|
|
|
|
|
by rhn_mk1
1488 days ago
|
|
The problem with GMO is that it's intertwined with intellectual property shenanigans favouring corporations over traditional farmers, and upsetting traditional methods of farming. > Are you infringing a patent by selling your soybeans that contain a minor amount of contaminating Roundup tolerant seeds from your neighbor’s land? Are you infringing a patent by replanting those seeds? While you don’t intend to use or sell Monsanto’s crops, intention is not material to patent infringement. All that matters is the mere existence of Monsanto’s crops in your harvest. https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/the-patent-landscape... Granted, GMO is not the only type of crop affected, but it has a greater overlap with those practices than non-GMO crops. > Farmers worldwide increasingly find themselves unable to legally save, share, sell, or breed with their own seeds. https://www.opensourceseeds.org/en/about-us |
|
But the vast majority of the time (even in these comments) that people talk about GMO's being bad they are claiming the science is wrong, its bad for your health, etc etc etc.
Almost no one talks about the issues with the corporations. Which is a very real issue, but that issue should not be used to paint GMO's as bad on their own.
But labeling or banning them is not the solution. Considering the major health benefits (and environmental, costs, etc) that these improvements can have. Better laws about what these corporations can and cannot do is the answer.
Frankly, the public has been lied too to think that GMO's are bad for them.