An Op-Ed piece in the New York Times recently made quite a stir when the writers suggested that the United States needs to embrace genetically modified wheat.
As you know, corn and soybean farmers gladly latched onto biotechnology, but wheat farmers never did. The opinion piece suggests that this was a huge mistake and its time to move forward with it, especially since we now see the benefits of GMOs.
My favorite quote from the article:
The scientific consensus is that existing genetically engineered crops are as safe as the non-genetically engineered hybrid plants that are a mainstay of our diet. The government should be encouraging and promoting these technologies.
Why has wheat lagged behind? One reason is that, back in the mid-1990s, corn and soybean farmers avidly embraced the nascent biotechnology revolution, snatching up new, genetically engineered seed varieties. But wheat farmers balked at the potentially higher prices of these new seeds and feared that anti-genetic engineering views held by some of our trading partners would hurt exports.
Today, itโs easy to see why corn and soybean farmers made the switch. Crop yields have increased and farmers have been able to reduce their use of chemical insecticides and shift to less toxic herbicides to control weeds. Theyโve also made more money. Over the same period, the amount of land planted in wheat has dropped by about 20 percent, and although yields have increased, productivity growth has been lower than for the crops genetically engineered with molecular techniques.
Monsanto recently said that it had made significant progress in the development of herbicide-tolerant wheat. It will enable farmers to use more environmentally benign herbicides and could be ready for commercial use in the next few years. But the federal government must first approve it, a process that has become mired in excessive, expensive and unscientific regulation that discriminates against this kind of genetic engineering.
Click here to read the entire piece.
It is very reassuring to see a major news publication in the country get behind and support genetically modified crops!
Seriously, you need to post your sources, because I could quote a dozen sources that dispute your opinion…
I do cite my sources, thank you very much. Cool thing: if you hover your mouse over the text that is a different color in the post, you will notice some of the words are a hyperlink! Click on it and it will take you to the source for my information! And, I know for a FACT, that you cannot cite credible sources that dispute what I am saying.Thanks for reading! ๐
The New York Times? Isn't that the one that keeps losing more credibility each day? And in regards to your comments about Chiptole, if they are creating a market for antibiotic free meat and they are not harming you, then why not leave them alone? I don't see anything wrong with promoting non – antibiotic products. Kudos to them for increasing their sales with TRUE statements. Do you know that just the USA has over 50% of the whole worlds total lawyers? Food for thought.
I don't find the New York Times to be a very stimulating read, but sometimes they get it right. Chipotle is actually lying about the meat not having antibiotics. That's because NO meat you purchase has antibiotics in it. They are confusing consumers in order to make a profit, not creating a niche market. Panera and Chic-fil-a are doing the same thing. Unless you think that is is ok to lie to people, that is not an acceptable marketing plan. I suggest you actually READ the article, not just comment.And, come on, if you're going to try and dig lawyers, at least it should make sense…
Nice work, FD. Appreciate getting the FACTS instead of hype and myths. Good science will win in the end, and even disbelievers have difficulty denying it. As a farmer looking to utilize any good technology to be more sustainable, I value the work you are doing. Thank you.