So that's the topic.

 

Has the debate on biotechnology specifically GM crops already been deemed irrelavent by the world having chosen it's path already?

 

Of course there are stil nay sayers who are violently against it. However now with China and India making the move to fully develop biotech to support their bulging populations, and with South Africa ready to makes moves which will most likely lead to much of the rest of africa following, are these nay sayers just wasting their breath. 70% of all processed foods in North america contain GM products and that number is quickly growing. It seems that the only anti-GM stronghold left over is Europe. But really lets face it Europe is pretty insignificant compared to North America, Asia, and Africa... Plus much of their current objections seem to be political in nature flue by anti-american setiments and distrust of large corporations (Like Mosanto) which have tainted their reputations by previous seedy business practices.

Not to mention that every Anti-GM argument every made has failed to find any factual support whatsoever...

 

I find it funny how one of the major arguements against GM crops was that they'd leave the developing world behind. Ironically it seems that if many developed countries don't catch on they'll be the ones left behind....

 

I remember a story a historian friend of mine told me to put this into perspective. When trains first were being estabilished there was strong opposition to the technology. The leading arguement against them was that it was unnatural to move at speeds faster than on a horses back. And that travelling faster on a train would have negative health effects...

 

 

I guess what I mean to say is:

 

is it inevitability at this point.

Yes. I think it will only get more popular to use genetically engineered crops. This is my logic on GM crops. Correct me if I'm wrong here, but wouldn't we just break a crop of GM crop down to amino acids and stuff anyway. And if you could GM a crop to have a better and higher concentration of amino acids you would have to eat less vegetables. This would be especially beneficial in places such as Ethiopia or other starving countries.

by

previous seedy business practices

i am assuming you mean the selling of genetically advanced plants and not the seeds themselves, or is there something more sinister we should know about?

It hasn't won over the naysayers, but the naysayers haven't won over the public either.

It hasn't won over the naysayers, but the naysayers haven't won over the public either.

 

hmmm for some reason I suspect that you just answered based on the title of the post and did didn't read it at all...