"Yields of most staple crops have barely increased in years, seeds and herbicides are becoming more expensive, and the promised health, safety and nutritional benefits (...) have failed to materialise. Instead, farm pollution increases, agricultural biodiversity continues to be lost and nearly 30 years (...) after Monsanto breezed into Europe pledging to feed the world, there are still around 800 million people who are malnourished"

"Nearly 10 million of the poorest farmers now use the system of rice intensification (SRI), which has been proven to increase rice, wheat, potato and other yields dramatically by stimulating the roots of crops. Agro-forestry techniques that grow trees and shrubs among crops is proving more productive, as is land restoration. Farmers’ groups in India and across Latin America are developing their own seed companies in order to avoid the new corporate monopolies."

@cathal what's your take on this article? I find myself pretty in line with the author's point of view that no matter how safe GMOs are, the matter is first and foremost political. Any company controlling 70% of a market is suspicious, but one that can control how food will be grown _worldwide_ is dangerous to the safety, freedom and self-determination of billions of people, especially to those living in the global south.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!