a most generous assessment of the situation; and that many people, including himself, think that there is something basically wrong with the parent lines or the Bt technology per se .

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/IndianCottonFarmersBetrayed.php
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnyCanuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 10:47 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. And by way of contrast.


Br. Paul's Organic Cotton and Vegetable Farm

Jesuit brother breaks all the rules he learned in agricultural college, and shows how to bring food security to the world

Dr. Mae-Wan Ho

Organic cotton is possible and highly profitable

Brother Paul Desmarais of the Kasisi Agricultural Training Centre of Lusaka in Zambia is a happy man. He has just demonstrated that cotton can be grown organically, and furthermore, at yields up to more than twice the national average. That is quite an achievement as cotton is notorious for consuming the most agrochemicals of any crop, some 21 percent of that consumed worldwide; and most people have been led to believe that cotton cannot be grown without chemical sprays.

“I am confident that anyone can grow cotton organically in Zambia”, says Br. Paul, beaming from ear to ear. You need to do only two things: increase the fertility of the soil with organic matter, and put extra local plant species into the cotton fields to control insect pests.”

Plants that are sick or doing poorly will be the first to succumb to insect pests; so keeping a crop healthy with fertile soil reduces insect attacks.

The species inter-planted with the cotton crop are those that attract pests away from the cotton crop or beneficial predators, or provide home for beneficial predators; many species serving both purposes. For example, munsale (sweet sorghum) attracts bollworm and aphids as well as a host of beneficial insects; nyemba (cowpeas) provides a habitat and food source for ants and predatory wasps, and also attracts the pests leafhoppers, aphids and bollworms; sanyembe (sunhemp) is highly attractive to beneficial insects as a border crop and controls nematodes as well. Delele (okra) attracts bollworms, caterpillars and leaf eaters; milisi (maize) traps aphids on tassels and bollworms; mupilu (mustard) attracts beneficial hover flies and parasitic wasps as well as aphids on which they feed. Malanga (sunflower) attracts bollworm moths to lay eggs, and the beneficial lacewings that feed on aphids. A horizontal row containing a mixture of all these were planted for every 20 rows of cotton in the field bordered by sunnhemp on two sides. A host of other species can be planted, adding to the diversity of the farm. A variety of trees, such as Sesbania , Leucaena , and other indigenous species can act as windbreaks and provide habitat for farmers' friends and provide material for composting and making teas.

SNIP

The economics of organic cotton from the KATC was compared with that of conventional cotton in the villages (Table 2). As can be seen, the net profit from organic production was more than twice that of conventional. The organic plots not only gave higher yield in the main cotton crop, they also provided harvests from the inter-planted species that could be sold.

The input costs for the organic plots were higher due to the extra labour and costs of preparing composts and manure teas. Less cottonseed is used in the organic fields due to inter-planting, but the yield was still higher. If the cotton were sold on the organic market, it would fetch a premium and increase income still further for the household.

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/BrPaulsOrganicFarm.php
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
formercia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-27-07 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. This method works well
I inter-plant my garden with flowers and plants that attract beneficial predatory insects and I have not had to spray in 7 years. Last year I monitored my potatoes closely and found that the adult Colorado Potato beetles showed up on schedule but they had disappeared in 2 days and there were no egg clusters or larvae remaining. Organic farmers around here get $2. per pound for organic potatoes at the farmer's market.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Nov 03rd 2024, 07:26 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC