Hacker News Reader

Comment by TheMagicHorsey | Hacker News Reader

How safe are GMO plants from a systems perspective?

When we breed plants through selection, the changes are slow and the plants do not acquire capabilities from outside their species.

When we change fast growing species like grasses, and give them capabilities they do not have in nature, do we really understand what those species do when they enter a natural ecosystem? Ecosystems have a delicate balance.

I really wonder how comprehensive GMO testing really is.

Having said that, I have no problems eating GMO crops. I don’t think the risks are to humans directly. I think the issue is environmental.

View on HN

Like you, I have no problem eating GMO crops but as you say, there are potential knock-on effects from a systems perspective. Similar to the financial system, if the sole pursuit is yield, systemic problems arise.

The main issues I have with GMO is the patenting of crops, specifically those that are introduced to third world countries which are typically sterile, causing the farmers to have an ongoing dependence/obligation to the patent holders. Probably an even greater problem is crop resilience - yes, many crops will give far greater yield when given ideal conditions, but by reducing diversity within the same species makes them more vulnerable to specific diseases. In nature, there is always some % of a crop that's resistant to a disease, that diversity is removed when all the crops are essentially identical.

> The main issues I have with GMO is the patenting of crops, specifically those that are introduced to third world countries which are typically sterile, causing the farmers to have an ongoing dependence/obligation to the patent holders.

Incidentally, this is also the solution to one of the major criticisms of GMO plants: in the event of significant cross-pollination, the GMO plants won't be viable.

> Probably an even greater problem is crop resilience - yes, many crops will give far greater yield when given ideal conditions, but by reducing diversity within the same species makes them more vulnerable to specific diseases.

We already massively reduce diversity in agricultural crops. This is not a problem specific to, or even exacerbated by, GMO crops.

> In nature, there is always some % of a crop that's resistant to a disease, that diversity is removed when all the crops are essentially identical.

Diversity is doing exactly piss-all for the hundreds of millions of conifers in California that have been killed by bark beetles.

Mostly because the natural state is that species outcompete others on long timeframes. The problem is that alleged natural state is currently vastly reduced diversity. If anything, adding GMO will improve on that.

Patenting of plants predates GMOs and actually, the majority of patented plant varieties are non-GMO. GMO plants are not sterile. They are usually hybrids and like with all hybrids (even non-GMO) their offspring do not maintain the same traits. This is why Monsanto's (and other non-GM hybrid seed providers) agreements with farmers do not allow for replanting--they don't want liability for trait failure in offspring.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com