Tuesday, April 5, 2011

California Court Overturns Order to Destroy GMO Beets


Summary: In December 2010, it looked like the GMO controversies would be coming to an end when a federal judge ordered that 258 acres of genetically modified sugar beets be destroyed. This was because the risk of gene contamination in Oregon's Willamette Valley was so great. However, the situation recently got worse when a federal appeals court in San Francisco overturned a previous ruling to destroy the sugar beets. This could be a potential problem because the GMO sugar beets account for 95% of the crop and there are fears that the wind might cross-pollinate with the organic crops.

Reaction: I found this article extremely interesting and I thought it was really strange that our legal system did not follow through with destroying the GMO sugar beets. The owners of organic farms must be furious because the seeds can easily be transported into their farms. After gathering information in class and learning about the major effects GMO's can have on our environment, I do not think they should be used. Not knowing the long term effects of using them is extremely dangerous to the health of humans and the environment.

Questions:
1. Are you for or against GMO's?
2. If you were the judge, how would you handle this situation?
3. How would you feel if you were the organic farmers?
Posted by at

4 comments:

  1. Phil T.April 6, 2011 at 7:56 AM

    Wow, our judicial system is crazy. The fact the a federal judges ruling can be overturned is not a good thing. Those beets should be destroyed. They could destroy all the other plants in that area. I am really upset about this. I don't want to get something at the grocery store and it harm my body because it was genetically modified.

    1. I am against GMO's. They have more problems than solutions. They destroy crops and cause resistant bugs. Soon pesticides won't even work because of these GMO's.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Shea BApril 6, 2011 at 1:31 PM

    These beets are definitely dangerous and should be eliminated. It will not be good if they destroy the other plants in the area, or take over other areas.
    3. If I was an organic farmer I would be very angry but also very worried. This could effect my farm in a huge way, which will effect how much money I make.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Kerry FApril 6, 2011 at 4:38 PM

    I agree Rachel the judicial system should not let these sugar beets continue to grow. If they mix with the organic farmers crops they could get in trouble anyway. Either 1) the crops get infected and the organic farmers sue, or 2) they just destroy the crop.
    1. I am not for or against GMO's. I think if they can help people or make our food more nutritious, then hey more power to them! But if we're creating things to perfect just to perfect them, are we thinking about the effects that they could have in the long run. Like Mrs. DeLuca said "Are we doing it for a benefit, or are we doing it just to do it?"

    ReplyDelete
  4. Alyssa K.April 25, 2011 at 2:01 PM

    I think I can see why the opinion might have changed, though it was most likely wrong to change it because of the contamination risk. In class we learned that organic crops are much more expensive to purchase and much less are produced. Think of how the price of sugar beets would have gone up if these crops were totally banned. I think they may have changed the ruling because of public pressure. This was wrong because the contamination risk was so high, but I completely understand why this may have occured.
    Questions:
    1. I am on the fence as well. Some GMO's are helpful and their also cheaper. Thats good for the economy and those affected by it. What bothers me is all the antibiotics and such in the GMOs. Personally I don't want vaccines that took (probably) years to develop, to become useless. Science is a great thing, but there should be a limit to how much science is used.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)