most popular:
66 Gas Saving Tips



most popular:
7 Best Electric Scooters


th comments
John Taylor said: "Sometimes you need to sue idiots who refuse to take responsibility for their actions. In this case Jude Judy was quite correct, the dog ow..." [read]

Elepski said: "I have to say.. this is really pathetic This is a classic case of the "sue everyone for everything America" Sometime accidents just..." [read]

said: "Aw c'mon Maria, have a sense of humor. The author is awoman, and speaking as a DD myself, I find the concept hilarious! ..." [read]

Alejandro Mosquera said: "Great article, really informative, and also helpful links, thanks..." [read]

Brian said: "This is a common problem in rural areas where dogs run free more often than not. While most rural dog owners accept this fact it is clear these tw..." [read]

Frankencotton- Is Your UnderwearTransgenic?

by Lloyd Alter, Toronto on 05.17.06
Fashion & Beauty (clothing)

frankencotton.jpgIt appears that much of the cotton grown these days is genetically modified to include genetic material from a bacterium called Bacillus thuringiensis or Bt, considered by some to be a friendly and organic alternative to pesticides. Farmers who use BT cotton "reduced their use of pesticides and increased the diversity of their insect populations, while protecting crops against the dread pink bollworm." James Gorman writes in the New York Times (in a wonderful style that we shall simply cut and paste, he is very funny): " A similar genetic modification in corn has caused an uproar. Many countries have rules about labeling food that contains genetically modified organisms, or G.M.O. Zambia, for instance, has refused to import transgenic corn. But cotton has faced no such trade barriers.The obvious reason is that people tend not to eat their shirts." However some may be concerned about having pesticides built into their shorts. TreeHugger suggests any number of organic cotton, bamboo or hemp alternatives. James Gorman in the ::New York Times

Comments (4)

A comment on the Google search page you get when you click on the links in this article. It's offensive to my aesthetic sensibilities.

jump to top Mike says:

Well, this is the sort of dilemm a we face now isn't it? We don't want GMO plant and animals because of unknown consequences, but they can be safer for the environment, eg. this example that uses less pesticides, which have well known consequences. Or nuclear power. Fine, it's scary and where to put the radioactive waste, but conventional coal and oil plants are definitely bad: acid rain, greenhouse gases and you're guaranteed to have a major oil spill every couple of years.

jump to top Jed says:

Jed - I'm not sure that Bt cotton *is* better for the environment. I'm doing my thesis on the opposition to GMOs in Karnataka, and I've come across quite a few claims that
1) Bt cotton doesn't necessarily protect from all pests, so pesticide ends up being used anyway,
2) Bt cotton requires huge amounts of water if it's to grow successfully,
3) Corruption and lack of resources mean that many field trials carried out by Monsanto et al are not properly monitored, and GM crops that are meant to be destroyed after testing make it out into the markets, and so the food chain.

There have also been hundreds of reports of Indian farmers committing suicide when their Bt cotton crops failed.

jump to top Anonymous says:

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

th ads
th top picks
th ads