January 26, 2011
from
PreventDisease Website
While experts have warned that the cost of food will soar by 50 per
cent over the next few decades causing famine, mass migrations and
riots, biotech shills have taken the moral high ground claiming
genetically modified foods are the answer.
The increase in food costs will be triggered by the increasing world
population, rising cost of fuel and increased competition for water,
according to a leading Government think-tank.
Spiraling food prices will push hundreds of millions of people into
hunger, trigger mass migration and spark civil unrest, the report
warned.
The report, from
Foresight, a think-tank set up to
predict future crises, called for ‘urgent action’ to prevent food
shortages, and said genetically modified crops may be needed to
prevent famines.
Sir John Beddington argues that moves to block
GM crops on moral grounds are no
longer sustainable
Moves to block cultivation of genetically modified crops in the
developing world can no longer be tolerated on ethical or
moral grounds, the government's chief scientist, Sir John
Beddington, has warned. He said the world faced "a perfect storm" of
issues that could lead to widespread food shortages and public
unrest over the next few decades. His warning comes in the wake of
food riots in north Africa and rising global concern about mounting
food prices.
Foresight predicted that the world’s population would rise from 6.9
billion today to around 9 billion by the middle of the century.
Beddington said humanity had to face the fact that every means to
improve food production should now be employed, including widespread
use of new biotechnological techniques in farming. He stressed that
no harm should be inflicted on humans or the environment.
His remarks were made in advance of
publication tomorrow of a major report, "The
Future of Food and Farming".
He emphasized the role of modern biotechnological techniques,
including GM crops, in the future of global food production.
"There will be no silver bullet, but
it is very hard to see how it would be remotely sensible to
justify not using new technologies such as GM. Just look at the
problems that the world faces: water shortages and salination of
existing water supplies, for example. GM crops should be able to
deal with that."
Beddington said he would present details
of his office's report in Washington next month.
He also hoped it would be debated at
other events, including the G8 and G20 summits.
Agriculture ministers gathered in Berlin said they were “concerned
that excessive price volatility and speculation” in international
markets for agricultural commodities may threaten the security of
the world’s food supply.
The ministers from 48 countries called on the G-20 nations to “fight
the abuse and manipulation of prices” in agricultural markets,
according to a joint statement handed out at a press conference in
the German capital.
The seven agriculture ministers were unanimous on the causes and
consequences of food shortages, which are pushing prices
sharply up and, they agreed, renewing the threats of social
instability and the sort of food riots witnessed in Mozambique,
Egypt and elsewhere last year.
France presides over the Group of 20 this year, and the country’s
agriculture minister, Bruno Le Maire, has said world
agricultural markets require more regulation.
German farm minister Ilse Aigner,
who hosted the meeting, said today that price and position limits
should be among measures considered.
"We will see them again in 2011 and
2012 if we don't rapid take the necessary decisions together,"
warned French minister Bruno Le Maire.
His Moroccan counterpart Aziz
Akhenouch denounced the "rocketing prices" which threaten
purchasing power as well as political stability in his country,
which is a major wheat importer and saw prices double last year.
“All the member countries in the
G-20 have to oppose this price volatility,” Le Maire said in a
press conference. “With this text we already have a good
starting point.”
World food prices rose to a record in
December on higher costs for sugar, grain and oilseeds,
the United Nations reported January
4.
An index of 55 food commodities tracked
by the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)
gained for a sixth month to 214.7 points, above the previous high of
213.5 in June 2008.
"It is important to open borders,"
for certain products, stressed Kenyan farm minister Sally
Jepngetich Kosgey.
"Trade is part of the solution, not the problem," said Pascal
Lamy, the World Trade Organization's director general, who also
attended the meeting.
However there were sharp differences on
the questions of further opening borders for agriculture products.
"Everyone wants first and foremost
to support their own infrastructure, and trade with others comes
after that" said Canada's minister Gerry Ritz.
There was more consensus on the need to
tackle the market speculators who inflame prices.
"There is total uncertainty today,"
on the available volumes of foodstuffs, Le Maire complained.
"It's not normal that their is so little information," he added,
calling for more transparency to stabilize the market.
GM Food is an expensive
technology that the farmers of the developing nations would not be
able to afford easily.
Patenting laws go against the poor
around the world and allow biotech companies to benefit from
patenting indigenous knowledge often without consent.
This is a very young and untested technology and may not be the
answer just yet.
Crop uniformity, which the biotech firms are promoting, will reduce
genetic diversity making them more vulnerable to disease and pests.
This furthers the need for pesticides (often created by the same
companies creating and promoting genetically engineered crops).
Hence this leads to questions of the motives of corporations and
countries who are using the plight of the developing world as a
marketing strategy to gain acceptance of GE food as well as
dependency upon it via intellectual property rights. That they are
against any labeling or other precautionary steps and measures that
states may wish to take is of paramount concern.
The way in which we reach the answer to the question, "are
GE foods safe?" is where a
lot of the problem lies.
A quick acceptance of GE foods without
proper testing etc. could show corporate profitability to be very
influential, while a thorough debate and sufficient public
participation would ensure that real social and environmental
concerns are in fact adhered to.
And this pattern would probably indicate
to us how other major issues in the future ought to be dealt with.
Sources
|