- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Letters posted here are associated with the following article:
The letters thread is now closed.
You state that the virus-resistant papaya is different than something made by Monsanto because the papaya was publicly funded, and presumably the altruistic motives make the fruit itself OK. Good results are good results, regardless of whether the profit motive is in play or not. There is a huge amount of evidence that the GMO crops approved for sale today are safe. The people of Thailand seem to understand this.
One has to wonder how governments and Greenpeace would react if a primary dietary staple, such as rice, corn or wheat, was plagued by disease and on the verge of being wiped out. Would they be so quick to protest a genetically modified solution, if other answers could not be found? I think not.
The papaya is as basic a fruit in Southeast Asia as the apple is in North America. Any threat to its existence is a serious matter. A genetically modified version may not be final answer, but at the very minimum it needs to be considered and evaluated. Greenpeace's silly protest was meaningless. If anything, it showed how much Thais really do love their papayas, genetically modified or not.
And isn't that the point - the smae with the DDT arguments- well fed, and healthy westerners object to GM food in the poorest nations in the world - prefering starvation to...
eating...
You almost had good alliteration with the headline. Couldn't you think of a p-word instead of unexpectedly? Preternaturally? Prodigiously? Peculiarly? Oh well, have a palindrome instead.
That is an awesome display of reality! GM paranoia is trumped by hunger.
