After 20 years of genetically modified crops are they a sucess?
I have never been that keen on the idea of eating genetically modified food. I understand the economic argument about same amount of land would give you a greater yield and that the crops would be more robust and hence would need less pesticides. But I have always had my concerns about if scientist truly understood all the implications of modify crops. In Europe generally the idea of fooling with nature caused widespread protests.
Genetically modified crops were more acceptable in North America and were introduced 20 years. Well I can safely say that any fears I had about any adverse side effects or any other fears of GM crops being “Frankenstein” food that is harmful to humans were laid to rest a long time ago. So I would say that GM crops are now more acceptable by the European general public, who here in the UK we probably eat GM crops that are imported from North America. So on the “Frankenstein” criteria they have been very successful.
But what about the economic arguments that were put forward 20 years ago. Data from the united nations reveals that there is no discernible advantage in yields between North America and Europe that didn’t introduce GM crops. Since GM crops like corn, cotton and soyabeans were introduced into North America the use of toxic chemicals to kill insects and fungi has fallen by 33% but the spraying of herbicides has increased by 21%. In France, the use of insecticides and fungicides has fallen by 65% and herbicide spraying as fallen by 36%.
This suggests that GM crops aren’t as robust as originally envisaged by scientist and they don’t produce more abundant harvests either. So western europe didn’t loose out by not introducing GM crops.
Where GM crops do seem to have made a difference according to Matin Qaim, a researcher at Georg-August-University of Göttingen, Germany, is significant yield gains from insect-resistant varieties of crops in the developing world, particularly in India.
References
Genetically engineered crops: Experiences and Prospects report see >> https://www.nap.edu/login.php?record_id=23395
Related Posts
The Impact of Sitting All Day – Part 2
In part 1, I looked at the impact of sitting on your muscles, but what happens in the rest of your body? Leg Disorders We are all familiar with the risk of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) if we take long flights. This is because sitting for long periods of time slows blood circulation, which causes fluid to pool in legs. This creates problems ranging from swollen ankles, varicose beings to dangerous blood clots. Soft Bones Osteoporosis is a disease marked by reduced bone strength leading to an increased risk of fractures, or broken bones. Bone strength has two main features: bone mass (amount of bone) and bone quality. Osteoporosis is often called a “silent disease” because it usually progresses without any symptoms until a fracture occurs or one or more vertebrae (bones in the spine) collapse. Weight-bearing activities such as walking and running stimulate hip and lower-body bones to grow thicker, denser and stronger. Medical researchers partially attribute the recent surge in cases of osteoporosis to lack of activity. Garrett, Brasure et al, 2004, Physical Inactivity Direct Cost To A Health Plan, American Journal of Preventative Medicine; Vol 27 No 4, Pages 304–309 See http://www.ajpmonline.org/article/S0749-3797%2804%2900191-6/abstract?cc=y Weight Gain As the body slows down while in a resting and seated positions, the metabolism naturally slows down. Calories are burned at a far lower rate, when you sit, you burn only about one calorie a minute!. For some people this can lead to weight gain becoming an issues. Being overweight is a known risk factor for many common chronic conditions including
- diabetes
- gallstones
- hypertension
- heart disease
- stroke
Can massaging your baby improve the mood of new mothers?
I can't begin to imagine how worried, anxious & may be inadequate I would feel if I had a premature baby. I would imagine there is a really strong instinct & desire to the hold the baby which is more difficult if it needs to be in an incubator. A recent study has looked at the impact on the mother’s health of massaging premature babies. Fifty-two mothers with babies born at 30 - 38 weeks were randomly assigned ot an intervention or control group. Mothers in the experimental group were asked to massage their babies daily alongside standard medical care, while those in the control group only had standard medical care. Mothers in the experimental group were given an information pamphlet, training video and researches conducted a massage training session. They were then asked to perform a massage on their babies for 15 minutes each day for 5 days. Mothers were asked to complete a questionnaire rating changes in 65 "mood factors" including anxiety, depression and fatigue, on a five-point scale. Mood scores were consistent across both groups at the beginning of the study but there were significant differences by the end. Mothers who massaged their babies had a better mood than those who didn't. They also experienced less anxiety, depression & fatigue. Reading this did make me wonder the impact of massaging babies would have on the mood of mums whose babies weren't premature. Reference https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1556370717300937
Are you low in magnesium?
Although we have talked in general about lots of people being low in magnesium, it begs the querstion are you low in Magnesium? Given we can't take a test, what are the signs you can look for to see if you are low magnesium?
- Anxiety
- Times of hyperactivity
- Difficulty getting to sleep
- Difficulty staying asleep
- Muscle spams and muscle cramping
- Fibromyalgia
- Facial tics
- Eye twitches or involuntary evey movements
