Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

What do you think of “Terminator Technology” used to make plants infertile after one growing season?

I found this information particularly disturbing.

"1. Did you know that the US Government holds a patent on “Terminator Technology”, developed by Monsanto, that makes plants sterile after a single growing season?

2. Are you aware that the UN Food and Agriculture Organization estimates that three-fourths of agricultural genetic diversity has been lost in the past century?

3. Did you realize that the Grocery Manufacturers of America estimate that 75% of all processed foods contain Genetically Modified ingredients?"

http://www.your-vegetarian-kitchen.com/your-right-...

9 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    In my opinion, crop monoculture and the associated loss of biodiversity (#2 in your list) is a far more serious issue with far-reaching consequences. GM technology on the other hand, is widely misunderstood and scapegoated as This Evil Thing, when it has as much potential to do good as to do harm. Monsanto may not be 'good', but it's like any company that's only interested in big bucks. Blaming the technology because you dislike the company is the wrong way to go about things, IMO. It's too bad that GM technology is monopolized by a few big MNCs.

    #1 is more disturbing from an economic/political standpoint because of its effects on farmers in developing countries. The biological/environmental concerns are vastly overrated. The genes that make the crop sterile are not easily transferred to other crops, and even if they are, natural selection takes care of the 'problem'.

    I'm not saying TT is a 'good' technology, but it is no worse than any of the other more subtle methods developed countries use to maintain economic control over other nations. It should not be used as the poster child for GMOs either.

    If it weren't for GM technology, we would still be butchering and bleeding animals for vaccines and insulin and stripping forests free of valuable wild plants for drugs. All of the crops we eat today have been genetically modified by natural means (breeding), even though is is harder to track and control than artificial modification where only one or two genes are involved.

    At this point, none of the food crops on the market have animal genes in them, and it probably will stay that way due to public pressure. I just find it funny when people bring up the 'fish tomato' even though that was pulled a decade ago.

    I should point out though, that transferring an animal gene into a plant does not make the plant 'more animal'. It just induces the plant to manufacture that desired protein. In many ways this supports the vegan philosophy, because it ensures that that animal may not be exploited for that particular purpose any more. Of course, it depends on what the trait is. A very good example is vegetarian rennet (bacteria). Without GM technology, all rennet would be calf rennet. The driver behind all this is economics, not ethics, but sometimes it does fall in line with veg*nism.

    Source(s): I realize that part of my answer has nothing to do with what you asked, sorry :). I just wish people evaluate everything with an open mind and not generalize GMOs as 'bad'. A lot of the rhetoric about GMOs comes from emotions, not science. Also, many of the 'diverse' crop lines have been wiped out due to traditional breeding and the human demand for food (including animal products, of course). People should be more concerned about environmentally unsustainable meat production than GM technology. Chef Bette, I'm not sure who you were referring to, but I've done a lot more research on this than one might think. It's why I feel so strongly about it. My career revolves around plants (not necessarily GMOs, but I have a much better understanding of it than an Average Joe). I am neither for, nor against them, since it is illogical to be for or against a neutral technology. Every case has to be evaluated seperately, and while I see nothing particularly beneficial about TT, it should not be linked to the wider issue of GMOs in general, nor should it be blown out of proportion. Furthermore, I would rather base my views on reviewed journal articles rather than one man's opinion in a book. I haven't read his book and cannot directly comment on it, but I would never let a book shape my understanding of an issue, especially a scientific issue. I fully appreciate the concerns about Big Business and their power. What I don't agree with is misrepresenting the science as more (or less) than what it is. Any technology can be misused. It's fine if people don't want to eat GMOs, provided they base that decision off of facts and not hype or speculation. If you weren't referring to me, I apologize :) Max Marie SFO, Cross pollination does not transfer TT. How can a lethal gene transfer to progeny? By definition, that is not lethal anymore. On the contrary, TT prevents such gene transfer from occuring. I could explain further just why this is impossible, but some people have their minds made up already. Nevertheless, I have a journal article if you're interested. As for the human genes in rice, it has benefits to human health, just like stem cell technology (only, far more ethical). Would you rather see human health compromised because of some illogical stance against all GMOs? Would you rather see animals being exploited because GM plants are not allowed? As for canola, GM canola oil and normal canola oil are identical because the oil does not contain the gene or its products. The environmental risks of Bt-modified crops are probably real, although this is not proven. But Bt toxin has nothing to do with TT or human genes, which is the point I'm trying to make. Every gene is a totally different issue and must be analyzed individually. If Bt toxin is killing the bees (and it may well be), well I would like to see Bt modification banned but it won't necessarily affect my perception of other GM crops.
  • Anonymous
    5 years ago

    This is a good question and beyond the scope of this forum. Fannylight makes a good start. In 2010, I ran a solar greenhouse experiment with the stated goal of maintaining photosynthetic activity through the winter months for biosequestration of excess nutrients from municipal wastewater. The plants that had very high productivity in the summer months did not grow well in the winter, despite the surplus of nutrients and day temperatures 30 C above ambient. My collaborator (a biologist) suggested that a seasonal crop rotation using plants adapted for low light in the winter might increase overall photosynthetic productivity. Due to budget constraints, we did not test that hypotheis. I think the problem posed is an open question in science that will be settled by experiment.

  • ?
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    Oh I agree. This is all scary business. I was certain, though, that the Monsato patent is Canadian?

    I have a very difficult time with "Dr. Weil" and his uber support of Canola. Why do we need a genetically engineered oil when olive is so healthy? How can anyone claim "organic canola" when the canola itself is GM? I've seen the stuff labeled organic. It's just so wrong!

    Why do we need rice spliced with human liver genes? Why do we need tomato spliced with animal genes?

    It's insane!

    Compounded with the fact that no one can stop cross pollination. Pretty soon all plants will have terminator potential. Then where will we be?

    They estimate that this nation could run out of grain within the next few years. 10 years ago we were already running short. Now we've reached critical levels. Estimations do not take terminator technology into account.

    We have so polluted our environment that the sensitive bees are dying off. How will any pollination take place?

  • 1 decade ago

    I'm not too concerned simply because there is a huge heirloom plant movement and while that will never apply to "big agriculture", I have the ability to grow a diverse crop in my own backyard.

    Even people in the inner city can provide some of their own food if they use resources like community gardens....

    My dad farms and it amazes me how much he spends on seed every ear (although corn prices were at an all time high this year so he made out well)

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Genetically modified plants scare me, but at the same time I don't want some genetically modified seed reproducing itself after one harvest. Who knows what may happen. I believe this technology is a safeguard too.

  • Lee
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    Yes, it's true, the Chem-Agro companies (like Monsanto, as you mention) are using all sorts of tricks to insure that farmers have to buy their seed every year.

    Have you read Michael Pollan's The Omnivore's Dilemma? It's a real eye-opener about today's industrial food system.

  • 1 decade ago

    I think it's interesting. So you're saying the seeds that are produced by the crops can't be used to grow a new crop?

    The plants in my area die after the growing season because of winter. What crops last for more than one growing season anyways?

    That info. on Rumsfeld-Monsanto-Reagan-aspartame was quite interesting.

  • 1 decade ago

    Thanks for pointing to this all important issue and for referencing my review of Andrew Kimbrell's book Your Right to Know. The more attention that is brought to bear on this issue the better off we all will be. And yes, you are right, it is pretty disturbing information.

    The responses you are getting are pretty telling aren't they? It amazes me that some people who have no knowledge about a situation, and do no research on it can speak so authoritatively about issues that impact us all and condemn the source out of hand. Just demonstrates that not everyone is a Lover of Truth. I'm glad that you are.

    And thanks for directing those who are truth seekers to the information via http://www.your-vegetarian-kitchen.com/y...

    And thanks to LeCe too. I'll check out Michael Pollan's The Omnivore's Dilemma.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    vegetarins-kitchen dot com

    a radical web...?

    what would be the reason to offer genetically nonreproductive seed stock for any profit??

    terminator tec

    JUST another SCARE tactice of the silly food freaks..

    PS :: if the smarties know how to do it they must ALSO,, follow to know how to make it better.bigger healthier..

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.