Genetically modified foods
I don't really have a very good reason to criticise genetically modified foods. It does make me wonder however if 21st century man is really in a position to criticise hundreds of millions of years of natural genetic modification.
At the very least, if they are going to be genetically modifying things then they should be doing something useful to vegies. Like making square tomatoes. Whenever I slice a tomato for a sandwich I struggle to make the round pieces fit side by side on the bread. If I overlap them a bit then it makes the sandwich bulky and dangerously unstable. Seeing as the sandwich is the cornerstone of the Australian lunchtime economy I think all efforts should be put forward to developing a square tomato with slices that just neatly go to the edge of the piece of bread. Think of how many more people would eat tomato and cheese sandwiches. It might solve childhood obesity, world hunger - oh, there is no end to the possibilities.
But no, they have to invest all those millions of dollars into making tomatoes resistant to a wasp or impervious to a cold wind. All of this might be useful for the farmer but what about us? The consumer misses out on the genetic modification miracle. I would like to see the genes of the kangaroo crossed with the genes of a wombat crossed with the genes of a kookaburra just to see what a jumping wombat with the giggles looks like.
But being frivolous with nature is no laughing matter. The world is in the midst of climatic upheaval. If indigenous plants are wiped out and we are left with our homemade, knock-up versions of plants and animals then we will be at the mercy of whatever conditions we originally designed them for. Those conditions are under threat because of our interference with other things and so it seems, that the more we fiddle and faddle to overcome nature's obstacles to our personal financial success, the more nature will someday turn around and kick us up our genetically-modified arses.
It would be nice to have one like Kylie's though...
At the very least, if they are going to be genetically modifying things then they should be doing something useful to vegies. Like making square tomatoes. Whenever I slice a tomato for a sandwich I struggle to make the round pieces fit side by side on the bread. If I overlap them a bit then it makes the sandwich bulky and dangerously unstable. Seeing as the sandwich is the cornerstone of the Australian lunchtime economy I think all efforts should be put forward to developing a square tomato with slices that just neatly go to the edge of the piece of bread. Think of how many more people would eat tomato and cheese sandwiches. It might solve childhood obesity, world hunger - oh, there is no end to the possibilities.
But no, they have to invest all those millions of dollars into making tomatoes resistant to a wasp or impervious to a cold wind. All of this might be useful for the farmer but what about us? The consumer misses out on the genetic modification miracle. I would like to see the genes of the kangaroo crossed with the genes of a wombat crossed with the genes of a kookaburra just to see what a jumping wombat with the giggles looks like.
But being frivolous with nature is no laughing matter. The world is in the midst of climatic upheaval. If indigenous plants are wiped out and we are left with our homemade, knock-up versions of plants and animals then we will be at the mercy of whatever conditions we originally designed them for. Those conditions are under threat because of our interference with other things and so it seems, that the more we fiddle and faddle to overcome nature's obstacles to our personal financial success, the more nature will someday turn around and kick us up our genetically-modified arses.
It would be nice to have one like Kylie's though...
