Nature has lots of waste. The difference is that change in nature is so gradual that entire biosystems have had time to grow up around it.
Part of the challenge is to find methods that fit seamlessly into these systems.
But industrial beef? Definitely a huge waste of resources. Hell, farmed beef, period is a huge waste of land.
Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard
Small scale, diverse farming has no need for GMO's. There is a lot of risk for almost no benefit other than the ease of factory farming. And after a brief time, that is no longer the case.
Edit: factory meat & dairy farms use antibiotics and growth hormones which are truly scary - eat local meat and antibiotic & hormone free eggs and dairy. And we have yet to mention endocrine disruptors in our carpets, sofas, pajamas, food packaging, etc.
Again, it saddens me that all GMOs are tarred by the sme brush based simply on the purported unethical practices of one company.
I live near the International Rice Research Institute. A non-proft dedicated to improving rice breeds in terms of yield, hardiness and Hybrid vigor. And they do use genetic modification in their research.
to develop pesticide dependent rice.
Yet their efforts have been frustrated by the furore and hysteria surrounding anything with the "GMO" tag. It's like being the one Afghani kid in an American public school after 9/11.
To say that genetic modification per se is bad is like saying that since antibiotics (again) are used in commercial farming, that all instances of antibiotics are bad.
Having had Typhoid Fever, a disease that's fatal without antibiotics, I would question any such assertion or blanket statement. Do we misuse and overuse antibiotics? Heavens yes! Should we stop antibiotic use completely? Hell no.
And the idyllic view that natural rotation and organic farming is all that's needed is a "one size fits all" solution to the problems of creating sustainable farming on a global scale. Not saying that we should not aspire to do either, but that we should sit back and look at the big picture.
My take, if it improve yields without creating ecological disasters downstream, increasing land use disproportionately or deiving already poor farmers deeper into poverty, it deserves further study... Whatever the method used.