[Klissineopar]

At first, our primogenitor lived in the garden of Eden, they only ate plants until they were exiled from the garden. "And God said, Behold I have given to you every seed-bearing herb sowing seed which is upon all the earth, and every tree which has in itself the fruit of seed that is sown, to you it shall be for food." Genesis 1:29

The lapse of mankind into sinfulness became progressively worse, Cain killed his brother Abel; The sons of God having seen the daughters of men that they were beautiful, took to themselves wives of all whom they chose; But Noe found grace before the Lord God. "And every reptile which is living shall be to you for meat, I have given all things to you as the green herbs. But flesh with blood of life ye shall not eat." Genesis 9:3-4

Our fasting rules keep body（and soul）clean and health. We must be temperate, gentle with the earth, not using without limit. So i think GMO foods should be avoided, it's not based on natural principles and against nature and upsetting of the ecosystem.

Please consult the following information:

Basil The Great And Communal Ownership http://www.oodegr.com/english/psyxot...inoxrisia1.htm
Food, Inc. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1286537/
The World According To Monsanto(Le monde selon Monsanto http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1189345/) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YH4OwBYDQe8
Our Daily Bread(Unser täglich Brot) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0765849/
Meat the Truth(http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1341746/) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uTJsZrX2wI
We Feed the World http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0478324/

So, what do you think about Genetically Modified Organism foods(and meat)?

[realfan87]

I like the Italian tomatoes with the fish genes the best.

[Keeriewof]

It's fun, but a film is more funny "Splic" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1017460/

[TaliaJack]

Selective breeding of animals and plants has been done for centuries. This is a form of genetic modification. I do believe that there are good ways to do this and quite possibly bad ways. I, for one, am very concerned with certain large corporations that produce seeds that, while they increase crop yield, do not produce seeds, so that in order to grow more crops, you MUST buy them from that corporation and nobody else. However, that being said, I am not sure where the Church fits into this discussion, personally.

[Tauntenue]

Selective breeding of animals and plants has been done for centuries. This is a form of genetic modification.

This is the standard argument made by Monsanto and their apologists. One problem: There is a big qualitative difference between interbreeding plants and animals of the same species and altering their genetic codes in labs to create species that would never arise in normal horticulture or animal husbandry, no matter what you interbred with what else. It is deeply perverse, even if it's hard to put a finger on exactly why.

Yes, corporate control of food supply is a huge problem which is bolstered by GMO, as well as the potential ecological impacts of these new organisms. Another problem is simply the question of where the line should be drawn. Do I trust our governments and corporations to maintain a firm line against messing with human DNA at some point in the future? No way.

[sobre]

It is funny this has been brought up as only one and a half hours ago I was in the shop and I read something that said it was from G.M. crops this is very rare in the U.K. as most things are labled no-G.M. else they are not sold, that is no one will buy them.
I have to mainly agree with Ryan's post above, this is a big difference between breeding plants and animals, and modifying them in a lab.

I, for one, am very concerned with certain large corporations that produce seeds that, while they increase crop yield, do not produce seeds, so that in order to grow more crops, you MUST buy them from that corporation and nobody else. I agree this could be a major problem after all in the last days one will not be able to trade anything without the mark of the beast so if all the crops can only be bought not not grow oneself it could be a major way of controlling people.

Do I trust our governments and corporations to maintain a firm line against messing with human DNA at some point in the future? No way. This is another major problem another would be it turning into a trend for designer babies.

In Christ.
Daniel,

[Serttyfd]

In charity, I believe that it's needful to consider carefully how restrictions on GMO use affect millions of lives and fortunes. One may still believe that the treatment process is sufficiently perverse to warrant those restrictions, but we must keep the consequences thereof in mind.

Policies like those in effect in Europe at the moment, which serve to make it impossible for poor countries in places like Africa to use genetically modified seed, are indirectly responsible for mass starvation and death, as well as the perpetuation of dismal standards of living.

The countries in question urgently need technology to increase yields and productivity in their agricultural sectors. Countries that have introduced GMOs have increased yield per hectare by about 30% over the past few years. Yields for non-GMO crops are flat-to-slightly declining.

However, if they plant GMOs, the EU won't allow them to export because of fears about cross-contamination and almost impossibly strict purity standards. What happens? They don't plant them. Their agricultural sectors are less productive. People starve. People die. People remain in poverty, because other sectors of the economy haven't developed.

I have seen no compelling evidence that GMO products cause anything comparable to the harm that is wreaked upon the Third World by such policies.

The analogy in respect of incentives is to ethanol or biodiesel subsidies that cause the price of corn and flour to triple in places where people are spending 80% of their disposal income on food. Owing to the subsidies, crops formerly grown for food are grown for fuel. Our breakfast cereal costs go up. Elsewhere, hundreds of millions go hungry.

We live in a world with scarce resources. We must consider how best to allocate them.

In Christ,
Evan

[flienianO]

However, if they plant GMOs, the EU won't allow them to export because of fears about cross-contamination and almost impossibly strict purity standards. I might be being think here but why cant they grow G.M. crops to feed themselves and not export them.

In Christ.
Daniel,

[xiaoselangone]

I agree in large part with Evan, especially about bio-fuels. Using food crops for bio-fuel is very very bad policy and was NOT thought through.

All forms of genetic modification have issues, even mere husbandry, especially when biodiversity is lost. Look at what happened in the Irish potato famine for example. I think there are responsible ways to go forward, even with laboratory modification at the genetic level. Irrationality on either side of the issue does nobody any good.

I do believe there are compelling arguments on either side of the issue and my mind is certainly not quite made up just yet.

[h4z1XBI7]

I might be being think here but why cant they grow G.M. crops to feed themselves and not export them.

In Christ.
Daniel,

Because the export ban in effect applies to ALL exports. If you plant GMOs, under Europe's rules, the EU allows you to export nothing.

In Christ,
Evan

[NvrNoNowX]

If you plant GMOs, under Europe's rules, the EU allows you to export nothing. Oh right I think I know what you mean. So if they should plant G.M. wheat they could not export say Pineapple?

[BokerokyBan]

Well, not exactly. My language was perhaps too strong. Like I said, there's fear about cross-contamination that gives rise to purity standards that exporting nations are concerned that they can't meet. So, nations don't use or import GMOs even briefly, for fear that all of their agricultural exports will be ineligible for export into the EU-- even though the ban technically applies only to GMO.

In Christ,
Evan

[CatLuvkaLover]

I wouldn't touch GMO foods with a 10-foot pole.

If we are concerned about feeding more hungry people on the earth, then we should consume less meat and advocate more grains.

1 acre of grains feeds 20 times more people than the same acre of livestock. Not to mention all of the health problems associated with over-consumption of meats.

[Hofonom]

That's fine and dandy, but you are aware that this grain has most likely been genetically altered in one way or another right? In order to better resist disease or insects or increase yield? Gene-splicing specifically may not have been used, but gene modification of some sort most certainly has taken place.

FWIW.

Herman the genetically unaltered Pooh (perhaps his gene pool could use some chlorine?)

[Uciaucrx]

Before this conversation goes much further - I will remind everyone that this forum is dedicated to the the discussion of Orthodox Christianity in its patristic, monastic and liturgical expression. I do think there is place for this topic within those bounds, however, lets try to keep within those bounds.

Fr David Moser

[gymnAnemoe]

I will modify my answer to Herman, in order to comply with Fr. David's request:

There is a huge difference between "selective breeding" and "artificial genetic modification".

Selective breeding happens all of the time in nature, since the beginning of history, in the form of "survival of the fittest". Hence, God has made it so that nature works this way.

Artificial genetic modification has never, in the entire history of creation, EVER happened, besides in the last couple of decades. This is NOT the way God has intended nature to work.

[Pheddytrourry]

I think it is an excellent way to ruins people's health thus making you easy to control

[Shootohoist]

Christina,

People are starving. They are starving precisely because what you've suggested is not a viable option for them. Non-GMO crops are not producing the yields that are needed to feed people and to produce the wealth gains necessary to raise people up to a standard of living that can be characterized as anything but desperately poor. The shift in food consumption you've described is simply not feasible in the short term (I would submit that it would be catastrophic on a number of fronts, but that's a separate matter), and in the short term, millions are starving and poor.

The result? Such countries depend upon foreign aid (c.f., Somalia, Zambia, Uganda, etc.). Foreign aid reduces the necessity for governments in such countries to restrict their investments to economically viable projects or reduce their levels of corruption. Aid may simply be appropriated to the benefit of the ruling class, which rations it it in politically strategic ways. Even when it does get through to the people, such aid relegates the people of these countries to perptual dependent status.

This needs not be. Despite an image of helpless Third World economies whose economic rise is possible only through transfers of aid, many Third World countries have considerable internal sources of wealth which are not fully utilized, which wealth greatly exceeds whatever foreign aid such countries have ever received. Such internal sources of wealth are compromised by restrictions like those in question. I think you must consider seriously whether GMO technology is so odious that it is worth this immense cost.

For my part, I've not come across anything in Scripture or the Fathers that would lead me to believe that the genetic modification of plants is sufficiently atrocious to justify exacerbating the suffering that I've drawn attention to. St. John Chrysostom admonished his congregation to feed the poor, that they may not feed the fires of Hell. It seems to be incumbent upon us as Christians to ensure that policies that may work towards preventing the poor from being fed (and ultimately I would that they be able to feed themselves, so as not to have to be forced to look to others) are looked at very, very critically-- even though man does not live by bread alone.

Again, we live in a fallen world with scarce resources. We must be careful that we do not strain out gnats and swallow camels.

In Christ,
Evan

[Riprincattiva]

Evan, I believe you are greatly over-simplifying the matter.

Look at how much food we waste every day in America: Almost every grocery store throws out truckloads of "old" food every week. I've seen this with my own eyes. One of my neighbors picks up 2 truck-loads of food from Whole Foods Market twice a week. He throws the food to his pigs. This is just ONE grocery store, and this happens in most, if not all, grocery stores around the country. Walmart, in particular, has refused to give any of this food to the poor.

On the other hand, our government pays farmers to burn their excess corn for the year, in order to keep the prices high. Why can't this corn be sent to the starving countries?

Does it really seem to you like we're not producing enough food? The problem is corporate greed, not farming practices.

I apologize, Fr. David, because I'm finding it difficult to stay "on topic" for this issue.

As a response to whether or not the Fathers would have been against GMO... I guess we would have to find a saint from the last decade or so, since the saints of the past never had to deal with such things.

Quotes can be found from saints who stressed the importance of eating healthy and avoiding harmful junk food. Studies have shown the dangers associated with GMO foods, and the damage they cause in mice models. I'm sure the saints would agree that it's not good to eat foods that damage the "temple of the Holy Spirit" or the "image of God".

Also, it is our responsibility to take care of this Earth that God has given us, as much as we can. It doesn't seem very prudent to me to cover millions of acres of land with pesticidal crops, which kill any and every insect that feeds on them.

[mXr8icOB]

The claim that there is world hunger because people can't grow GMO crops is nonsensical any way you look at it. No one I've heard from who studies/ fights famine and world hunger has pinpointed GMO restrictions as the cause or even a cause- this is just more cynical marketing from Monsanto and friends. The problem is not food production but distribution, as it almost always has been throughout history. Why people think a patented crop, designed for profit by companies with very dubious ethics, will solve world hunger is a mystery to me.