Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Building Better Bananas (2012)

gatesnotes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 64 posts

Re: Building Better Bananas (2012)

#31

Post by Goosey »

kiba wrote: post #27
shabble wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also seems like it would negate one of the biggest potential hazards of GMO applications - the accidental spread of damaging traits to native species through cross-pollination. IIRC the seeding ability was intentionally bred out of cultivated bananas because the seeds themselves were large, inedible, and comprised a significant portion of the fruit itself.

GE crops are designed to grow food for humans, not optimized to survive in the wild.

At which point does the latter result in the former being shortsighted?

Re: Building Better Bananas (2012)

#32

Post by maxerickson »

elfcard wrote: post #22
ataggart wrote: post #12

Considering the opposition to golden rice (sometimes violently [1]) to fulfill this role in other parts of the world, these bananas are probably DOA. So long as middle-class Westerners imagine someone somewhere might end up making a profit, they will prefer children in developing countries starve and go blind [2]. [1] http://news.sciencemag.org/asiapacific/2013/08/activists-des... [2] http://blogs.scientificamerican.…

Here is the deal, we simply haven't had the time to determine if this is safe. And anyone who says it is is lying, because that's simply impossible to tell at this point. We know that with our best intentions and cutting edge science, we created margarine, something to save the arteries of the world. Only to find out that we didn't understand the science well enough, and margarine was essentially the stuff causing th…

Margarine has a more interesting history than that:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margarine#History

It was mostly about making a fat spread that was cheaper than butter. Relatively recent marketing probably made lots of health claims.

I suppose that makes the development a closer parallel with golden rice (or bananas), but I think you are underestimating the understanding that the developers of these organisms have.

Re: Building Better Bananas (2012)

#33

Post by daviddumenil »

retroafroman wrote: post #28
TheBiv wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tomatoes, definitely! My brother works at a major shipping company and tomatoes are picked green, and then the trucks they are shipped in have an environment where they turn red. You can really taste the difference when you go to a farmers market and try a fresh tomato! Make sure the top of the tomato is orange so that you know it's fresh!

Bananas are often force rippened at the warehouse before sale, as well.

The ethylene is used to retrigger their natural ripening process which has been stunted to allow them to be shipped abroad.

Re: Building Better Bananas (2012)

#34

Post by bryanlarsen »

bildung wrote: post #14
tfinniga wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think "distribution" in this context is just a nice way of saying that poor people can't afford better food from elsewhere, they have to rely on what is cheap and can be bought from the local market. If they're already buying bananas as a staple food, then I presume that the fix would be for the government to go to the local growers and either give the better banana plants for free, or at a discounted rate, or some…

> I think "distribution" in this context is just a nice way of saying that poor people can't afford better food from elsewhere, they have to rely on what is cheap and can be bought from the local market. That may very well be the case. > If they're already buying bananas as a staple food, then I presume that the fix would be for the government to go to the local growers and either give the better banana plants for fr…

Bananas are tasty and currently part of the culture. Is it easier to add vitamin A to bananas or to convince people to eat a different food that's rich in vitamin A? It's easy to convince a starving person to eat anything, but AFAICT most of these people aren't starving, just malnourished.

Re: Building Better Bananas (2012)

#35

Post by nitid_name »

Goosey wrote: post #31
kiba wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GE crops are designed to grow food for humans, not optimized to survive in the wild.

At which point does the latter result in the former being shortsighted?

That happens on the post-apocalyptic time line, I would assume

Re: Building Better Bananas (2012)

#36

Post by aestra »

ataggart wrote: post #12

Considering the opposition to golden rice (sometimes violently [1]) to fulfill this role in other parts of the world, these bananas are probably DOA. So long as middle-class Westerners imagine someone somewhere might end up making a profit, they will prefer children in developing countries starve and go blind [2]. [1] http://news.sciencemag.org/asiapacific/2013/08/activists-des... [2] http://blogs.scientificamerican.…

Golden rice treats a symptom and is not a cure. Instead of spending millions of dollars on treating symptoms I wonder if all that effort should instead be invested in finding a cure. There is an idea that biotechnology alone will solve all the world's problems without trying to understand what causes those problems. Or even understand the situation outside their own worldview.

Vitamin A deficiency is rarely an isolated phenomenon but usually coupled to a general lack of a balanced diet. It seems like a too first world centric solution to say "you eat mostly rice? Lets alter the rice" rather than looking into the reasons why you eat mostly rice. And vitamin A is a single nutrient.

I'm not sure if there was any other unforeseen consequences taken into account as nothing exists in a vacuum. Will encouraging golden rice consumption lead to discouraging a varied diet? Who knows. Did they take into account that vitamin A is a fat fat-soluble vitamin and there should be fat in the diet for proper absorption? I honestly don't know on the second question.

Would farmers even be willing to plant the rice?

Re: Building Better Bananas (2012)

#37

Post by yitchelle »

elfcard wrote: post #22
ataggart wrote: post #12

Considering the opposition to golden rice (sometimes violently [1]) to fulfill this role in other parts of the world, these bananas are probably DOA. So long as middle-class Westerners imagine someone somewhere might end up making a profit, they will prefer children in developing countries starve and go blind [2]. [1] http://news.sciencemag.org/asiapacific/2013/08/activists-des... [2] http://blogs.scientificamerican.…

Here is the deal, we simply haven't had the time to determine if this is safe. And anyone who says it is is lying, because that's simply impossible to tell at this point. We know that with our best intentions and cutting edge science, we created margarine, something to save the arteries of the world. Only to find out that we didn't understand the science well enough, and margarine was essentially the stuff causing th…

Hmm. Let me ask you a question. What is really truly safe? The food that we eat are only determined to be safe through the test of time, food that we have eaten over hundreds of years with no mass death.

Even so, it can be dangerous if we eat too much of it. Eg, beer has been around for many years and have been seen to be healthy in some circles, but too much of it can be fatal.

So how do you really know for sure? Would it not be possible that the plant we eat has gone through nature's version of modification known as evolution and has become toxic for consumption?

Re: Building Better Bananas (2012)

#38

Post by jjoonathan »

bmj wrote: post #11
tfinniga wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think "distribution" in this context is just a nice way of saying that poor people can't afford better food from elsewhere, they have to rely on what is cheap and can be bought from the local market. If they're already buying bananas as a staple food, then I presume that the fix would be for the government to go to the local growers and either give the better banana plants for free, or at a discounted rate, or some…

I think "distribution" in this context is just a nice way of saying that poor people can't afford better food from elsewhere, they have to rely on what is cheap and can be bought from the local market. Depends on location, I think. In the United States, yeah, that might be the case, but in other countries (I'm thinking parts of Africa), it is a distribution issue, particularly when dealing with corrupt governments.

I'm sure it depends on the famine, but this very issue (is famine primarily due to local inequality or local scarcity) is currently the subject of a spat between two prominent academics, Amartya Sen and Thomas Picketty, which has produced an abundance of material on the subject. FWIW Picketty seems to be much better at managing the internet battlefront, so it might be better to start with Sen's book "Poverty and Famines: An Essay on Entitlement and Deprivation" ($10 on kindle) and then judge what you see on the internet after having read Sen's argument.

Sen was originally motivated to study economics when, as a boy, he lived through one of India's famines while working at a grain/rice/? silo. He wanted to reconcile the fact that there was a large amount of excess grain left at the time the next crop was being harvested with the fact that he had seen starved corpses along the streets (and had heard that the famine was much worse elsewhere through the newspaper). He eventually came to the conclusion that the famine he had lived through, along with many others, was primarily economic (due to inequality combined with a few other triggers) rather than due to local food supply actually falling below what was needed to feed the population.

I don't know as much about Picketty (I had Sen as a lecturer -- didn't care much for him in that capacity, but his writing was top quality). I do know that I haven't been impressed or convinced by Picketty's arguments, which read as if they were written by someone who had never read Sen's book (he keeps raising objections that Sen thoroughly addressed >30 years ago).

Re: Building Better Bananas (2012)

#39

Post by delluminatus »

aestra wrote: post #36
ataggart wrote: post #12

Considering the opposition to golden rice (sometimes violently [1]) to fulfill this role in other parts of the world, these bananas are probably DOA. So long as middle-class Westerners imagine someone somewhere might end up making a profit, they will prefer children in developing countries starve and go blind [2]. [1] http://news.sciencemag.org/asiapacific/2013/08/activists-des... [2] http://blogs.scientificamerican.…

Golden rice treats a symptom and is not a cure. Instead of spending millions of dollars on treating symptoms I wonder if all that effort should instead be invested in finding a cure. There is an idea that biotechnology alone will solve all the world's problems without trying to understand what causes those problems. Or even understand the situation outside their own worldview. Vitamin A deficiency is rarely an isolat…

FYI, rice is an extremely healthy food, and typically it has been something that the poor are lucky to have. It also contains fat (in non-white rice).

Also, what do you want people to "find a cure" for? The growing population of humans? Climate change, which will radically alter geography especially in Africa, the Middle East, and India? Wealth imbalance, which has existed since the beginning of agriculture? It's extremely naive to suggest that "millions of dollars" is sufficient to "find a cure" for whatever it is that causes the "symptom" of human malnourishment.

Re: Building Better Bananas (2012)

#40

Post by aestra »

maxerickson wrote: post #32
elfcard wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is the deal, we simply haven't had the time to determine if this is safe. And anyone who says it is is lying, because that's simply impossible to tell at this point. We know that with our best intentions and cutting edge science, we created margarine, something to save the arteries of the world. Only to find out that we didn't understand the science well enough, and margarine was essentially the stuff causing th…

Margarine has a more interesting history than that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margarine#History It was mostly about making a fat spread that was cheaper than butter. Relatively recent marketing probably made lots of health claims. I suppose that makes the development a closer parallel with golden rice (or bananas), but I think you are underestimating the understanding that the developers of these organisms have.

Interestingly enough butter consumption has skyrocketed and has surpassed margarine consumption for the first time since the 50s. The hype has worn off, the health benefits haven't been proven, and margarine has become the poster child for "fake" foods.

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-01-30/unilever-add...

It helps that butter tastes so much better. I grew up on margarine and butter was like a forbidden fruit to my mom because it was "so bad for you." I grew up thinking butter was death in stick form. I always bought margarine as an adult because you do what your parents did unless you have a reason not to. Well, at some point a few years ago I questioned it and switched over to butter. Guess who also switched to butter recently after decrying it my whole life? My mom.

Post reply on HN