GMISBEST. - 1/29/2006 5:19 PM
Botnst - 1/29/2006 5:09 PM
The patented plants usually produce viable seeds. But like any hybrid the F2 generation usually has a wide spectrum of unpleasant gene expressions. The difference between traditional hybridization and GA seed is that the time to productions is much shorter and the crop is much more predictable in terms of yeild. Many GA crops are specifically resistent to certain herbicides. This allows the farmer to spray herbicide in higher concentrations without damaging the crop yield.
The patented seeds can be easily followed from generation to generation. Just look at the marker gels (like on CSI) and you know in a day or so. Some countries (notably Argentina and Brasil) have been extremely tolerant of patent violations. To the point that Monsanto (I think) threatened never to sell them patented seeds again.
The whole issue of hybrid and GA seeds to 3rd world countries is an awful lot more complex. Traditional seed methods produce lower crop yields than hybrid or GA. However, hybrid and GA seed loses vigor after several generations resulting in lower yields than traditional seeds. So the poor farmer gets hooked into the system if he wants to make consistently higher yields than traditional seed.
Is this moral?
Is it moral to steal a patent?
My point all along. We want those farmers to be dependent on companies like Monsanto so we can have long term leverage by using the food supply instead of sending our boys over there. In addition why use a system that has worked for thousands of years but still does not provide the surplus yield that we enjoy? Purely organic form of farming should be reserved for us, rich countries that can best monitor the process and keep our people healthy. The Third World on the other hand must become a larger producer of those GM weeds so they can feed their people right now but in the future must styill obey our whishes. The can't be let loose on this planet with scarce resources you know, they will destroy it and ruin it for us.