Changement climatique et environnement
#TheFutureIsYours Montrer la voie vers un avenir plus durable
Embrace the future of farming
Humanity has been consuming genetically modified food for thousands of years. Ever since farming exists, we have been artificially selecting the seeds that yield a larger quantity or higher quality products. We've done the same with animals, by selecting those who produce more. Examples of this can be seen by comparing the original wild corn with the corn we use now, artificially selected over hundreds of generations, or the original sheep and the sheep that exist now on farms. All these are examples of genetic modification produced by the random nature of reproduction. We now have the technology (CRISPR) to produce all these varieties in a matter of days. We have the opportunity to cure hunger in many places, increase the nutritional value of food, increase yields of manufacturing crops like cotton, and make plants resistant to emerging dangers of climatic change and globalization like predatory fungi or insects that damage crops or by making crops resistant to dissication and heat waves.
It's sad to see that while the rest of the world is moving forward, we in Europe have falled behind in this race. Ever since the introduction of transgenic products, the quality of life of many people has increased. There has not been a single death or even an illness caused by them, and there isn't a reason to. They are just like normal plants, just with different properties.
This technology can also help keep the biodiversity, by not using a single variety, but modifying many local.

Événements associés
Oběhové hospodářství a snižování odpadu
La adaptación al cambio climático: incrementar la resiliencia del territorio de frontera
Die Zukunft der Gemeinsamen Europäischen Agrarpolitik
Atelier participatif - Du Pacte vert à la PAC : quels objectifs pour la nouvelle politique agricole commune
Αποκατάσταση της βιοποικιλότητας και μείωση της ρύπανσης: Οι δράσεις της Κύπρου και η Ευρωπαϊκή Πράσινη Συμφωνία
La partecipazione delle donne al Green Deal - opportunità per un'emancipazione economica
Approuvée par
et 30 personnes de plus (voir plus) (voir moins)
et 31 personnes de plus (voir plus) (voir moins)
Empreintes digitales
Le fragment de texte ci-dessous constitue une restitution abrégée, hachée de ce contenu. Il vous est conseillé de vous assurer que cela n’a pas altéré le contenu car une simple modification pourrait lui conférer une valeur totalement différente.
Valeur:
cc727f0fa5e353d352edf22b1d40b17835a6b05fd9a1996743cacbbbbf9d03dc
Source (Source):
{"body":{"es":"Humanity has been consuming genetically modified food for thousands of years. Ever since farming exists, we have been artificially selecting the seeds that yield a larger quantity or higher quality products. We've done the same with animals, by selecting those who produce more. Examples of this can be seen by comparing the original wild corn with the corn we use now, artificially selected over hundreds of generations, or the original sheep and the sheep that exist now on farms. All these are examples of genetic modification produced by the random nature of reproduction. We now have the technology (CRISPR) to produce all these varieties in a matter of days. We have the opportunity to cure hunger in many places, increase the nutritional value of food, increase yields of manufacturing crops like cotton, and make plants resistant to emerging dangers of climatic change and globalization like predatory fungi or insects that damage crops or by making crops resistant to dissication and heat waves.\n\nIt's sad to see that while the rest of the world is moving forward, we in Europe have falled behind in this race. Ever since the introduction of transgenic products, the quality of life of many people has increased. There has not been a single death or even an illness caused by them, and there isn't a reason to. They are just like normal plants, just with different properties.\n\nThis technology can also help keep the biodiversity, by not using a single variety, but modifying many local.","machine_translations":{"bg":"Човечеството е консумирано генетично модифицирана храна за селскостопански години. Откакто съществува селскостопанска дейност, ние бяхме изкуствени, за да подберем кандидатите, които произвеждат по-големи количества или висококачествени продукти. Направихме същото с животните, като подберем кой произвежда повече. Това може да се види чрез сравняване на първоначалната дива царевица с царевичната царевица, която използваме сега, изкуствено подбрана на стотици поколения, или оригиналната договореност, която съществува в стопанствата. Всичко това са прегледи на генетичната модификация, получени от случайния характер на размножаването. Сега разполагаме с технологията (CRISPR), за да произвеждаме всички тези сортове в рамките на няколко дни. Имаме възможност да се справим с глада на много места, да увеличим хранителната стойност на храните, да увеличим добивите от производствени култури като памука и да направим растенията устойчиви на възникващите опасности от Климатичните промени и глобализацията, като например хищнически гъби или насекоми, които вредят на културите, или като направят културите устойчиви на диалог и горещи вълни. Тъжно е да се види, че останалата част от света напредва, ние в Европа сме заблудени в това отношение. Оттогава въвеждането на трансгенни продукти включва качеството на живот на много хора. Не е налице нито една вина, нито дори възраст, причинена от тях, и няма причина за това. Те са точно като обикновените растения, точно с различни предложения. Тази технология може също така да спомогне за запазването на биологичното разнообразие, като не използва нито един сорт, а променя много местни сортове.","cs":"Lidstvo se konzumuje geneticky modifikované potraviny po dobu zemědělské činnosti. Od doby, kdy zemědělství existuje, jsme umělí vybírat žadatele, kteří produkují větší množství nebo vysoce kvalitní produkty. Udělali jsme tutéž práci se zvířaty tím, že jsme vybrali, kdo produkuje více. To lze pozorovat porovnáním původní volně žijící kukuřice s nyní používanou kukuřicí, která byla uměle vybrána po více než stovkách generací, nebo původní dohodou, která v hospodářstvích existuje. To vše jsou recenze genetické modifikace vytvořené náhodným charakterem reprodukce. Nyní máme technologii (CRISPR), abychom mohli všechny tyto odrůdy produkovat v řádu dní. Na mnoha místech máme možnost vymýtit hlad, zvýšit výživovou hodnotu potravin, zvýšit výnosy z výroby plodin, jako je bavlna, a učinit rostliny odolné vůči novým nebezpečím, která přináší klimatická změna a globalizace, jako jsou dravé houby nebo hmyz, které poškozují plodiny, nebo tím, že plodiny budou odolné vůči dialogu a vlnám veder. Je smutné vidět, že zbytek světa postupuje kupředu, my jsme v Evropě v tomto ohledu klamali. Již od zavedení transgenních produktů byla zahrnuta kvalita života mnoha lidí. V důsledku toho nedošlo k jedinému pochybení nebo dokonce věku a neexistuje důvod k tomu. Jsou stejně jako běžné závody, jen s různými návrhy. Tato technologie může rovněž přispět k zachování biologické rozmanitosti tím, že nepoužívá jednu odrůdu, ale mění mnoho místních druhů.","da":"Menneskeheden er blevet konsumeret genetisk modificerede fødevarer i landbrugsårene. Lige siden landbruget eksisterede, har vi været kunstige med hensyn til at udvælge de ansøgere, der leverer større mængder eller produkter af høj kvalitet. Vi har gjort det samme med dyr ved at vælge, hvem der producerer mere. Dette kan ses ved at sammenligne den oprindelige vilde majs med den majs, vi anvender nu, kunstigt udvalgt over hundredvis af generationer, eller den oprindelige aftale, der findes på landbrugsbedrifter. Alle disse er revurderinger af genetisk modifikation som følge af reproduktionens tilfældige karakter. Vi har nu teknologien (CRISPR) til at producere alle disse sorter inden for en række dage. Vi har mulighed for at helbrede sult mange steder, øge fødevarers næringsværdi, øge udbyttet af produktionsafgrøder som bomuld og gøre planter modstandsdygtige over for nye farer ved klimatiske forandringer og globalisering såsom rodatoriske svampe eller insekter, der skader afgrøder, eller ved at gøre afgrøder resistente over for dialog og hedebølger. Det er svært at se, at resten af verden skrider fremad, og vi har i Europa vildledt bagud i denne henseende. På et hvilket som helst tidspunkt genoptager indførelsen af transgene produkter, og mange menneskers livskvalitet er blevet medtaget. Der har ikke været tale om en enkelt fejl eller en alder forårsaget af dem, og der er ingen grund til det. De er lige så almindelige anlæg med forskellige forslag. Denne teknologi kan også bidrage til at bevare biodiversiteten ved ikke at anvende en enkelt sort, men ved at ændre mange lokale.","de":"Die Menschheit wird seit Jahren gentechnisch veränderte Lebensmittel verzehrt. Seit dem Bestehen der Landwirtschaft sind wir gekünstelt, die Antragsteller auszuwählen, die eine größere Menge oder hochwertige Erzeugnisse produzieren. Das Gleiche haben wir mit Tieren gemacht, indem wir ausgewählt haben, wer mehr produziert. Dies ergibt sich aus dem Vergleich des ursprünglichen Wildmaises mit dem Mais, den wir heute verwenden, künstlich über hunderte Generationen ausgewählt, oder mit der ursprünglichen Vereinbarung, die in landwirtschaftlichen Betrieben besteht. All dies sind Überprüfungen der genetischen Veränderung, die durch den Zufallscharakter der Fortpflanzung hervorgerufen wird. Wir verfügen nun über die Technologie (CRISPR), um all diese Sorten in einigen Tagen zu produzieren. Wir haben die Möglichkeit, den Hunger an vielen Orten zu heilen, den Nährwert von Lebensmitteln zu erhöhen, die Erträge von Produktionspflanzen wie Baumwolle zu steigern und Pflanzen resistent gegen aufkommende Gefahren des Klimawandels und der Globalisierung wie Raubpilze oder Insekten zu machen, die Kulturpflanzen schädigen, oder indem Kulturen gegen Dialog- und Hitzewellen resistent gemacht werden. Es ist traurig zu sehen, dass die übrige Welt voranschreitet, und wir in Europa haben in dieser Hinsicht getäuscht. Bei der Einführung transgener Produkte wurde die Lebensqualität vieler Menschen berücksichtigt. Es ist kein einzelnes Verschulden oder sogar ein von ihnen verursachtes Alter gegeben, und es gibt keinen Grund dafür. Sie sind genauso wie normale Pflanzen, nur mit unterschiedlichen Vorschlägen. Diese Technologie kann auch dazu beitragen, die biologische Vielfalt zu erhalten, indem sie nicht nur eine einzige Sorte verwendet, sondern viele lokale Varianten verändert.","el":"Η ανθρωπότητα καταναλώνεται γενετικά τροποποιημένα τρόφιμα για τα έτη της γεωργίας. Από την εποχή της γεωργικής δραστηριότητας, είμαστε τεχνητοί για την επιλογή των αιτούντων που παράγουν μεγαλύτερη ποσότητα ή προϊόντα υψηλής ποιότητας. Το ίδιο έγινε και με τα ζώα, επιλέγοντας ποιος παράγει περισσότερα. Αυτό μπορεί να γίνει αντιληπτό με τη σύγκριση του αρχικού άγριου καλαμποκιού με το καλαμπόκι που χρησιμοποιούμε σήμερα, το οποίο έχει επιλεγεί τεχνητά από εκατοντάδες γενιές, ή με την αρχική συμφωνία που υπάρχει στις γεωργικές εκμεταλλεύσεις. Όλα αυτά είναι αναθεωρήσεις γενετικής τροποποίησης που προκύπτουν από τον τυχαίο χαρακτήρα της αναπαραγωγής. Διαθέτουμε πλέον την τεχνολογία (CRISPR) για την παραγωγή όλων αυτών των ποικιλιών μέσα σε λίγες μέρες. Έχουμε τη δυνατότητα να θεραπεύσουμε την πείνα σε πολλά μέρη, να αυξήσουμε τη διατροφική αξία των τροφίμων, να αυξήσουμε τις αποδόσεις των καλλιεργειών παραγωγής, όπως το βαμβάκι, και να καταστήσουμε τα φυτά ανθεκτικά στους αναδυόμενους κινδύνους της κλιματικής αλλαγής και της παγκοσμιοποίησης, όπως τα αρπακτικά μύκητες ή τα έντομα που βλάπτουν τις καλλιέργειες ή καθιστώντας τις καλλιέργειες ανθεκτικές στον διάλογο και στα κύματα καύσωνα. Είναι λυπηρό το γεγονός ότι έχει προχωρήσει ο υπόλοιπος κόσμος, εμείς στην Ευρώπη έχουμε υποπέσει σε παραπλάνηση στο θέμα αυτό. Ποτέ με την εισαγωγή διαγονιδιακών προϊόντων, έχει συμπεριληφθεί η ποιότητα ζωής πολλών ανθρώπων. Δεν υπήρξε ένα και μόνο σφάλμα ή ακόμη και ηλικία που προκλήθηκε από αυτά, και δεν υπάρχει λόγος. Είναι ακριβώς όπως οι κανονικές μονάδες παραγωγής, ακριβώς με διαφορετικές προτάσεις. Η τεχνολογία αυτή μπορεί επίσης να συμβάλει στη διατήρηση της βιοποικιλότητας, όχι με τη χρήση μιας μόνο ποικιλίας, αλλά με την τροποποίηση πολλών τοπικών ποικιλιών.","en":"Humanity has been consumed genetically modified food for farming years. Ever since farming exists, we have been artificial to select the applicants that yield a larger quantity or high quality products. We've done the same with animals, by selecting who produces more. Consideration of this can be seen by Comparing the original wild corn with the corn we use now, artificially selected over hundreds of generations, or the original deal that exists on farms. All these are reviews of genetic modification produced by the random nature of reproduction. We now have the technology (CRISPR) to produce all these varieties in a matter of days. We have the option to cure hunger in many places, increase the nutritional value of food, increase yields of manufacturing crops like cotton, and make plants resistant to emerging dangers of Climatic change and globalisation like predatory fungi or insects that harm crops or by making crops resistant to dialogue and heat waves. It’s sad to see that it has the rest of the world is moving forward, we in Europe have misled behind in this respect. Ever sincedes the introduction of Transgenic products, the quality of life of many people has been included. There has not been a single fault or even an age caused by them, and there isn't a reason to. They are just like normal plants, just with different proposals. This technology can also help keep the biodiversity, by not using a single variety, but modifying many local ones.","et":"Inimkonda on põllumajanduslikel aastatel tarbitud geneetiliselt muundatud toitu. Põllumajandustootmisest alates oleme olnud kunstlikud valima taotlejaid, kes toodavad suuremas koguses või kvaliteetseid tooteid. Oleme teinud sama loomadega, valides, kes toodab rohkem. Seda arvesse võttes võrdleme algupärast metsmaisi tänapäeval kasutatava maisiga, mis on valitud üle sadade põlvkondade kunstlikult, või põllumajandusettevõtetes eksisteeriva algse tehinguga. Kõik need on geneetilise muundamise hindamised, mille aluseks on sigivuse juhuslikkus. Nüüd on meil olemas tehnoloogia (CRISPR), et toota kõiki neid sorte mõne päeva jooksul. Meil on võimalus parandada näljahäda paljudes kohtades, suurendada toidu toiteväärtust, suurendada põllukultuuride, näiteks puuvilla saagikust ning muuta taimed vastupidavaks uute ohtude suhtes, mida põhjustavad klimaatilised muutused ja globaliseerumine, nagu röövellikud seened või putukad, mis kahjustavad põllukultuure, või muuta põllukultuurid dialoogi ja kuumalainete suhtes vastupidavaks. On kahetsusväärne näha, et ülejäänud maailm on edasi liikumas, me oleme Euroopas selles osas eksitanud. Alates transgeensete toodete kasutuselevõtust on hõlmatud paljude inimeste elukvaliteet. Tegemist ei ole üksiksüüga ega isegi vanusega, mille nad on põhjustanud, ning selleks ei ole põhjust. Need on samasugused nagu tavalised tehased, millel on ka erinevad ettepanekud. See tehnoloogia võib aidata säilitada ka bioloogilist mitmekesisust, sest ei kasutata ainult üht sorti, vaid muudetakse paljusid kohalikke.","fi":"Ihmiskunta on nauttinut muuntogeenisiä elintarvikkeita viljelyvuosina. Maataloustuotannosta lähtien on ollut keinotekoista valita hakijat, jotka tuottavat enemmän tai korkealaatuisia tuotteita. Olemme tehneet samoin eläinten kanssa valitsemalla, ketkä tuottavat enemmän. Tämä voidaan nähdä vertaamalla alkuperäistä luonnonvaraista maissia nyt käytettävään maissiin, joka on valittu keinotekoisesti satojen sukupolvien ajan, tai maatiloilla vallitsevaan alkuperäiseen sopimukseen. Kaikki nämä ovat geenimuuntelun arviointeja, jotka johtuvat lisääntymisen sattumanvaraisuudesta. Meillä on nyt tekniikka (CRISPR), jonka avulla kaikkia näitä lajikkeita voidaan tuottaa muutamassa päivässä. Meillä on mahdollisuus korjata nälkää monin paikoin, lisätä elintarvikkeiden ravintoarvoa, lisätä puuvillan kaltaisten viljelykasvien tuotantosatoa ja tehdä kasveista vastustuskykyisiä ilmastomuutoksen ja globalisaation aiheuttamille uusille vaaroille, kuten pesivät sienet tai hyönteiset, jotka vahingoittavat viljelykasveja, tai tekemällä viljelmistä vuoropuhelua ja helleaaltoja kestäviä. On surullista nähdä, että muu maailma etenee, ja olemme Euroopassa menneet taaksepäin. Transgeenisten tuotteiden käyttöönotosta lähtien monien ihmisten elämänlaatu on otettu huomioon. Kyse ei ole yhdestä ainoasta tuottamuksesta tai edes iästä, eikä siihen ole mitään syytä. Ne ovat aivan tavallisia laitoksia, joilla on vain erilaisia ehdotuksia. Tämä teknologia voi myös auttaa säilyttämään biologisen monimuotoisuuden, koska siinä ei käytetä yhtä lajiketta vaan muutetaan monia paikallisia lajikkeita.","fr":"L’humanité est consommée d’aliments génétiquement modifiés pendant des années d’élevage. Depuis l’existence de l’agriculture, il est artificiel de sélectionner les demandeurs qui produisent une plus grande quantité ou des produits de qualité supérieure. Nous avons fait de même avec les animaux, en sélectionnant ceux qui produisent davantage. Cet aspect peut être examiné en comparant le maïs sauvage d’origine avec le maïs que nous utilisons aujourd’hui, sélectionné artificiellement sur plusieurs centaines de générations, ou en comparant l’accord original qui existe dans les exploitations agricoles. Tous ces éléments sont des examens de la modification génétique résultant du caractère aléatoire de la reproduction. Nous disposons désormais de la technologie (CRISPR) pour produire toutes ces variétés en quelques jours. Nous avons la possibilité de guérir la faim dans de nombreux endroits, d’augmenter la valeur nutritionnelle des denrées alimentaires, d’augmenter les rendements des cultures manufacturières comme le coton et de rendre les plantes résistantes aux nouveaux dangers du changement climatique et de la mondialisation, comme les champignons prédateurs ou les insectes qui nuisent aux cultures, ou en rendant les cultures résistantes au dialogue et aux vagues de chaleur. Il est triste de voir que le reste du monde progresse, nous avons induit l’Europe en erreur à cet égard. La qualité de vie de nombreuses personnes a été prise en compte lors de l’introduction de produits transgéniques. Il n’y a pas eu de faute unique ni même d’âge, et il n’y a pas de raison. Ils sont tout aussi similaires aux usines normales, avec des propositions différentes. Cette technologie peut également contribuer à préserver la biodiversité, en n’utilisant pas une seule variété, mais en modifiant de nombreuses variétés locales.","ga":"Tá an cine daonna tar éis bia géinmhodhnaithe a chaitheamh ar feadh na mblianta feirmeoireachta. Ó tharla go bhfuil an fheirmeoireacht ann, táimid saorga chun na hiarratasóirí a roghnú a mbíonn líon níos mó táirgí nó táirgí ar ardchaighdeán mar thoradh orthu. Táimid tar éis a rinneadh mar an gcéanna le hainmhithe, ag roghnú a tháirgeann níos mó. Is féidir breithniú ar seo a fheiceáil ag Comparing an arbhar fiáin bunaidh leis an arbhar a úsáid againn anois, a roghnaíodh go saorga thar na céadta glúnta, nó an déileáil bunaidh atá ann ar fheirmeacha. Tá gach na hathbhreithnithe ar mhodhnú géiniteach arna dtáirgeadh ag an nádúr randamach atáirgthe. Ní mór dúinn anois an teicneolaíocht (CRISPR) a thabhairt ar aird go léir na cineálacha seo i réimse na laethanta. Tá sé de rogha againn an t-ocras a leigheas in a lán áiteanna, cur le luach cothaitheach an bhia, táirgeacht bharra monaraíochta ar nós cadáis a mhéadú, agus plandaí a dhéanamh frithsheasmhach in aghaidh contúirtí atá ag teacht chun cinn mar gheall ar an athrú aeráide agus ar dhomhandú amhail fungais chreachacha nó feithidí a dhéanann dochar do bharra nó trí bharra a bheith frithsheasmhach in aghaidh comhráite agus tonnta teasa. Is brónach é a fheiceáil go bhfuil an chuid eile den domhan ag dul chun cinn, tá muid san Eoraip tar éis dul i ngleic leis sin. Ó shin i leith tugadh isteach táirgí Transgenic, tá cáilíocht beatha a lán daoine curtha san áireamh. Ní raibh locht amháin nó fiú aois de bharr Them, agus nach bhfuil cúis leis. Tá siad díreach cosúil le plandaí gnáth, ach le tograí éagsúla. Is féidir leis an teicneolaíocht seo cabhrú freisin leis an mbithéagsúlacht a choinneáil, trí gan aon chineál amháin a úsáid, ach na cinn áitiúla go leor a mhodhnú.","hr":"Humanost se konzumira genetski modificiranom hranom tijekom poljoprivrednih godina. Od početka poljoprivredne proizvodnje bilo je umjetno odabrati podnositelje zahtjeva koji proizvode veću količinu ili visokokvalitetne proizvode. Isto smo učinili sa životinjama tako što smo odabrali tko proizvodi više. To je vidljivo iz usporedbe izvornog divljeg kukuruza s kukuruzom koji danas upotrebljavamo, umjetno izabranih preko stotina generacija, ili izvornim dogovorom koji postoji na poljoprivrednim gospodarstvima. Sve to su recenzije genetske modifikacije nastale slučajnom prirodom razmnožavanja. Sada imamo tehnologiju (CRISPR) za proizvodnju svih tih sorti u nekoliko dana. Možemo liječiti glad na mnogim mjestima, povećati prehrambenu vrijednost hrane, povećati prinose proizvodnih kultura kao što je pamuk te učiniti biljke otpornima na nove opasnosti od klimatskih promjena i globalizacije, kao što su predatorske gljive ili kukci koji štete usjevima ili stvaranjem usjeva otpornih na dijalog i toplinske valove. Žao je što je ostatak svijeta napredovao, a mi smo u Europi zapostavljeni u tom pogledu. Od uvođenja transgenskih proizvoda uključena je kvaliteta života mnogih ljudi. Nije došlo ni do kakve pogreške, pa čak ni do starosti, i ne postoji razlog za to. To su, baš kao i obične biljke, samo s različitim prijedlozima. Ta tehnologija može pomoći i očuvanju biološke raznolikosti jer ne upotrebljava samo jednu sortu, već mijenja mnoge lokalne.","hu":"Az emberiség a gazdálkodási évek során géntechnológiával módosított élelmiszert fogyasztott. A gazdálkodás óta mesterségesen választottuk ki azokat a kérelmezőket, akik nagyobb mennyiségű vagy kiváló minőségű terméket állítanak elő. Ugyanezt tettük az állatokkal is, kiválasztva, hogy ki termel többet. Ezt úgy lehet figyelembe venni, hogy összevetjük az eredeti vadon termő kukoricát a ma használt kukoricával, amelyet mesterségesen több száz generációra választunk ki, vagy a gazdaságokban fennálló eredeti egyezség alapján. Ezek mindegyike a genetikai módosításnak a szaporodás véletlenszerű természetéből adódó felülvizsgálata. Most már rendelkezésre áll a technológia (CRISPR) ahhoz, hogy napközben állítsuk elő mindezen fajtákat. Sok helyen van lehetőségünk az éhezés kezelésére, az élelmiszerek tápértékének növelésére, a gyapothoz hasonló növények terméshozamának növelésére, valamint arra, hogy a növényeket ellenállóvá tegyük a klimatikus változások és a globalizáció új veszélyeivel szemben, mint például a felfaló gombák vagy rovarok, amelyek károsítják a növényeket, vagy azáltal, hogy ellenállóvá teszik a növényeket a párbeszéddel és a hőhullámokkal szemben. Szomorú, hogy a világ többi részével halad előre, Európában pedig e tekintetben félrevezettük a lemaradást. A transzgenikus termékek bevezetése óta számos ember életminősége szerepel benne. Nem egyetlen hibáról, sőt életkorról sem volt szó, és nincs ok erre. Éppúgy, mint a szokványos üzemek, csak különböző javaslatokkal rendelkeznek. Ez a technológia hozzájárulhat a biológiai sokféleség megőrzéséhez is azáltal, hogy nem egyetlen fajtát használ, hanem számos helyi változatot módosít.","it":"L'umanità è consumata da anni geneticamente modificati. Da quando l'agricoltura esiste, siamo stati artificiosi nel selezionare i richiedenti che producono una quantità maggiore o prodotti di alta qualità. Abbiamo fatto lo stesso con gli animali selezionando chi produce di più. Questo aspetto può essere preso in considerazione confrontando il mais selvatico originale con il mais che utilizziamo oggi, scelto artificialmente nell'arco di centinaia di generazioni, o l'accordo originale esistente nelle aziende agricole. Si tratta di revisioni di modificazioni genetiche prodotte dalla natura aleatoria della riproduzione. Oggi disponiamo della tecnologia (CRISPR) per produrre tutte queste varietà in una serie di giorni. Abbiamo la possibilità di curare la fame in molti luoghi, aumentare il valore nutrizionale degli alimenti, aumentare la resa delle colture manifatturiere come il cotone e rendere le piante resistenti ai pericoli emergenti del cambiamento climatico e della globalizzazione, come i funghi predatori o gli insetti che danneggiano le colture o rendendo le colture resistenti al dialogo e alle ondate di calore. È triste constatare che il resto del mondo sta avanzando, in Europa siamo indotti in errore al riguardo. Sempre grazie all'introduzione di prodotti transgenici, è stata inclusa la qualità della vita di molte persone. Non vi è stato un singolo difetto o addirittura un'età da essi causata, e non vi è motivo di farlo. Sono al pari degli impianti normali, con proposte diverse. Questa tecnologia può anche contribuire a mantenere la biodiversità, non utilizzando un'unica varietà, ma modificando molte specie locali.","lt":"Žmonija ūkininkavimo metus vartoja genetiškai modifikuotą maistą. Nuo tada, kai ūkininkaujama, mes dirbtinai atrinkome pareiškėjus, kurie gamina didesnius kiekius arba kokybiškus produktus. Tą patį padarėme ir su gyvūnais, pasirinkdami, kas gamina daugiau. Į tai galima atsižvelgti lyginant pradinį laukinį kukurūzą su dabar naudojamais kukurūzais, dirbtinai atrinktais per šimtus kartų, arba pirminiu ūkiuose sudarytu sandoriu. Visi šie tyrimai – genetinių modifikacijų, kurias lemia atsitiktinis reprodukcijos pobūdis, apžvalga. Dabar turime technologiją (CRISPR), pagal kurią per keletą dienų galima gaminti visas šias veisles. Turime galimybę daugelyje vietovių išgydyti badą, padidinti maisto maistinę vertę, padidinti augalų, pavyzdžiui, medvilnės, gamybos derlių ir užtikrinti, kad augalai būtų atsparūs kylantiems klimato kaitos ir globalizacijos pavojams, pvz., plėšrūnams ar vabzdžiams, kenkiantiems pasėliams, arba dėl to, kad augalai tampa atsparūs dialogui ir karščio bangoms. Liūdna, kad kitas pasaulis žengia į priekį, o Europa šiuo atžvilgiu suklaidino. Nuo pat transgeninių produktų pateikimo į rinką buvo įtraukta daugelio žmonių gyvenimo kokybė. Dėl jų kaltės ar amžiaus nebuvo nė vienos kaltės ir nėra priežasties. Jie yra panašūs į įprastus įrenginius ir teikia skirtingus pasiūlymus. Ši technologija taip pat gali padėti išsaugoti biologinę įvairovę, nes nenaudojama viena veislė, o keičiama daugelis vietinių rūšių.","lv":"Cilvēce lauksaimniecības gados ir patērēta ģenētiski modificēta pārtika. Kopš lauksaimniecības pastāvēšanas mēs esam mākslīgi atlasījuši pieteikuma iesniedzējus, kas ražo lielāku daudzumu vai augstas kvalitātes produktus. Mēs to pašu esam izdarījuši ar dzīvniekiem, izvēloties, kas ražo vairāk. To var apskatīt, salīdzinot sākotnējo savvaļas kukurūzu ar kukurūzu, ko mēs izmantojam tagad, mākslīgi atlasot vairāk nekā simtiem paaudžu, vai sākotnējo vienošanos, kas pastāv saimniecībās. Tie visi ir pārskati par ģenētisko modifikāciju, kas rodas pēc nejaušības principa. Tagad mums ir tehnoloģija (CRISPR), lai ražotu visas šīs šķirnes dažu dienu laikā. Mums ir iespēja daudzās vietās izskaust badu, palielināt pārtikas uzturvērtību, palielināt tādu kultūraugu ražu kā kokvilnu un padarīt augus izturīgus pret jauniem klimatisko pārmaiņu un globalizācijas draudiem, piemēram, plēsīgām sēnītēm vai kukaiņiem, kas kaitē kultūraugiem, vai padarot kultūraugus izturīgus pret dialoga un karstuma viļņiem. Ir skumji redzēt, ka pārējā pasaule virzās uz priekšu, mēs Eiropā esam maldinājuši šajā ziņā. Kopš transgēnu produktu ieviešanas ir iekļauta daudzu cilvēku dzīves kvalitāte. Nav bijis nevienas vainas vai pat vecuma, kas radies viņu dēļ, un tam nav iemesla. Tie ir gluži kā normāli augi, tikai ar dažādiem priekšlikumiem. Šī tehnoloģija var arī palīdzēt saglabāt bioloģisko daudzveidību, neizmantojot vienu šķirni, bet gan pārveidojot daudzas vietējās šķirnes.","mt":"L-umanità ġiet ikkunsmata ikel ġenetikament modifikat għal snin ta’ biedja. Minn meta teżisti l-biedja, aħna konna artifiċjali li nagħżlu l-applikanti li jrendu kwantità akbar jew prodotti ta’ kwalità għolja. Għamilna l-istess ħaġa mal-annimali, billi għażilna min jipproduċi aktar. Dan jista’ jitqies billi l-qamħ selvaġġ oriġinali jitqabbel mal-qamħirrun li nużaw issa, magħżul artifiċjalment tul mijiet ta’ ġenerazzjonijiet, jew il-ftehim oriġinali li jeżisti fl-irziezet. Dawn kollha huma reviżjonijiet tal-modifika ġenetika prodotta min-natura aleatorja tar-riproduzzjoni. Issa għandna t-teknoloġija (CRISPR) biex nipproduċu dawn il-varjetajiet kollha fi ftit jiem. Għandna l-għażla li nsalvaw il-ġuħ f’ħafna postijiet, inżidu l-valur nutrittiv tal-ikel, inżidu r-rendimenti tal-produzzjoni tal-għelejjel bħall-qoton, u nagħmlu l-pjanti reżistenti għall-perikli emerġenti tal-bidla Klimatika u l-globalizzazzjoni bħall-fungi predatorji jew l-insetti li jagħmlu ħsara lill-għelejjel jew billi l-għelejjel isiru reżistenti għad-djalogu u għall-mewġiet tas-sħana. Huwa ta’ dispjaċir li naraw li l-bqija tad-dinja miexja’ l quddiem, aħna fl-Ewropa żgwidajna f’dan ir-rigward. Xi darba l-introduzzjoni ta’ prodotti Transġeniċi, il-kwalità tal-ħajja ta’ ħafna nies ġiet inkluża. Ma kienx hemm tort wieħed jew saħansitra età kkawżata minnhom, u ma hemmx raġuni għal dan. Dawn huma l-istess bħal impjanti normali, sempliċiment bi proposti differenti. Din it-teknoloġija tista’ tgħin ukoll biex tinżamm il-bijodiversità, billi ma tintużax varjetà waħda, iżda billi timmodifika ħafna dawk lokali.","nl":"De mensheid wordt al jarenlang genetisch gemodificeerd voedsel geconsumeerd. Sinds het bestaan van de landbouw is het kunstmatig geweest om de aanvragers te selecteren die een grotere hoeveelheid of hoogwaardige producten leveren. We hebben hetzelfde gedaan met dieren door te selecteren wie meer produceert. Dit blijkt uit een vergelijking van de oorspronkelijke wilde maïs met de maïs die we nu gebruiken, kunstmatig geselecteerd over honderden generaties, of de oorspronkelijke overeenkomst die op landbouwbedrijven bestaat. Dit zijn allemaal evaluaties van genetische modificatie die wordt veroorzaakt door de willekeurige aard van de voortplanting. We beschikken nu over de technologie (CRISPR) om al deze rassen in een aantal dagen te produceren. We hebben de mogelijkheid om honger op veel plaatsen te genezen, de voedingswaarde van voedsel te verhogen, de opbrengst van gewassen als katoen te verhogen en planten resistent te maken tegen opkomende gevaren van climatische verandering en globalisering, zoals roofschimmels of insecten die schadelijk zijn voor gewassen, of door gewassen resistent te maken tegen dialoog en hittegolven. Het is jammer dat de rest van de wereld vooruitgang boekt en dat we in Europa in dit opzicht misleid zijn. Na de introductie van transgene producten is de levenskwaliteit van veel mensen in aanmerking genomen. Er is geen sprake van één enkele fout of zelfs van een ouderdom die door hen is veroorzaakt, en er is geen reden om. Zij zijn net als normale installaties, net als met verschillende voorstellen. Deze technologie kan ook bijdragen tot het behoud van de biodiversiteit door niet één enkele variëteit te gebruiken, maar veel lokale rassen te wijzigen.","pl":"W latach hodowlanych ludzkość spożywała genetycznie zmodyfikowaną żywność. Od czasu prowadzenia działalności rolniczej sztucznie wybieramy wnioskodawców, którzy wytwarzają większą ilość lub produkty wysokiej jakości. Uczyniliśmy to samo w przypadku zwierząt, wybierając, kto produkuje więcej. Można to ocenić, porównując oryginalną dziką kukurydzę z kukurydzą, którą obecnie wykorzystujemy, sztucznie wyselekcjonowaną ponad setki pokoleń, lub oryginalną umowę, która istnieje w gospodarstwach. Wszystkie te elementy to przeglądy modyfikacji genetycznej spowodowanej losowym charakterem rozmnażania. Dysponujemy obecnie technologią (CRISPR), która umożliwia produkowanie wszystkich tych odmian w ciągu kilku dni. Mamy możliwość zwalczania głodu w wielu miejscach, zwiększenia wartości odżywczej żywności, zwiększenia plonów z upraw takich jak bawełna oraz uodpornienia roślin na pojawiające się zagrożenia związane ze zmianami klimatycznymi i globalizacją, takie jak grzyby drapieżne lub owady szkodzące uprawom, lub przez uodpornienie upraw na dialog i fale upałów. Smutnie widać, że reszta świata postępuje, a w Europie my w tym zakresie wprowadzamy w błąd. Od czasu wprowadzenia produktów transgenicznych uwzględniono jakość życia wielu ludzi. Nie wystąpiła pojedyncza wada, ani nawet wiek, i nie ma powodu. Są one tak samo jak normalne zakłady, tylko z różnymi propozycjami. Technologia ta może również przyczynić się do zachowania różnorodności biologicznej, nie wykorzystując jednej odmiany, lecz zmieniając wiele lokalnych.","pt":"A humanidade é consumida de alimentos geneticamente modificados durante anos de atividade agrícola. Desde que a agricultura existe, temos sido artificiais para selecionar os requerentes que produzem uma maior quantidade ou produtos de alta qualidade. Fizemos o mesmo com os animais, selecionando quem produz mais. Este aspeto pode ser considerado comparando o milho selvagem original com o milho que utilizamos atualmente, selecionado artificialmente ao longo de centenas de gerações, ou o acordo original que existe nas explorações agrícolas. Todas estas são revisões da modificação genética produzida pela natureza aleatória da reprodução. Dispomos agora da tecnologia (CRISPR) para produzir todas estas variedades em dias. Temos a opção de curar a fome em muitos locais, aumentar o valor nutricional dos alimentos, aumentar os rendimentos das culturas transformadoras como o algodão e tornar as plantas resistentes aos perigos emergentes das alterações climáticas e da globalização, como fungos predadores ou insetos que prejudicam as culturas ou tornando as culturas resistentes ao diálogo e às ondas de calor. É triste ver que o resto do mundo está a avançar e, na Europa, temos induzido em erro a este respeito. Desde sempre a introdução de produtos transgénicos, foi incluída a qualidade de vida de muitas pessoas. Não houve uma única falha, nem sequer uma idade por eles causada, e não há razão para tal. São como as plantas normais, com propostas diferentes. Esta tecnologia pode também ajudar a manter a biodiversidade, não utilizando uma variedade única, mas alterando muitas espécies locais.","ro":"Omenirea a consumat alimente modificate genetic pe parcursul anilor de creștere. Din momentul în care există agricultură, am fost artificial să selectăm solicitanții care produc o cantitate mai mare sau produse de înaltă calitate. Am făcut același lucru cu animalele, selectând cine produce mai mult. Acest lucru poate fi observat prin compararea porumbului sălbatic original cu porumbul pe care îl utilizăm în prezent, selectat în mod artificial de-a lungul a sute de generații, sau a acordului inițial care există în ferme. Toate acestea sunt revizuiri ale modificărilor genetice produse prin natura aleatorie a reproducerii. Avem acum tehnologia (CRISPR) pentru a produce toate aceste soiuri în câteva zile. Avem opțiunea de a vindeca foametea în multe locuri, de a crește valoarea nutritivă a alimentelor, de a crește producția de culturi precum bumbacul și de a face plantele rezistente la pericolele emergente ale schimbărilor climatice și ale globalizării, cum ar fi ciupercile sau insectele prădătoare care dăunează culturilor sau prin asigurarea rezistenței culturilor la dialog și la valurile de căldură. Este trist să vedem că restul lumii avansează, iar în Europa ne-am înșelat în această privință. Perpetuează introducerea produselor transgenice, a fost inclusă calitatea vieții multor persoane. Nu a existat o singură greșeală sau chiar o vârstă cauzată de aceștia și nu există niciun motiv pentru aceasta. Acestea sunt la fel ca și plantele normale, cu propuneri diferite. Această tehnologie poate contribui, de asemenea, la păstrarea biodiversității, prin faptul că nu utilizează un singur soi, ci le modifică pe cele locale.","sk":"Ľudstvo konzumovalo geneticky modifikované potraviny na poľnohospodárske roky. Od existencie poľnohospodárstva sme umelo vybrali žiadateľov, ktorí vyrábajú väčšie množstvo alebo vysokokvalitné výrobky. Urobili sme to isté aj so zvieratami, keď sme vybrali, kto produkuje viac. Túto skutočnosť možno vidieť porovnaním pôvodnej divokej kukurice s kukuricou, ktorú teraz používame, umelo vybranou viac ako stovky generácií alebo s pôvodnou dohodou, ktorá existuje v poľnohospodárskych podnikoch. Všetky sú preskúmania genetickej modifikácie vytvorenej náhodnou povahou reprodukcie. Teraz máme technológiu (CRISPR) na výrobu všetkých týchto odrôd v priebehu niekoľkých dní. Máme možnosť vyliečiť hlad na mnohých miestach, zvýšiť výživovú hodnotu potravín, zvýšiť výnosy výrobných plodín, ako je bavlna, a zabezpečiť odolnosť rastlín voči novým nebezpečenstvám spôsobeným klimatickou zmenou a globalizáciou, ako sú predátorské huby alebo hmyz, ktoré poškodzujú plodiny, alebo tak, že plodiny sú odolné voči dialógu a vlnám horúčav. Je smutné vidieť, že zvyšok sveta napreduje, v Európe sme v tejto súvislosti zavádzajúco. Od zavedenia transgénnych produktov sa zahrnula aj kvalita života mnohých ľudí. Nedošlo k žiadnemu zavineniu, ani k veku, a preto neexistuje dôvod. Sú rovnako ako bežné závody, ale len s odlišnými návrhmi. Táto technológia môže prispieť aj k zachovaniu biodiverzity tým, že nevyužíva len jednu odrodu, ale mení mnohé miestne možnosti.","sl":"Človeštvo se v letih kmetovanja zaužije gensko spremenjena hrana. Odkar se izvaja kmetijstvo, smo umetno izbirali prosilce, ki pridelujejo večjo količino ali visokokakovostne proizvode. Enako smo naredili z živalmi, tako da smo izbrali, kdo proizvede več. Upoštevanje tega je razvidno iz primerjave prvotne divje koruze s koruzo, ki jo uporabljamo zdaj, umetno izbranimi več sto generacijami ali prvotnim dogovorom, ki obstaja na kmetijah. Vse to so pregledi genskega spreminjanja, ki je posledica naključne narave razmnoževanja. Zdaj imamo tehnologijo (CRISPR) za proizvodnjo vseh teh sort v nekaj dneh. Na številnih območjih imamo možnost, da odpravimo lakoto, povečamo hranilno vrednost hrane, povečamo pridelek poljščin, kot je bombaž, in naredimo rastline, odporne na nastajajoče nevarnosti podnebnih sprememb in globalizacije, kot so plenilske glive ali žuželke, ki škodujejo poljščinam, ali pa postanejo odporne na dialog in vročinske valove. Žalostno je videti, da ima preostali svet korak naprej, v Evropi pa smo v zvezi s tem zavedeni. Od uvedbe transgenih proizvodov je bila kakovost življenja številnih ljudi vključena. Ni bilo ene same krivde ali celo starosti, ki bi jo povzročili, in za to ni razloga. So prav tako kot običajne rastline samo z različnimi predlogi. Ta tehnologija lahko prispeva tudi k ohranjanju biotske raznovrstnosti, saj ne uporablja ene same sorte, temveč spremeni številne lokalne.","sv":"Mänskligheten har konsumerat genetiskt modifierade livsmedel under jordbruksåren. Ända sedan jordbruket bedrivs har vi varit konstlade att välja ut de sökande som producerar produkter av större kvantitet eller hög kvalitet. Vi har gjort samma sak med djuren genom att välja ut vem som producerar mer. Detta kan ses genom att man jämför den ursprungliga vilda majsen med den majs vi använder i dag, artificiellt utvald över hundratals generationer, eller den ursprungliga uppgörelsen på gårdarna. Alla dessa är granskningar av genetisk modifiering som produceras på grund av att reproduktionen är slumpmässig. Vi har nu tekniken (CRISPR) för att producera alla dessa sorter inom några dagar. Vi har möjlighet att bota svält på många platser, öka näringsvärdet i livsmedel, öka avkastningen för produktionsgrödor som bomull och göra växter motståndskraftiga mot nya faror till följd av klimatförändringar och globalisering, såsom rovsvampar eller insekter som skadar grödor eller genom att göra grödor motståndskraftiga mot dialog och värmeböljor. Det är sorgligt att se att resten av världen går framåt, och vi i Europa har vilselett oss i detta avseende. Ända sedan införandet av transgena produkter har många människors livskvalitet inkluderats. Det har inte förekommit ett enda fel eller ens en ålder som orsakats av dem, och det finns ingen anledning till detta. De är precis som vanliga växter, bara med olika förslag. Denna teknik kan också bidra till att bevara den biologiska mångfalden genom att inte använda en enda sort, utan genom att ändra många lokala."}},"title":{"es":"Embrace the future of farming","machine_translations":{"bg":"Възприемане на бъдещето на селското стопанство","cs":"Chopit se budoucnosti zemědělství","da":"Udnyttelse af landbrugets fremtid","de":"Die Zukunft der Landwirtschaft zu meistern","el":"Ενστερνισμός του μέλλοντος της γεωργίας","en":"Embrace the future of farming","et":"Põllumajandustootmise tuleviku arvessevõtmine","fi":"Maatalouden tulevaisuuden huomioon ottaminen","fr":"Embrasser l’avenir de l’agriculture","ga":"Glacadh le todhchaí na feirmeoireachta","hr":"Prihvaćanje budućnosti poljoprivrede","hu":"A mezőgazdaság jövőjének felkarolása","it":"Abbracciare il futuro dell'agricoltura","lt":"Pasinaudokite ūkininkavimo ateitimi","lv":"Atbalstīt lauksaimniecības nākotni","mt":"Inħaddnu l-futur tal-biedja","nl":"De toekomst van de landbouw omarmen","pl":"Przyjęcie przyszłości rolnictwa","pt":"Abraçar o futuro da agricultura","ro":"Să îmbrățișeze viitorul agriculturii","sk":"Osvojiť si budúcnosť poľnohospodárstva","sl":"Sprejeti prihodnost kmetovanja","sv":"Ta vara på jordbrukets framtid"}}}
Cette empreinte digitale a été calculée au moyen d’un algorithme de hachage SHA256. Pour la reproduire vous-même, vous pouvez utiliser un Calculateur MD5 en ligne. et faire un copier-coller des données sources.
Partager:
Partager le lien:
Veuillez coller ce code sur votre page:
<script src="https://futureu.europa.eu/processes/GreenDeal/f/1/proposals/251/embed.js?locale=fr"></script>
<noscript><iframe src="https://futureu.europa.eu/processes/GreenDeal/f/1/proposals/251/embed.html?locale=fr" frameborder="0" scrolling="vertical"></iframe></noscript>
Signaler un contenu inapproprié
Ce contenu est-il inapproprié?
- Appelez-nous au 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11
- Utilisez d'autres options téléphoniques
- Écrivez-nous au moyen de notre formulaire de contact
- Rencontrez-nous dans un bureau local de l’UE
- Parlement européen
- Conseil européen
- Conseil de l'Union européenne
- Commission européenne
- Cour de justice de l'Union européenne (CJUE)
- Banque centrale européenne (BCE)
- Cour des comptes européenne
- Service européen pour l’action extérieure (SEAE)
- Comité économique et social européen (CESE)
- Comité européen des régions (CdR)
- Banque européenne d'investissement (BEI)
- Médiateur européen
- Contrôleur européen de la protection des données
- Comité européen de la protection des données
- Office européen de sélection du personnel
- Office des publications de l’Union européenne
- Agences
Veuillez vous connecter
Vous pouvez accéder à la plate-forme avec un compte externe
48 commentaires
Conversation
Sono assolutamente contrario, abbiamo di strategie agroecologiche non di tecnologie soggette a proprietà intellettuale.
What technologies subject to intellectual property are you talking about? I would assume most of the technology required is not subject to intellectual property.
The technology, as it exists, is mostly developed, forwarded & promoted by big agribusiness companies which are notoriously well known for trying to acquire intellectual property rights for naturally existing plants which would prevent anyone else who hasn't bought a license from using the plant legally. They already have sued an innocent farmer who didn't have any contract, didn't want to use their GMOs, but was that unfortunate that genetical material from their plants has contaminated his. They sued on the basis of intellectual property rights and won. He had to pay for genetic contamination that he neither wanted nor could possibly prevent and that ruined his business.
Genetically engeneered plants right now come mostly with 2 features. They are either designed to survive maximum use of agrochemicals which is maximum devastating for soil health, water cycles & ecosystems. Or they produce masses of 'natural' chemicals which are polluting the environment. We have better solutions!
So called "organic agriculture" is terrible for environment, due to low yields, high water usage, lots of land used (which could be otherwise be wild land, not farmland), and is highly vulnerable to insects and other dangers.
Also, your concerns about intellectual property are unjust, since it's not regulated as it should be. What whis proposal aims to is push for the building of a sustainable and beneficial agriculture policy. Let's not forget that governments and other institutions can also develop enhanced crops to the public free of use, since it's developed with public funds.
Sorry, but your information on are not correct.
We need healthy soil , not proprietary seeds.
strategy to improve top soil its organic life, water ritention, permability, biodiversity and all ecological services
This is not a naive persepective, it is science.
http://www.fao.org/documents/card/en/c/cb1928en
Seeds are free to use. If you don't want to use them that's on you, but you cannot stop others from using better seeds. Also, as I said, better seeds don't have to be propietary, since public companies and governments can also develop them.
About all the other buzzwords you use... No, genetically modified plants don't endanger any of that. First of all, the document you post doesn't even mention transgenic or GMO in all but 2 texts, citing biodiversity concerns. This is demonstrably false because the modifications that enhance the seeds can be added to all variants, not just one. You can improve your local variant. The rest of the sentence doesn't even make sense.
No. Genetically modified seeds should not be free to use. Better seeds which have been selected in natural processes by nature however are free of licences and intellectual property because the modification has been done by nature. The intellectual property belongs to nature. It cannot be patented. Nature knows proven since the beginning of cultivation of seeds best, what needs to be changed in the genes to adapt to specific climate and soil conditions, development of defences against pests. Your model is the proven failed model (check Superweed in Monsanto areas) of big agrobusiness which leads directly to the reduction of species diversity and enormous profits only for stakeholders. We all suffer already enough from that proprietary crap. See also the activities of Vandana Shiva for saving local seeds in India. (for the inhabitants, not for stake-holders)
Saying organic farming (OF) is bad for the environment is not a helpful approach to the topic. Indeed, OF tends to lead to better soil quality (thus more carbon sequestration), causes less pollution (fertilizers etc.) and indeed uses less resources if done right (i.e. grow appropriate crops, water with micro drip and such rather cheap technologies...).
The elephant in the room is rather that yields are indeed significantly lower and thus purely organic farming cannot be a sustainable solution to ensure enough food for a world population reaching up to 10 billion by the end of the century.
The major problem with intensive farming (using monocultures, GMOs, etc.) is collateral damage to nature. Intensive GMO use tends to require/promote use of fertilizer (made of finite mined resources) and pesticides/herbicides (whether by design or because resistant insect species develop). Results: deteriorating soil quality, collateral damage to fauna (insects, rodents), pollution of groundwater.
To understand the implications of this, it is essential to call to mind that all of this effects elements of a large interconnected ecosystem. If we take one thing out of the equation, reverberations are felt all the way up. Nature, left to its own devices, finds its balance. In that sense, we should strive to interfere as little as possible - and I'm afraid, intensive farming falls on the negative end of the spectrum.
A possible solution may be extensive farming, which integrates parts of intensive farming (use of machinery/technology to name one) with elements of OF (limited use of pesticides/herbicides, growing varieties adapted to local climates rather than on-size-fits-all seed - important with a view to climate change).
Conversation
The main thing that needs to be done is educating people. Most people imagine some dangerous poisonous chemicals when they hear the words GMO, which is far from the truth. The truth is, as you said, everything we eat (both plants and animals) was genetically modified, just with a slower, manual process. Being against GMO is like being against a tractor. It's just a tool to speed up what manually takes hundreds of years.
Yes. Education is crucial. The reality of GMO in agriculture is not positive at all. I'm not against science in this field. By applying GMO we destroy already existing specialised seeds (they don't need to be developed) for various ambients. This destruction is made by the greed of shareholder value mentality, which comes to that perverted ideas of patenting and licensing living organisms. Like we saw with Monsanto, they sued everyone who had unwillingly and inevitably his own crops infested with Monsanto genetic crap to pay license fee. This type of seed is not even successful, as one can see in the quality of the products. Its just a capitalist trap to make every planter and farmer a forced customer of licences, which he doesn't want and doesn't need. The whole concept of monoculture (which is exactly what GMO means) is equally responsible for the dead end, we are lost in, if we do not turn around.
However, everything that you mentioned isn't the problems of GMOs themselves, but of the people. If we decide to use them, we can set proper legislation, that will prevent these shareholders from leaching on farmers this much. It's all about how we decide to set it. Banning all GMOs leads to the exact opposite - what is outlawed can't be regulated.
The problem is - and many people seem not to understand - that we don't need another linear solution.
What do I mean by linear solutions? We have a problem with fertility. So let's take fertilizer. It's not enough. So let's take more. Plants are vulnerable to pests. Let's use pesticides. They are full of bugs. So let's have some insecticides. They are attacked by fungi. So let's use fungicides. There are other plants that damage our yields. So let's add some herbicides. Soil is depleted. So let's use more fertilizer. Weeds become resilient. So let's combine some hard-core chemicals & spray them per airplane. Soil is drought stricken. So let's exploit rivers & aquifers to provide water. Water becomes scarce. Never mind. We'll develop superseeds for plants that will survive everything.
Do you know how many farmers have to give up every year because they can no longer afford that game? How many of them commit suicide because of that? How many hectares of land are depleted & given up?
http://decidim-dife/Decidim::User/23369 Unfortunately, that's just how it is. How else would you like to produce enough food? While GMOs are another upgrade in this game, they can eliminate all the previous ways of increasing harvest - you don't need to use pesticides if the plant produces the poison (that hurts only pests) itself. You don't need to use herbicides if the plant is more competitive and isn't threatened by other plants. You don't need to use Fungicides if the plant has mechanisms to protect itself.
You are focusing on the plant only, but not on the system. But actually, we have to (re-) create ecosystems if we want to survive.
In an ecosystem, it's not the task of a single plant to fend of pests & fight drought, it's task of the whole system.
Sorry, but to apply linear thinking to a complex non-linear system is as intelligent & useful as sailing the ocean without any training, experience or advice.
Conversation
Ich bin bei dem Thema ehrlich gesagt zwiegespalten. Ich kenne das Potential von Gentechnologie sehr gut, allerdings auch das gewaltige Potential zur ökologischen und ökonomischen Misswirtschaft.
In den USA ist das gut zu beobachten: Dort gibt es riesige Plantagen, auf denen seit jahrzehnten ein und dieselbe Pflanze wächst. Die Böden sind deshalb dermassen ausgelaugt, dass darauf nur noch genetisch veränderte Pflanzen wachsen, und auch das nur bei massiver Düngung. Die Abhängigkeit wiederum wird von den grossen Agrarfirmen wie Monsanto ausgenutzt, um die Bauern strategisch auszubeuten (ich verwende dieses Wort nicht oft, aber hier trifft es absolut zu): Es wird verboten, Früchte aus dem Vorjahr zur Saat zu verwenden (man muss quasi jedes jahr neue Samen zu hohen Preisen kaufen) und gleichzeitig wird ein aggresives Pflanzenschutzmittel gratis mitgeliefert, dass den Boden für alle anderen Pflanzen endgültig unbrauchbar macht. So etwas müssen wir hier verhindern.
You're absolutely correct. GMOs are an extremely powerful and helpful tool, that can save huge amounts of nature and prevent further deforestation, but it can turn into a nightmare if it's managed incorrectly. We need very solid legislation, that will prevent what happened in America.
It's like this with everything. It's awesome and perfect, but only as long as no people are part of it.
Are you dreaming?
All solutions that are available right now, are working perfectly well do not need a single GOM to succeed. Tell me a single place where GOMs are already solving any problems without dire side effects!
I will name you at least half a dozen examples where a well informed systemic approach does the job while using the the simplest tools and methods you can imagine.
Sorry, GMOs.
At that time the results of "technologies" are visibly dangerous : pollutions, diseases (excess weight, diabetes, etc) versus hungry, shortages of natural resources (water, sand, metals, etc), climate change and others biological chemical cycles (P, N, etc), deforestation, soils and biodiversity losses, etc
Very few of us are criminals and we let them continue even though we known that their "innovations" are idiocies from people who doesn't known they don't known all !
If those criminals are so watchfull what is the purpose of intellectual property ?
In our local territories we must, each of us, work as farmers to protect soils functionning and improve endemic plants genetic We must help farmers who succeed in doing that (they do exist) We must contribute to pass on their knowledge and adapt them to our local soils, climate, etc
Money (currency debts) can't be anymore our unit of measurement (euro, dollar, yen, etc) : we must change its judicial rules
https://monnaiedettes.fr/
Conversation
Instead of GMOs, we could refocus on plant breeding - less risky than GMOs and less harmful to nature.
Also I consider the statement: "Humanity has been consuming genetically modified food for thousands of years." misleading on purpose.
Genetically modified e.g. 500 years ago by whom? Soft way how to sell GMO, which were created only in few last decades (as far as it is known). Misleading intros are very bad idea...
Humanity was selecting random mutation that was beneficial for them. Now we put these modifications by owrselfs.
I'm not generally against genetic engineering, but I'm very cautious about playing around with genes in plants.
The argument that we always have chosen suitable genetic varieties & genetic engineering isn't so much different, is misleading. Why?
I often have read of virus genes embedded in our DNA or maybe the DNA of plants & animals. I've read about bacteria who can exchange genes even with other bacteria species. But do they actually exchange genes with cells of our body, with plants or animals? I've never ever heard or read about that. Do bacteria, viruses or other microbes take genes from one plant to another? I've never heard or read about that, too.
Do pollinators carry genes from one plant to another? This seems to be the case. But do they cross species. That's an interesting question. Never read something like that. So, as far as I know, pollinators can carry the genes from GMOs to their natural relatives.
But could they ever bring the genes from aubergines to rice? That's exactly what genetic engineering in case of GMOs does.
Can pollinators carry genes from GMOs to nearby weeds? That's an interesting question, too.
That is one of the possible risks of GMO, we cannot say what new breeds will occur once used long enough to cross breed.
Btw
"Humanity was selecting random mutation that was beneficial for them. Now we put these modifications by owrselfs." - I think the selection was done from random mutation, but these were occurring in nature, not in labs and then introduced to nature.
but if we make radical changes that might negatively effect other plants it's still possible to make them sterile.
Conversation
I am not completely against the use of GMO's in general, however I am against the use of GMO's in a way they have been used until now. The push back against GMO's is here for certain reasons, not just for fun.
https://www.dw.com/en/resistance-to-genetically-modified-seeds-in-africa/a-44736633
Some of them are:
- Proprietary patented seeds, leading into increased power of aggro lobby (and control of the whole food system)
- Seeds which cannot be reproduced by the farmer himself (posing health risk if done so)
- Seeds degrading soil and harming the environment due increased (intended) use of herbicides
- Often oversold yield benefits, which might actually be lower compared to crops grown with agroecological principles
If we can make GMO seeds which will lead to decreased environmental impact (which is often opposite of what is often happening now), seeds which will not put smaller farmers into disadvantage (e.g. forcing them to buy new seeds every year), than sure. But not right now.
I think genetically modified organisms can be very useful in other contexts & they already are. That's perfect. But with agriculture, I do not even see the need because we have possibilities to regenerate ecosystems which is a much more powerful tool than developing single plants with some special traits which are not integrated in the ecosystems. What is not properly integrated into ecosystems tends to destroy them or at least not to interact properly with natural environments. We already have widely used plants - hybrid or GMOs - which do not interact properly with the result that they cannot deliver basic nutrients because they can't get them from the microbes, fungi and other creatures in the soil.
I think this is more of a problem with the current patent system, rather than technology. Also, we are able to make seeds that can reproduce, we are just afraid to do so.
It's not only about reproduction, but also about interaction. Two completely different aspects.
Reproduction is the question of licensing, property, farmers rights vs company. It's also a question of having GMOs which are able to self-replicate. If they self-replicate properly, farmers could use seeds for next season. They also might be used for crossbreeding. But it also means that not only some of their genes might spread to natural relatives. The whole subspecies of plants can spread without human intervention. Here, I'm quite sceptical because in human history many imported species have been invasive. We have imported species which have adapted & integrated & others that destroy ecosystems.
The other aspect is interaction with natural environments. Are GMOs fit for proper interaction? Or do they work best in a factory environment?
Conversation
I am for the use of GMO, but without the possibility to patent life. Also with a control of their spread outside of where they are used, and a control to limit huge monocultures.
Tell me how you want to achieve that?
At the moment in the European Union, plants and animals obtained through classical breeding or already naturally present, as well as essentially obtained by biological process cannot be patented. Though, GMOs can still be patented (like the ones obtained with CRISPR-Cas9 and such technologies). I think that no living thing should be patentable.
Control their spread outside of the field where they are used by imposing minimal distances between these fields and others, or other solutions, I am not an expert, they probably know better.
Limiting huge monocultures with regulations too, maybe with a minimum plant diversity for every thousand square meters.
I'm not against genetically modified organisms in general. But in agriculture we definitely have better solutions.
If you are interested, have a look at things like natural sequence farming, regenerative agriculture, permaculture, Yacouba Savadogo, farmer managed natural regeneration, to name just a few.
The concept of genetically modified plants to solve the problem is based on the idea that we have severe environmental conditions & problems with conventional agriculture in some regions. Therefore we create plants which are capable to manage the conditions.
The concept behind the other methods is that the severe environmental conditions are no inavoidable fate but man-made & can be reversed by using natural mechanisms.
That GMOs can be managed safely outside the laboratory hasn't been shown yet & I doubt that it will be shown in the future. That the other concepts work has been shown over decades. They are cheap. They are available right now. They are safe, scalable, excellent.
Yes sure, I did some WWOOFing during four months in 2017 and 2018 and I am a proponent of techniques used in permaculture and agroecology, no-till farming, covered seeding,…
Also, I did not approve this proposition as its formulation is not very clear and I have some reservations on that subject. Though, I recognise that the subject is also too polarized and we should probably not abandon this idea either.
How long is it that golden rice has been propagated? How much money has been used for research and development since? What problem is it supposed to solve? - Lack of some vitamins with following health issues. Aren't there vegetables available which would solve the problem?
Sorry, the whole story of GMOs for agriculture sounds good only as long as don't ask what are the alternatives.
Conversation
I just want to say that i read an article a few days ago about the topic of CRISPR and the EU ban of GMO plants.
They spoke something about that it was time to review the GMO "ban" since CRISPR technology is not the same and they could alter the plants DNA more safe and precise than with conventional GMO manipulation.
So they would review the law.
However be aware that CRISPR and the plants are NOT some kind of magic plants that solve all problems. They did some tests in USA years ago and the plants do not produce much more food than the conventional kind of food but it is pretty smart if they become more resistant to dicease/insects and drought.
Also be very aware that CRISPR technology can be used for biological weapons.
CRISPR technology is really dangerous in the wrong hands.. And i can gurantee that its gona be used for bad things in the future. When new technology is invented, it will always be used for bad things sooner or later.
Now that Bayer has bought Monsanto EU suddenly is reviewing GMOs. And the US suddenly is suing Monsanto.
We have safe and proper possibilities to improve the functioning of ecosystems by intelligent use of natural effects. This can restore water cycles, temperature regulation and soil health. These techniques are in use for several decades now. Successfully & without side effects.
I personally prefer to restore the function of ecosystems, bringing back high quality water to the plains & have high quality nutrition this way.
GMOs do not regenerate ecosystems because they are not designed to properly interact with other plants and creatures in a natural environment. They only are perhaps able to survive in a devastated environment. In my opinion this is not enough for us to survive as well.
Conversation
The situation of today IS the result of the way we have done things until yet.
And the only thing You suggest, is to continue the same way and to go further.
strange way to think !
Exactly.
David Montgomery: Dirt. The Erosion of Civilization.
Gale Brown: From Dirt to Soil.
Can you give us reliable figures to support your assertions ?
Global annual harvest available ?
Annual consumption in relation to these harvest ?
Who consumes, where and how much ?
How much are the annual surpluses stored and why are they stored if some people starving ?
The impact of ogm is not direct, but indirect > it increases “phytos” > phytos increases cancers on human beings and many problems with insects.
Natural plants, properly used, can provide almost everything. GMOs can only survive crippling circumstances. So I ask you. Do you want a green, lush healthy environment or do you want somehow to survive severely desastrous living conditions?
You don't believe?
Let's have an example: Decades ago, one single illiterate African in Burkina Faso decided to leave the city in the middle of famine & drought & turn to an abandoned, dry, depleted piece of land. Now this piece of land is a lush green forest garden which nourishes a big family & provides high ground water levels with high quality water to the surrounding.
What did he do? He hacked holes in the hard dry soil & filled them with milet seeds, dung & seeds of bushes & trees. Alrttady in the first year, he had better yields than normally expected under these conditions. From the second year on, things improved. His name is Yacouba Savadogo.
Similarly an Australian rancher transformed a salty, dry piece of land. Peter Andrews.
Conversation
We have the possibility to choose between life and death. Life is for me 'Green up to cool down'. Death is for me allowing drought, extreme rain, water scarcity to rule our lives & use big tech to somehow survive.
Natural sequence farming works reliably in drought stricken places in Australia. Yacouba Savadogos Method is successfully applied by poor people in the sahel zone. Regenerative Agriculture is financially, ecologically & socially successful in the US. Permaculture has been successfully applied to various places & climate zones, including deserts. Rainwater harvesting methods are successfully used in harshly dry regions of India. China has successfully regreened a desertificated region & works hard to fight desertification in other vulnerable places. Do you have any examples of similar beneficial effects of your beloved GOMs?
Sorry GMOs!
Bitte vergleichen mit meiner Vision und prüfen, ob der Vorschlag in die Vision passen könnte.
Vielen Dank.
Alles neu machen! EU und die Welt im Einklang mit 60 Meter Meeresspiegelanstieg bis zum Jahr 3000#comment_48417
L'Homme n'est pas plus fort que la nature; nous devons apprendre d'elle et non pas l'exploiter sans limite.
Nous avons les sciences pour sélectionner de façon naturelle les plantes les plus robustes pour avoir une nouvelle génération plus résistante.
Votre idée est de remplacer la nature par l'Homme, avec cette vision de choses, nous n'avancerons pas davantage.
Il faut créer des écosystèmes sans pesticides ni organismes génétiquement modifiés.
Si nous harmonisons les écosystèmes de manière égale, je crois qu'on pourrait mieux s'en sortir.
GMO seeds are NOT selected seeds.
Genetica, è l’era di CRISPR-Cas9: come funziona e le sue applicazioni Il metodo crispr-cas9 che permette di modificare gli acidi nucleici di cui è costituito il genoma di tutti gli organismi viventi, è valso il premio Nobel per la chimica a Emmanuelle Charpentier e Jennifer Doudna per la loro capacità di “riscrivere il codice della vita”. Vediamo in cosa consiste e le applicazioni Il metodo crispr-cas9 che permette di modificare gli acidi nucleici di cui è costituito il genoma di tutti gli organismi viventi, è valso il premio Nobel per la chimica a Emmanuelle Charpentier e Jennifer Doudna per la loro capacità di “riscrivere il codice della vita”. Vediamo in cosa consiste e le applicazioni geneticamente modificati con la tecnica CRISPR invaderanno la nostra vita, siano essi zanzare incapaci di trasmettere la malaria, o alimenti più nutrienti.
Chargement des commentaires en cours ...