In the short term we have plenty of non-GM food spare to give as aid. Which, as I said, is what we are doing to countries that refuse GM.
Looking to the long term, to let GM loose is detrimental to the biodiversity of the environment, and thereby undermines future efforts for sustainable farming in future.
Even the pro-GM UK government ended up having test results showing GM crops being detrimental to their surrounding environment compared to normal chemical farming. (The exception was a strain of maize, because the non-GM comparison crop was sprayed with a substance so toxic it's being banned in the EU!)
And this is before any 'superweed' thing happens.
So our choice is send food aid and inhibit their ability to feed themselves in future, or send food aid and give them a better chance.
Like the joint African nations statement said, the image of the hungry of their countries is being cynically abused by rich corporations to force acceptance of a technology that is neither safe nor environmentally friendly.
Aside of the GM thing, a major step toward making nations self-sufficient in food would be if we stopped buying their grain to feed to animals.
Nearly half the world's grain harvest is fed to animals, and almost all the nutriment becomes animal shit rather than meat or milk. It is an obscene waste.
All through the enormous Ethiopian famine in the 80s we were importing food *from* Ethiopia cos we want so much meat.
Like you say, we need new ideas if we're to all have enough to eat. Lowering the animal product intake of the welthy would be a big help.
|
