Solving world hunger with science

  • Thread starter Thread starter cracker
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Science
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
5 replies · 5K views
cracker
Messages
37
Reaction score
0
I really don't remember were I heard this but it was about solving world hunger and malnutrition by engineering the DNA of a common plant to have all the nutrients and vitimens. So did they ever manage to do this or was it all just a bunch of bolony.
 
Biology news on Phys.org
Corn and rice come to mind.
My understanding is some sucess with both in the lab.
Don't know about practical application as in actually growing it in a field somewhere.
 
We don't need genetically engineered plants to feed everyone. We already have enough agricultural capacity to give every person on the planet more than 5,000 Calories per day. Unfortunately, we use a great deal of that land for making grain for cattle, energetically an extremely wasteful process.

We also have all sorts of political and economic pressures, some virtually unsolvable, which leave certain parts of the world in hunger.

- Warren
 
Most of the folks who work in the area agree with Warren - the idea that there is not enough food is wrong. Politics and violence play a huge part in causing deprivation.

I'm not so sure about feeding animals. 40% of temperate arable lands are grasslands. For many of those lands the most economic use of those lands is grazing, not cropping. Especially in areas with fragile soils, low rainfall, or more extreme climates - for example as you move near the sub-arctic, or into shortgrass prairie.

For example see this -
http://aes.missouri.edu/fsrc/research/afgc95km.stm
 
In countries like Australia grazing is the only productive use of arid areas, if you plow them to plant crops the whole lot will just blow away.

The developed countries already produce more than enough food to feed the whole world. The reasons that so many people go hungry are all political or economic. We can afford to give food to the poorest people in the world but to do so will mean military action to keep the greedy powerful from taking it all - remember Somalia?
 
I just read an interesting article at the BBC's website that I think is at least peripherally relevant.

"http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4793455.stm" "
 
Last edited by a moderator: