I just put down a small insert article from the January 12,
2013 edition of Science News. The writer asserts that Solving Hunger by
increasing the efficiency of photosynthesis would produce much more “food” from
the same plants and same space. And this would in turn relieve the world hunger
problem. Really?
No, I don’t think so. Decades of research has shown that
increased food production in places where starvation and poor nutrition is a
way of life increases the population in proportion to the food produced. In
other words: more food = more people. In these times of drought and weather
crisis after weather crisis what the world does not need are more people. Let
them starve? No, not a good idea either.
My solution is simple: Engineer into the new food supply a
birth control mechanism that either reduces fertility in men and/or women or
reduces libido in men. No fertility, no babies. No libido, no sex, no babies.
Hell, if science can genetically engineer plants to do all they can now, it
should be no real challenge to add a dose of something that would potentially
save the world from additional overpopulation and self-destruction.
Oh. I forgot. Too Late.
Image: http://openwetware.org/images/thumb/7/74/RSSE2007_ImperialCollege_SyntheticBiology_Prism.jpg/350px-RSSE2007_ImperialCollege_SyntheticBiology_Prism.jpg
Posts
1 comment:
I don't have any proof to argue this point, and it is pure speculation by observation, but I believe that there is no lack of food amounts. I think the problem lays in food distribution. I believe that even if science increases the food production by 10 fold, the hunger will proportionally increase as fortunate cultures will become fatter and the unfortunate will be even more hungrier.
Post a Comment