Genetic modification enables reduction in pesticides and fuel.
I have nothing against organic foods: reduction in pesticides is still an ongoing issue and more research is needed to develop more eco-frendly methods of agriculture and reduction of man's footprint on the environment.
Finally, the most important genetic modification of crop have been done using so called conventional breeding techniques: diploid grains have been transformed into hexaploids
how can a plant that produces toxins 24/7 for its entire life be safe? They don't even undergo long term, in depth, generational feeding studies. These are unique, which is why they can be patented...they are not the same as trait selection.
Nature is not a supernatural being that can be offended or appeased. Nature is the cold hard fact of the universe around us as we observe it. This desire to revert agricultural technology to the 1800's is short-sighted, ludicrous, and misled by luddites who seek to control people for their own respective causes.
enviroment and animals have dignity, not just humans...it makes sense growing food with nature not against her. Using pesticides and fertilizer because soil is dead. The farmer is not a slave of companies and banks but having a dead soil you are......take credits to buy technology until you loose your land because promises over profit blind farmers..every farmer is doing the same producing as much as possible to compensate decreasing market prices...more more supply, prices and nature decrease
hahaha I loved it when he said, modified foods are the same thing as foods that have gone through mutation over thousands of year, but now we can do it faster... LIKE A VIRUS lol. Totally break the enzyme barrier so we can put this gene in to combat the pesticide that we made... SWEET
as long as we are experimenting with new technologies we are going to make mistakes, and we don't know when we are going to develop a global killer. it could happen with genetic research, or in the pursuit of "greener" energies or just faster cars. if we are destined to destroy ourselves let it atleast be in the name of feeding starving people.
you money hungry idiots worrying about "competing in global markets" are going to kill us all after our genes and bodies are so f'ed up from eating gmo foods.
and by reducing the birth rate to the same level as the death rate, something that is now occuring in more developed nations, and implementing the technological advances at our disposal to produce more food the existing population could be supported. Clearly if common sense prevailed there would be no need for the millions to die...
in fact you are entirely wrong currently there is enough food around to feed the worlds population but due to things like the european common agricultural policy the amount grown is limited to keep prices artificially high and much excess grain and other produce is stored or destroyed. a similar situation exists in america. What would help ease the problem is to educate people and make the use of contraception more widespread.
so trivialising 20 million lives does not qualify as childish? ive seen my fair share of death, and quite frankly any decent minded person would should be in favour of such measures that can delay it for so many. I believe i will have to get used to individuals lacking a fully functioning mind.
yeah why not just let them die...it would be much easier for all concerned, and then we wouldn't have to put up with these pesky scientists either...in fact why not just kill everyone that isn't convinient...
People who wants ALL foods to be organic, and burn/vandalize genetically modifying labs are self-centered, racists.
If all food are organic, it can hardly feed 1 billion people.
Genetically modified food can withstand harsh weather climate, which means it can GROW ANYWHERE. It requires less care, and it's more resistant to deceases. It can ALSO yield more food PER ACRE.
Even with that, genetically modified can ONLY feed 5 billion people.
Sorry, but you've been DEBUNKED by "The World According to Monsanto"
As I've been cruising the GMO related videos, both pro and con, I'm laughing. Honestly, the pro monsanto videos are so funny! I've never seen a more pathetic attempt at PR in all my life.
DEAR MONSANTO, you are exposed. EVERYONE in the comments on all the videos is ANTI MONSANTO. The people who are not account for less than 10%. EVERYONE KNOWS MONSANTO IS EVIL, it's too late for the PR campaign.
Does this person not realise that GM corn is registered as a PESTICIDE as it produces its own toxins, which is why it does not have to be sprayed as often??? And then we eat it even though it has not been safety tested as a whole food!!As for food scarcity,this a by product of the rush to grow GM crops as biofuels.The world needs political will to make available food acessible, not a GM patented, money spinning,feudal system.
Don't believe it one bit. Enough food is grown each day for all the people of the world to eat. The issue of people not getting enough food is a TRANSPORTATION issue.
He forgets to mention that the USA and Canada are the only countries that are not required to add GMO contents to labels. Nature is multidimensional and humans can only think in one dimension. Corporate profits seem to be behind this "talk". Why did the citizens of the USA not have a debate on the addition of GMO's to our food?????
Don't be fooled by the Harpers assocaition. This guy is a corporate tool. He forgot to talk about the fact that labeling is required in all countries BUT USA and Canada. They also don't seem to understand that each day the world produces enough food for everyone to eat. The issue of people not getting enough is a TRANSPORTATION issue. There is so much wrong with his views on GMO's it's astounding. He's trying to confuse by grouping Diesel and Herbicide with untested GMO's. Foolish man/woman.
The main reason for GM food is competition. Company A is doing it because company B is doing it. If Comany A doesn't do it, then company B will own all the patents, etc. The companies in this have proven for years that they care little for the health of people. We are all just lab mice to these companies.
Aquamammal is right: we must stop eating meat. Meat should be no more tan 15% of our diet. Meat makes men homosexual, and women lesbian.
I don't buy this guy's argument at all. I eat about ten apples a day.. so far none from another country. So far, none that I know of that has been modified. I eat them because I want something that I know is good for my body. I do not want to be the gov't or some corporation's guinea pig.
Also, people have allergies to different things. Imagine someone allergic fish. Will they have an attack from eating an apple? Just leave apples out of it.
Common sense dictates that evolution works too slowly so we must make alternative plans to feed ourselves. As it has been stated, there is nothing natural about modern corn, bananas, wheat and even fowl and cows are heavily modified. But we can do better. Food thats healthier, cheaper, heartier, requires fewer resources. The Benefits (which we already enjoy) far outweigh the risks (which have not been demonstrated, only postulated.)
common sense? haha, obviously you don't know much about evolution and its many failures. personally I'm not against it, but if you take a look at our long history as a species, our acts of desperation have always proved to be detrimental. As for the 6.7 billion it hardly matters, this planet can't support us for much longer, even with GMOs. Go ahead and grasp at straws, I don't mind.
Universities and researchers are losing grant money because nobody wants to eat your frankenstein food, Mr. Kaufman. Nobody wants to buy it. First world countries have banned it, except for the USA. If you, and the evil assholes who pay you, continue down this path, what little is left of the food quality on this planet will be gone forever.
The reason the poor in the world are starving has nothing to do with the availability of GM or organic goods. Most third world nations are run by dictators that starve their own people. Even if GM goods were given the green light by first world nations, we would still see people being deprived of their basic needs in order to control them.
While that is basically true, the infrastructure to move meat and produce does not exist in Africa, Parts of Asia and South America. Even if the political needs were met today and the infrastructure available, There is still a problem with shipping. GMCs simply last longer, use less water, fuel and pesticides. Risks? Sure. But the potential risks are far outweighed by real starvation and preventable nutrition deficiencies.
I agree that in theory GM crops could help combat starvation on a global scale. It's rather sad to know that even if GM crops had proven zero health risk attached to it that before it could be put to the task of solving world hunger it would never succeed as long as there are people willing to seek power over others. It is going to take 1000's of years to develop a system that will make GM viable. Fortunately by then GM products will have been tested for a long enough period of time to be safe.
By following strict codes for building materials and design. That and 1000's of years of research into how to best construct a building. The development of GM products at it's current pace is too new to start testing on the public. Would you move into a building that used only recently researched materials and design that have not been subjected to at least a few centuries of research and development? If so, I have some great property made of cardboard that I'm willing to sell for a good price!
Ive boarded planes made by new, never before used composite materials. The plane worked fine. How long have advanced composites been developed? Not thousands of years, not even hundreds. Only a few dozen by a handful of corporations. It is not as though GM crops are not tested, like a bunch of scientists just whip something up in an afternoon and say "well this looks done to me, lets sell it." You cannot "accidently" engineer something, it requires tremendous research and ability.
I'm well aware of the advancements in science that allow us to enjoy safe flights in planes built using relatively new technology. I'm also aware that one does not need to fly in order to live. We need food, clothing and shelter in order to live and that is why anything involving these areas requires a much higher set of standards then flying or driving. Sad thing is that more money is spent making flying safer rather then making our food safe to consume.
lol superviruses...how is corn going to turn into a virus.we aren't messing around with genes, experimentation is slightly more difficult. If we know what gene encondes for a specific protein we can implant it into an organism and hence create a new function, in order to change corn into a virus you would have to spend years removing thousands of base pairs from its genome and adding new ones, and it almost certainly wouldn't be viable.
2- SECOND GM FOOD is OWNED by corporation who even have the balls to claim they OWN the natural genepool they POLUTE! this outrage allows corporations to corner the market on life and food. Its completely unacceptable.
1- FIRST GM Food is not seriously tested, we are Guiney pigs, people want GM LABELING but politicans are the Corporate prostitutes doing all they can to prevent labeling.
Nature makes small changes per thousand years, in a few years we have toxic genes, circus freak show genes and terminator genes
It's not a simple fact.. All GM assumes that we understand DNA in its entirety, when in fact we don't. In other words it's not science it's experimentation.
Also in the future, dollar a day won't be relevant because slave labor is not holistically economical. It's another form of credit that we will all be paying for in the years to come.
What science is not based on experimentation? We don't fully understand gravity, should we not build planes? We don't fully understand atoms, should be not build electronics?
I know you are asking these questions somewhat sarcastically, but they are actually very good questions. Also I believe experimentation is only justified when millions of lives are not at stake. Otherwise this kind of "science" is more like arrogance and may end very badly.
Millions of lives are at stake already. We cannot, and should not clear cut all the jungles and forests in the world for crops. How would YOU feed the 6.7 billion? How would you ensure that poor children get all the required vitamins. How would you ensure crops don't easily whither in the heat or die in the frost?
Apple seeds are open source, no one owns apples, but GM threatens this, unless all GM foods have no pattent and are open source to all in the world who want to use them like any other natural food then GM's a non starter.
Then your point about starving is moot, 3rd world nations are bamboozled and forced to plant crap that corporations can sell us for their profit(not the farmers profit) instead of planting food for themselves, starvation is an indirect result of greed and corporate slavery
Read about the golden rice project. a not for profit scheme to nutritionally enhance rice, it is being trialled now and could potentially save 20 million lives in the third world. GM food in american should probably be regulated better.
You know hunger only exists because of greed and mismanagement of resources. There is over 4x enough food to feed everyone on earth, without GM. So what you really have is 20 million lives at risk because of a dysfunctional civilization.. Fix the infrastructure first, make it efficient and just, then there is absolutely no need to take these kinds of risks.
i agree most problems are due to this. but do you have a viable solution that can be implemented within a couple of years time? no, how are you going to fix the whole nature of civilisation, to do so even if possible, would take a long time, meanwhile many would still starve. with the likes of the golden rice project we have an realistic and immplementable way to save millions of life within a few years. Why should these people die because of someones moral objection to gm food?
TBH I am in conflict about this. The question you ask is not a bad one. However, I think that ultimately it is our only option (fixing the nature of civilization). Things like GM just add complexity and doubt to an already dysfunctional system. You can't build a safe structure on a bad foundation, no matter how good your science is. But don't worry, it's already too late to stop GM, nanotech, and other controversial technologies. It's a gamble, I hope it does some good.
I agree with facts stated in the video.
Genetic modification enables reduction in pesticides and fuel.
I have nothing against organic foods: reduction in pesticides is still an ongoing issue and more research is needed to develop more eco-frendly methods of agriculture and reduction of man's footprint on the environment.
Finally, the most important genetic modification of crop have been done using so called conventional breeding techniques: diploid grains have been transformed into hexaploids
gmofed 1 year ago
how can a plant that produces toxins 24/7 for its entire life be safe? They don't even undergo long term, in depth, generational feeding studies. These are unique, which is why they can be patented...they are not the same as trait selection.
hebephoebe 1 year ago
agreed mattabe86
MultiLegman 2 years ago
Nature is not a supernatural being that can be offended or appeased. Nature is the cold hard fact of the universe around us as we observe it. This desire to revert agricultural technology to the 1800's is short-sighted, ludicrous, and misled by luddites who seek to control people for their own respective causes.
christerryatl 2 years ago
enviroment and animals have dignity, not just humans...it makes sense growing food with nature not against her. Using pesticides and fertilizer because soil is dead. The farmer is not a slave of companies and banks but having a dead soil you are......take credits to buy technology until you loose your land because promises over profit blind farmers..every farmer is doing the same producing as much as possible to compensate decreasing market prices...more more supply, prices and nature decrease
charlyfox 2 years ago
hahaha I loved it when he said, modified foods are the same thing as foods that have gone through mutation over thousands of year, but now we can do it faster... LIKE A VIRUS lol. Totally break the enzyme barrier so we can put this gene in to combat the pesticide that we made... SWEET
KartuneHustla 2 years ago
You ignorant shit! You have to be a complete moron to say GM foods are the "green" choice! Who does this guy think he is?
mattabe86 2 years ago 2
Organic is the green choice because it uses no pesticides and does not consist of GM foods and is the safest to eat without radiation.
ty99999returns 2 years ago
FUCK THIS GUY HE IS A DAMN LIAR!
GMO FOODS KILL PEOPLE AND TO FEED POOR PPL WITH GM FOODS IS TO KILL THEM OFF (THATS HOW DANGEROUS GMOs ARE).
ty99999returns 2 years ago
as long as we are experimenting with new technologies we are going to make mistakes, and we don't know when we are going to develop a global killer. it could happen with genetic research, or in the pursuit of "greener" energies or just faster cars. if we are destined to destroy ourselves let it atleast be in the name of feeding starving people.
thegreatpadaxes 2 years ago
1 dollar a day in China? u must be kidding..the average GDP in china exceeds $3000
406356690 2 years ago
aah i seriously want to punch this guy in the face. what a moron. how is this guy a published author?
mattabe86 3 years ago
you money hungry idiots worrying about "competing in global markets" are going to kill us all after our genes and bodies are so f'ed up from eating gmo foods.
mattabe86 3 years ago
and by reducing the birth rate to the same level as the death rate, something that is now occuring in more developed nations, and implementing the technological advances at our disposal to produce more food the existing population could be supported. Clearly if common sense prevailed there would be no need for the millions to die...
Skipissatan 3 years ago 2
in fact you are entirely wrong currently there is enough food around to feed the worlds population but due to things like the european common agricultural policy the amount grown is limited to keep prices artificially high and much excess grain and other produce is stored or destroyed. a similar situation exists in america. What would help ease the problem is to educate people and make the use of contraception more widespread.
Skipissatan 3 years ago 2
so trivialising 20 million lives does not qualify as childish? ive seen my fair share of death, and quite frankly any decent minded person would should be in favour of such measures that can delay it for so many. I believe i will have to get used to individuals lacking a fully functioning mind.
Skipissatan 3 years ago
yeah why not just let them die...it would be much easier for all concerned, and then we wouldn't have to put up with these pesky scientists either...in fact why not just kill everyone that isn't convinient...
Skipissatan 3 years ago
Asshole humans trying to play god, now trying to rationalize their delusion. Fuck GM foods and fuck monsanto too.
Xakryn 3 years ago
lol bias
diktaytor456 3 years ago
People who wants ALL foods to be organic, and burn/vandalize genetically modifying labs are self-centered, racists.
If all food are organic, it can hardly feed 1 billion people.
Genetically modified food can withstand harsh weather climate, which means it can GROW ANYWHERE. It requires less care, and it's more resistant to deceases. It can ALSO yield more food PER ACRE.
Even with that, genetically modified can ONLY feed 5 billion people.
We have to continue to modify food!
LovelyYTRocks 3 years ago
No, we simply need to reduce the worlds population to a more sustainable 1 billion. 7 Billion humans is too many, sorry.
Xakryn 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Sorry, but you've been DEBUNKED by "The World According to Monsanto"
As I've been cruising the GMO related videos, both pro and con, I'm laughing. Honestly, the pro monsanto videos are so funny! I've never seen a more pathetic attempt at PR in all my life.
DEAR MONSANTO, you are exposed. EVERYONE in the comments on all the videos is ANTI MONSANTO. The people who are not account for less than 10%. EVERYONE KNOWS MONSANTO IS EVIL, it's too late for the PR campaign.
qvqvqv23 3 years ago
Does this person not realise that GM corn is registered as a PESTICIDE as it produces its own toxins, which is why it does not have to be sprayed as often??? And then we eat it even though it has not been safety tested as a whole food!!As for food scarcity,this a by product of the rush to grow GM crops as biofuels.The world needs political will to make available food acessible, not a GM patented, money spinning,feudal system.
hebephoebe 3 years ago
Don't believe it one bit. Enough food is grown each day for all the people of the world to eat. The issue of people not getting enough food is a TRANSPORTATION issue.
He forgets to mention that the USA and Canada are the only countries that are not required to add GMO contents to labels. Nature is multidimensional and humans can only think in one dimension. Corporate profits seem to be behind this "talk". Why did the citizens of the USA not have a debate on the addition of GMO's to our food?????
SuberTuber 4 years ago
Don't be fooled by the Harpers assocaition. This guy is a corporate tool. He forgot to talk about the fact that labeling is required in all countries BUT USA and Canada. They also don't seem to understand that each day the world produces enough food for everyone to eat. The issue of people not getting enough is a TRANSPORTATION issue. There is so much wrong with his views on GMO's it's astounding. He's trying to confuse by grouping Diesel and Herbicide with untested GMO's. Foolish man/woman.
SuberTuber 4 years ago
The main reason for GM food is competition. Company A is doing it because company B is doing it. If Comany A doesn't do it, then company B will own all the patents, etc. The companies in this have proven for years that they care little for the health of people. We are all just lab mice to these companies.
Aquamammal is right: we must stop eating meat. Meat should be no more tan 15% of our diet. Meat makes men homosexual, and women lesbian.
zato3 4 years ago
I don't buy this guy's argument at all. I eat about ten apples a day.. so far none from another country. So far, none that I know of that has been modified. I eat them because I want something that I know is good for my body. I do not want to be the gov't or some corporation's guinea pig.
Also, people have allergies to different things. Imagine someone allergic fish. Will they have an attack from eating an apple? Just leave apples out of it.
EmelinaChaCha 4 years ago
Common sense dictates that evolution works too slowly so we must make alternative plans to feed ourselves. As it has been stated, there is nothing natural about modern corn, bananas, wheat and even fowl and cows are heavily modified. But we can do better. Food thats healthier, cheaper, heartier, requires fewer resources. The Benefits (which we already enjoy) far outweigh the risks (which have not been demonstrated, only postulated.)
kev3d 4 years ago
common sense? haha, obviously you don't know much about evolution and its many failures. personally I'm not against it, but if you take a look at our long history as a species, our acts of desperation have always proved to be detrimental. As for the 6.7 billion it hardly matters, this planet can't support us for much longer, even with GMOs. Go ahead and grasp at straws, I don't mind.
neotoy 4 years ago
Stop fucking eating meat, and there won't be this magnitude of starvation.
Read about the energy that goes into meat production.
aquamammal 4 years ago
Universities and researchers are losing grant money because nobody wants to eat your frankenstein food, Mr. Kaufman. Nobody wants to buy it. First world countries have banned it, except for the USA. If you, and the evil assholes who pay you, continue down this path, what little is left of the food quality on this planet will be gone forever.
zato3 4 years ago 3
So the fear-mongering continues and the poor of the world starve. How nice.
kev3d 4 years ago
The reason the poor in the world are starving has nothing to do with the availability of GM or organic goods. Most third world nations are run by dictators that starve their own people. Even if GM goods were given the green light by first world nations, we would still see people being deprived of their basic needs in order to control them.
takotheoktopus 4 years ago
While that is basically true, the infrastructure to move meat and produce does not exist in Africa, Parts of Asia and South America. Even if the political needs were met today and the infrastructure available, There is still a problem with shipping. GMCs simply last longer, use less water, fuel and pesticides. Risks? Sure. But the potential risks are far outweighed by real starvation and preventable nutrition deficiencies.
kev3d 4 years ago
I agree that in theory GM crops could help combat starvation on a global scale. It's rather sad to know that even if GM crops had proven zero health risk attached to it that before it could be put to the task of solving world hunger it would never succeed as long as there are people willing to seek power over others. It is going to take 1000's of years to develop a system that will make GM viable. Fortunately by then GM products will have been tested for a long enough period of time to be safe.
takotheoktopus 4 years ago 2
So how do they know they won't create super viruses and bacteria by messing with these genetic codes?
screwopenborders 4 years ago 2
How does an architect know his building won't fall down?
kev3d 4 years ago
By following strict codes for building materials and design. That and 1000's of years of research into how to best construct a building. The development of GM products at it's current pace is too new to start testing on the public. Would you move into a building that used only recently researched materials and design that have not been subjected to at least a few centuries of research and development? If so, I have some great property made of cardboard that I'm willing to sell for a good price!
takotheoktopus 4 years ago 2
Ive boarded planes made by new, never before used composite materials. The plane worked fine. How long have advanced composites been developed? Not thousands of years, not even hundreds. Only a few dozen by a handful of corporations. It is not as though GM crops are not tested, like a bunch of scientists just whip something up in an afternoon and say "well this looks done to me, lets sell it." You cannot "accidently" engineer something, it requires tremendous research and ability.
kev3d 4 years ago
I'm well aware of the advancements in science that allow us to enjoy safe flights in planes built using relatively new technology. I'm also aware that one does not need to fly in order to live. We need food, clothing and shelter in order to live and that is why anything involving these areas requires a much higher set of standards then flying or driving. Sad thing is that more money is spent making flying safer rather then making our food safe to consume.
takotheoktopus 4 years ago
lol superviruses...how is corn going to turn into a virus.we aren't messing around with genes, experimentation is slightly more difficult. If we know what gene encondes for a specific protein we can implant it into an organism and hence create a new function, in order to change corn into a virus you would have to spend years removing thousands of base pairs from its genome and adding new ones, and it almost certainly wouldn't be viable.
Skipissatan 3 years ago
2- SECOND GM FOOD is OWNED by corporation who even have the balls to claim they OWN the natural genepool they POLUTE! this outrage allows corporations to corner the market on life and food. Its completely unacceptable.
Rickdeckard2020 4 years ago 4
1- FIRST GM Food is not seriously tested, we are Guiney pigs, people want GM LABELING but politicans are the Corporate prostitutes doing all they can to prevent labeling.
Nature makes small changes per thousand years, in a few years we have toxic genes, circus freak show genes and terminator genes
people arent in charge the Corporations are
Rickdeckard2020 4 years ago 2
It's not a simple fact.. All GM assumes that we understand DNA in its entirety, when in fact we don't. In other words it's not science it's experimentation.
Also in the future, dollar a day won't be relevant because slave labor is not holistically economical. It's another form of credit that we will all be paying for in the years to come.
neotoy 4 years ago 2
What science is not based on experimentation? We don't fully understand gravity, should we not build planes? We don't fully understand atoms, should be not build electronics?
kev3d 4 years ago
I know you are asking these questions somewhat sarcastically, but they are actually very good questions. Also I believe experimentation is only justified when millions of lives are not at stake. Otherwise this kind of "science" is more like arrogance and may end very badly.
neotoy 4 years ago
Millions of lives are at stake already. We cannot, and should not clear cut all the jungles and forests in the world for crops. How would YOU feed the 6.7 billion? How would you ensure that poor children get all the required vitamins. How would you ensure crops don't easily whither in the heat or die in the frost?
kev3d 4 years ago
Apple seeds are open source, no one owns apples, but GM threatens this, unless all GM foods have no pattent and are open source to all in the world who want to use them like any other natural food then GM's a non starter.
Then your point about starving is moot, 3rd world nations are bamboozled and forced to plant crap that corporations can sell us for their profit(not the farmers profit) instead of planting food for themselves, starvation is an indirect result of greed and corporate slavery
Rickdeckard2020 4 years ago
Read about the golden rice project. a not for profit scheme to nutritionally enhance rice, it is being trialled now and could potentially save 20 million lives in the third world. GM food in american should probably be regulated better.
Skipissatan 3 years ago
You know hunger only exists because of greed and mismanagement of resources. There is over 4x enough food to feed everyone on earth, without GM. So what you really have is 20 million lives at risk because of a dysfunctional civilization.. Fix the infrastructure first, make it efficient and just, then there is absolutely no need to take these kinds of risks.
neotoy 3 years ago
i agree most problems are due to this. but do you have a viable solution that can be implemented within a couple of years time? no, how are you going to fix the whole nature of civilisation, to do so even if possible, would take a long time, meanwhile many would still starve. with the likes of the golden rice project we have an realistic and immplementable way to save millions of life within a few years. Why should these people die because of someones moral objection to gm food?
Skipissatan 3 years ago
TBH I am in conflict about this. The question you ask is not a bad one. However, I think that ultimately it is our only option (fixing the nature of civilization). Things like GM just add complexity and doubt to an already dysfunctional system. You can't build a safe structure on a bad foundation, no matter how good your science is. But don't worry, it's already too late to stop GM, nanotech, and other controversial technologies. It's a gamble, I hope it does some good.
neotoy 3 years ago