It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Harvard professor says it's crucial population is reduced through GMO foods

page: 1

log in


posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 03:36 PM

Quote from source:
Population growth must be slashed to protect human health and wellbeing, a Harvard University health professor says. Who also works as a pediatrician, says population growth and climate change are the two biggest threats to the future of life on earth.

Speaking at the National Press Club in Canberra on Tuesday, he said the discovery of new medicines often depends on healthy ecosystems, which continue to be destroyed.

Dr Bernstein gave the example of a recently extinct species of gastric-breeding frogs, that were unique to Australia.

The chemicals used to gestate spawn internally could have led to a cure for peptic ulcer disease, affecting more than a million Australians and 25 million Americans.

"With loss of individual species we foreclose upon the discovery of new medicines," he said, noting that one third of the world's species were forecast to be extinct by 2050.

Dr Bernstein said three-quarters of emerging diseases, including respiratory ailments, were the result of damaged ecological systems.

"Ecological barriers that once kept these infections at bay have been broken, opening the door to their passage of the human population, he said.

Over the past 50 years one fifth of the earth's topsoil and agricultural land has eroded, along with 90 per cent of marine fisheries and a third of forests, he said.

Over the same period the population has tripled to 6.5 billion people.

Dr Bernstein said to protect ecosystems, as the global population soars towards nine billion, policy makers need to cut carbon and population growth.

"We must do everything possible to further limit the growth of the human population," he said

I had to leave in the last part as it is the most telling.

So, this guy is a pediatrician and is saying that the population needs to be reduced? Wow, remind me not to take my kids to this man.

This whole overpopulation is bullsh!t. Maybe if we stopped being resource hogs maybe there would be enough for everyone to live a comfortable life.

Any thoughts?


posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 04:18 PM

Originally posted by predator0187
Maybe if we stopped being resource hogs maybe there would be enough for everyone to live a comfortable life.

And maybe if pigs flew, we could simply ride on them verses use cars.

People will continue to be a can spout all the idealistic fantast you want, but people will remain people.

We need a technological solution to the overpopulation problem...but for some reason, people never discuss the technological solutions...just what we can cut out, tax, or wish for people to wont change a thing, not a damned thing. People (especially poor nations) will continue to breed like bunnies, Oil will continue to be burned in mass amounts, forests will continue to be knocked down to build homes, paper, toothpicks, etc...and the only time people will wake up and realize we need out of the box thinking is when there is a mass body count.

Then it will be a reactionary "wow" moment and everyone will pat themselves on the back for being the pseduo-cutting edge thinkers whom barely averted a catastrophe.

I am not sure which side angers me the most...the politicians pretending cap and trade will make a difference, the ones denying evidence because some talking corporate head said to, or the people whom simply ignore even thinking about solutions....bah.

posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 04:23 PM
reply to post by SaturnFX

I am not talking about harmony, though it would be nice, I am talking about the advancement of our technology to be able to live without taking from the earth,in that sense. I think the poor countries will end up revolting because they live like they do and it may make more terrorists in the wake. People do not like living the way they do in third world countries and they will end up just causing civil wars.

It's sad that we have to have something big happen in order to change. Just goes to show how dumb we are.


posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 04:30 PM
from the original posted source

And he said it's crucial GM crops, including drought resistant varieties, are freely available.

i think he is jumping to conclusions, this is a drastic measure that a little 'green thumb' ingenuity could replace

it's too cold for the crop to grow? get a green house

too hot? build some shade, mirror in some light, grow indoors with an AC and fan near

genetically modify a plant because of drought???? why not use raised plant beds that drips unused water out the bottom to be recycled and used again, this way a little bit of water can go alot longer (some water given to plants is absorbed but a majority slips through the soil before it can be, this solution would solve that)

i don't need to go into detail, but this guy is going off the deep end, farmers make due and use their 'smarts' to get low cost, low waste crop growing to work, they don't just see an upcoming drought and think "well time to genetically modify everything"

they think "well, time to use the skills that thousands of years of human agriculture has developed because all these problems are nothing new"
even if the scale is larger, the solutions are already tested and recorded and still used every year

[edit on 4/14/2010 by indigothefish]

posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 04:36 PM
Ehhh... Where exactly he said that population
A) Has to be reduced?
B) It has to be done with GMO food(s)?
From article he said that population GROWTH has to be reduced. And GMO food should be part of global solution to climate change (What??????) and that in poor countries it would be a solution to food crysis. This is it. I do not get how you jump to your conclusions It is like if someone told you to stop accelerating. not stopping your car or even lowering the speed.
And i think that he is double wrong. We need to focus on stopping the pollution ,cutting population growth will not stop all the industrial poisons we make from poisoning us. And GMO food is not proven to be safe.

posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 05:00 PM

Originally posted by predator0187
This whole overpopulation is bullsh!t. Maybe if we stopped being resource hogs maybe there would be enough for everyone to live a comfortable life.

Any thoughts?


Yeah, but aren't you saying precisely the same thing he is? Uncontained usage of finite resources is a negative.

This doctor and others who propose population decline aren't (typically) suggesting random people be gathered up by UN stormtroopers and executed. It's more likely measures to thwart population explosion in 2nd/3rd world countries by education, birth control for undesired pregnancies, etc. Of course, population rates in many "modernized" countries are already net loss.

If global population is systematically reduced through these tools (not execution of anyone), then the existing resources could be better allocated and provide for more, and for longer, hopefully at a self-sustaining rate.

However, I agree, if he's proposing involuntary sterilization or other nefarious tools via genetically-modified agriculture, yeah, that's diabolical and unnecessary, I would think.

posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 05:48 PM

Originally posted by predator0187
Harvard professor says it's crucial population is reduced through GMO foods

I didn't see where he said that. The story said:

Dr Bernstein didn't suggest how to achieve this, saying it is up to policy makers in each country.

Where'd you get that he wanted to use GMO foods to reduce population?

posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 09:48 AM
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman

he doesn't really flat out say it like that but

And he said it's crucial GM crops, including drought resistant varieties, are freely available.

GM stands for geneticaly modified, i don't know what O stands for in the thread title or what not

in the article he kind of dances around the idea, not really laying out a plan for it to happen but allowing the idea to sink it

it's kind of like if you fell and scraped your elbow, and got a small cut and one person says
"are you ok? want a band aid?"
and then this harvard proffessor comes along and says

which is the main point of my earlier post on this thread you might want to read, he is over reacting

posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 10:00 AM
Management of water resources is one of the most pressing issues for the planet. Lack of sufficient fresh water leads to tribal conflict and failed agriculture. It is hoped that genetically modified crops can lead to more efficient water use, thus alleviating death through war and hunger. The object, as has been pointed out, is to reduce the rate of population growth, not the population. Continuing with "business as usual" will eventually reduce the population through conflict and famine, as it has for the past 10,000 years. You may debate the claims of GM foods, but please understand what is being said.

[edit on 15-4-2010 by DJW001]

posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 10:05 AM
as far as i know in america, the only crop problem right now is a case of late blight sweeping the north west

edit: and you know what they do? they just grow more crop to make up for what they lost, if they find a plant effected they try to get rid of it before it infects the rest

late blight is a SERIOUS problem right now, but YOU will still be able to buy your vegetables at the store because farmers know how to deal with this kind of thing

we waste alot of water, but there is no water shortage

[edit on 4/15/2010 by indigothefish]

[edit on 4/15/2010 by indigothefish]

posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 10:13 AM
reply to post by indigothefish

There are other places on earth than America:

As the picture shows, in 2025, water shortages will be more prevalent among poorer countries where resources are limited and population growth is rapid, such as the Middle East, Africa, and parts of Asia. By 2025, large urban and peri-urban areas will require new infrastructure to provide safe water and adequate sanitation. This suggests growing conflicts with agricultural water users, who currently consume the majority of the water used by humans.

posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 11:50 AM
yeah i see what you mean


[edit on 4/15/2010 by indigothefish]

posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 02:45 PM
reply to post by indigothefish

Hey, just wanna say I am glad you are on this site to share your insights with us all here. You strike me as either an experienced farmer or an agriculture specialists.

I know nothing about agriculture, and only know that technology, productivity and better land/resource management will feed our world several times over even in bad times.

I wish there were many more like you instead of talk heads who only know how manipulate statistics to prove their points and use 'scarcity theories' to impose genocide upon humans so that they and the rich will always be well fed.

You seem to know what you are talking about, a gift of farming perhaps if i may say so. Humans have different callings in life, and yours could be in farming.

I would gladly share wealth with your kind than with wall street cowboys shuffling papers. I hope you will share your ideas with other farmers around the world, perhaps write books based on your experiences to help others starting out. It is people like you that will feed us all.

Cheers! :-)

[edit on 15-4-2010 by SeekerofTruth101]

posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 02:49 PM
FDA Says Walnuts Are Drugs and Doritos Are Heart Healthy

... covering FDA and Codex issues in some depth so far.

posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 02:56 PM
reply to post by DJW001

70% of the world is covered by water. It is how you use technology to coenvert salt water into fresh water. It is possible, had been proven and is providing for a number of countries that do not have access to fresh water or due to drought.

And this year is 2010. By 2025, with tech improvements and economies of scale, desalination processes would be cheaper, and way cheaper than cloud seeding.

So, do not base your presumptions on 19th century perceptions many a scholar does, not a fault as that was how he had been taught. The danger to mankind is only when such scholars continue to hold firm that 19th century tech will be the same for the 21st century, disregarding evolution, and with those presumptions, it will only doom mankind instead.


posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 05:03 PM
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101

i had started a U2U towards a reply thanks for the positive comment, but it ended up turning into something relevant to this thread, so anyway here it is, first though, thanks for the positive feedback, both from myself and the 'green thumb' community in general

i've stated a couple times here already, but i spent a couple years living in japan a while back. to say the least it impacted my life for the better.

the japanese have a rich heritage of self reliance that comes from the fact that during fuedal days you had to rely on yourself for things like food, and even in fuedal cities the japanese caste system limited what most common people could or couldn't do for a living,
even today for the most part japan is a gigantic city, most of their population are in very crowded areas, but they still maintain the age tested wisdom of self reliance with every square foot of sunlight they can find

i have seen how the japanese fill their entire 4' X 8' or smaller deck space of crowded apartment decks so strategically that they manage to year round produce enough vegetables to save what is translateable to a hundred or so dollars a month on food costs

for example, due to the fact that soy milk has such short self life and other reasons, soy milk costs alot more than it is worth, it is extremely common for a japanese family to grow their own soy bean and produce it themselves

this probably sounds like alot of work to the american, before i got into this sort of thing, i thought this was only for 'farmers'. you can spend 99 cent on 100 or so soy beans, and each plant will yeild a half pound about of beans in 70 - 110 (depending on the strain of soy), have you ever had edamame soy? edamame is exclusively grown for human consumption, it is what's known as a complete protein because it contains every amino acid neccessary for the our bodies...

no, i am not a 'farmer'
but thanks, this is all simple knowledge that anyone can understand, also, anyone can afford it, in fact i've stated before that i am probably less than 30% self reliant myself, and yet i survive healthily and plumply happy on a couple grand income per year, i get a summer job when the tourism starts and that's all i need, dirt's really cheap and you don't need to add special things to your plants, maybe some manure for extra nutrience mixed in or layered on during flowering, but i'm telling you man, BUY SOME SEEDS YOU'LL HAVE TONS OF EXTRA MONEY

anyways, my main point in relation to this thread is, i face the common problems that everyone does, i need to eat, and i guess you could say i'm poor based on how much money i gather per year by working, but i have found that when your resources are limited, ingenuity is what separates survivors from the dead

this thread talks about how a guy thinks drought should be fought with genetically modified foods, which it is debatable wether that is healthy or not, but the POINT is that drought is nothing new and there are ways to work WITH nature on that one, i also agree with you that most of the earth's salt water can be converted into fresh enough water (probably most easily by evaporating methods) to supply crops for the rest of time

hope you like that

american's don't even understand the concept of minimal self suffeciency, i would EXPECT to think that they would jump to GM foods just because of drought or overpopulation hahahaha

[edit on 4/15/2010 by indigothefish]

posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 05:07 PM

Originally posted by predator0187

Quote from source:
Population growth must be slashed to protect human health and wellbeing, a Harvard University health professor says. Who also works as a pediatrician

This guy is admitting people need to be culled, and his job is to "help" sick kids ??

Hello C

My answer to his theory is:

"ok, let's start with you then, shall we?"

[edit on 15-4-2010 by HIWATT]

posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 05:17 PM
I think it is appropriate for all of those who support these eugenics policies to do their part to advance the population reduction agenda. It is only right that you live up to the expectations you set for others. Once all the eugenics proponents have done their part, there should be adequate resources remaining for the rest of the population.

By the way.....Thanks!

posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 05:25 PM
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101

I agree with you completely, but desalinization requires energy, and energy is another source of conflict at the moment. Water is an issue destroying Somalia and leading to potential conflicts between China and both India and Vietnam. China has practically depleted it's deep aquifer and cannot afford to let go of Tibet, in order to control the Himalayan snow melt. Even in the US, there is conflict in California between urban and agricultural users and similar issues in the US southeast. There will eventually be both technological and social fixes, of course, but in the meantime people need to become aware of the situation.

posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 05:31 PM
reply to post by DJW001

energy problem solved
removing salt from water with solar power

where there is a will, there is a way

[edit on 4/15/2010 by indigothefish]

new topics

top topics


log in