Hivi maendeleo ni kuiga wengine au kuboresha ulichonacho? Tz tunahitaji GMO kweli?

[GAGL]

Magazeti jana yameripoti kuwa serikali imeridhia matumizi ya GMO, huku ikisema kuwa nchi kama marekani, south africa na nyingine tayari wanatumia teknolojia hiyo. Hivi na ardhi yenye rutuba tuliyonayo, kuna ulazima wa kuingia kwenye hatari hii ya kuharibu asili yetu jamani eti kwa kuwa nchi kama marekani wanafanya hivyo?

 

[Lyimo]

Tatizo hapo siyo kwamba rotuba ya ardhi yetu tu. Ingawa GMO inaweza tumika kuongeza uzalishaji, ila pia anaweza leta uharibifu mkubwa wa asili ya mimea yetu iliyostahimili mazingira yetu (it can destroy our genetic resources). Hayo mataifa uliyoyataja, yanafanikiwa kutumia GMO kwasababu wanaweza kuzalisha mbegu/miche hiyo na pia wanaweza kudhibiti uharibifu unaoweza kutokea kwa mazao hayo. Kumbuka kudhibiti muingiliano wa vinasaba (genes) kwenye mimea si kazi ndogo, sababu uchavushaji na usafirishwaji wa pollen hufanywa zaidi na wadudu pamoja na upepo. Tusipokuwa makini tutaharibu mimea yetu ya asili, na baadaye kuyategemea hayo mataifa makubwa watutengenezee mbegu, kitu ambacho kitawagharimu sana wakulima wetu.

 

[mzeelapa]

Kila nchi inafanya mambo kulingana na mazingira yao. Sie kila kitu kuiga, study tours zisizo na mwisho na matokeo yake hatufanikiwi na badala yake tunakwenda mbele na nyuma.

 

[Ufipa-Kinondoni]

Haaaaaaaaaah! Nyie vipi ni kitu gani kinatokana na teknolojia ya Kiafrika? GMO haina budi kuiendeleza in controlled manner. Sahizi % kubwa ya vitu vingi vina asili ya GMO kwa sababu zifuatazo:
1) Mutation: Hii ni ile inayotokana na mabadiliko ya asili ya mimea hata wanyama na
2) Selective Breeding kwa mimea na wanyama ni GMO ambayo hatuogopi kutumia.

Pia GMO ndiyo chanzo kikuu cha madawa ya kutibu magonjwa mengi kama insulin za kisukari, penicillin, n.k.

Kuogopa teknolojia ni kujiuwa. Nchi nyingi zinatumia ila kwa tahathari sana. Zimeweza kutenga maeneo maalum ya kuzalisha mazao hao. Mfano, pamba ilikuwa inalimwa wilayani Chunya tukapiga maarufuku kwa sababu ya wadudu kutoka Malawi. Tunaweza kupeleka mbegu ambazo wale wadudu wakila majani, au sehemu yoyote ya mmea wanakufaa. Haya ni mafanikio hasa katika miongo 3 iliyopita.

Hii ndo kinatugharimu, angalia apples za S.A. mnazipenda??????????? zimetengenezwaje???? Ngano kutoka USA ndo zinatumika kwa sehemu kubwa TZ.

Tusikatae teknolojia.

Kinachotakiwa tuendeleze wataam wa ndani, ili kuweza kukabiliana na GMO na badaye tusiwe watumiaji wa teknolojia wa2 kwa bei ya madini yetu. Turuhusu katika ngazi ya maabara siyo shambani.

Tusiogope hiki ndo kimetugharimu kwenye UKIMWI. Hatutaki kukabiliana na changamoto mapema.

Angalia link hii kwa wenzetu wa Kenya First GM tropical maize in Africa; how far, how soon? | ASARECA

Thanks.

 

[Ufipa-Kinondoni]

Kila nchi inafanya mambo kulingana na mazingira yao. Sie kila kitu kuiga, study tours zisizo na mwisho na matokeo yake hatufanikiwi na badala yake tunakwenda mbele na nyuma.

The world is not fair as you say. It is global. Kitu gani tunajitegemea? Wenzetu Asia wakisikia kuna teknolojia mpya wanatuma watu kuiga ili wasiwe mbumbu. SS tunaendelea kulinda vitu ambayo hatuwezi kutumia

 

[MUREFU]

sawa kweli ila kaka kumbuka Tz wanapata msaada kutoka kwa hao wamarekani na ndio sababu kubwa ya nchi kama hii ifuate mkubwa wako anachosema maana ukifuatilia hatuna ulazma wa sisi kuingia kwenye GMO maana kunanjia nyingine tofaut na hiyo sema utafanyeje na msaada unapata kwake? sasa basi ili usipoteze unachokipata lazma ufuate anaekupa ndio maana imelazmika kufanya hivyo haijalishi GMO inahatarishi zipi kwa nchi yako

 

[Ufipa-Kinondoni]

Ulazima wa kufuata hamna ila mabadiliko hayachagui. Ndo maana nikasema haitajiki kunza leo ila inatakiwa tuwe angalau wa kimaabara.



Na kumbuka hakuna teknolojia rafiki, zote ni mbaya ila inategemeana na muda gani.

Tz hatuna uwezo wa kukabiliana na mabadiliko ya hali ya hewa. Kama mvua haitoshi kila mwaka hatutalima. Badaye kwa sababu tunaishi kama ombaomba wataleta kwa sera za kimataifa. Tutatumia bila kupenda. Tutanung'unika. Haitasaidia. Wazungu kila kitu ndani ya nchi.

Tanzania tuamke hakuna haja ya kutofanya wananyo fanya wenzetu. Asia imefanikiwa kwa sababu hizi. Kutoogopa maendeleo.

 

[Ufipa-Kinondoni]

Mods hebu rudisha hii thread. Ni muhimu. Mbona haina iliko kuwa moved.

 

[Moony]

Haaaaaaaaaah! Nyie vipi ni kitu gani kinatokana na teknolojia ya Kiafrika? GMO haina budi kuiendeleza in controlled manner. Sahizi % kubwa ya vitu vingi vina asili ya GMO kwa sababu zifuatazo:
1) Mutation: Hii ni ile inayotokana na mabadiliko ya asili ya mimea hata wanyama na
2) Selective Breeding kwa mimea na wanyama ni GMO ambayo hatuogopi kutumia.

Pia GMO ndiyo chanzo kikuu cha madawa ya kutibu magonjwa mengi kama insulin za kisukari, penicillin, n.k.

Kuogopa teknolojia ni kujiuwa. Nchi nyingi zinatumia ila kwa tahathari sana. Zimeweza kutenga maeneo maalum ya kuzalisha mazao hao. Mfano, pamba ilikuwa inalimwa wilayani Chunya tukapiga maarufuku kwa sababu ya wadudu kutoka Malawi. Tunaweza kupeleka mbegu ambazo wale wadudu wakila majani, au sehemu yoyote ya mmea wanakufaa. Haya ni mafanikio hasa katika miongo 3 iliyopita.

Hii ndo kinatugharimu, angalia apples za S.A. mnazipenda??????????? zimetengenezwaje???? Ngano kutoka USA ndo zinatumika kwa sehemu kubwa TZ.

Tusikatae teknolojia.

Kinachotakiwa tuendeleze wataam wa ndani, ili kuweza kukabiliana na GMO na badaye tusiwe watumiaji wa teknolojia wa2 kwa bei ya madini yetu. Turuhusu katika ngazi ya maabara siyo shambani.

Tusiogope hiki ndo kimetugharimu kwenye UKIMWI. Hatutaki kukabiliana na changamoto mapema.

Angalia link hii kwa wenzetu wa Kenya First GM tropical maize in Africa; how far, how soon? | ASARECA

Thanks.

Tatizo la nchi yetu ni kukosa elimu. Zamani enzi za Mwalimu kila sera ama jambo lolote jipya lilitolewa elimu kwa njia ya nyimbo, ngojera, matangazo, maigizo n.k
Sanaa na muziki vilitumika kuelezea sera yoyote mpya ya wizara yoyote pamoja na kwamba vyombo vya habari havikuwa vingi na wala technologia ilikuwa haijakua.

Watu wengi hatujui GMOs ni nini, athari na faida zake ni nini. Tukiambiwa ni mbaya basi tunachukulia hivyo tu. Wizara ya kilimo ingetafuta wanamuziki wa bendi na kwaya, waandishi wa habari, walimu,warembo, wabunge n.k waeleweshwe uzuri na ubaya na nini hasa maana ya GMO, zinatokana na nini, nk. Watu hawa kila mmoja kwa nafasi yake ataelimisha jamii na watu wataelewa.
Utakuta mtu analaani vyakula vya GMO wakati ameshikiria apple za sauzi. Basi tueleweshwe ili tufahamu nini kinaendelea

 

[Ufipa-Kinondoni]

Nchi yoyote isiyojua inafanya nini ndio matokeo yake. Sayansi kwetu tuko miaka 60-80 nyuma ya nchi za Asia, kwa Ulaya na Marekani tuko miaka hata 100-150 nyuma. Hatuna sera za sayansi na teknolojia yenye kuonyesha tunaenda wapi. Mambo yakianza kuharibika ndo tunagutuka kuita wazungu wafanye.

GMO siyo mbaya kama wanasiasa wanavyodanganya. Karibu kila kitu cha nje ni GMO hasa kwa Asia na USA. S.Africa ni ya 8 kwa matumizi ya teknolojia ya GMO, na sisi hata maembe yanatoka huko.

Tunakata huku tunakula. Nchi ijipange tu.

Tatizo la nchi yetu ni kukosa elimu. Zamani enzi za Mwalimu kila sera ama jambo lolote jipya lilitolewa elimu kwa njia ya nyimbo, ngojera, matangazo, maigizo n.k
Sanaa na muziki vilitumika kuelezea sera yoyote mpya ya wizara yoyote pamoja na kwamba vyombo vya habari havikuwa vingi na wala technologia ilikuwa haijakua.

Watu wengi hatujui GMOs ni nini, athari na faida zake ni nini. Tukiambiwa ni mbaya basi tunachukulia hivyo tu. Wizara ya kilimo ingetafuta wanamuziki wa bendi na kwaya, waandishi wa habari, walimu,warembo, wabunge n.k waeleweshwe uzuri na ubaya na nini hasa maana ya GMO, zinatokana na nini, nk. Watu hawa kila mmoja kwa nafasi yake ataelimisha jamii na watu wataelewa.
Utakuta mtu analaani vyakula vya GMO wakati ameshikiria apple za sauzi. Basi tueleweshwe ili tufahamu nini kinaendelea

 

[rodrick alexander]

hivi mmeshajiuliza kwanini sasa hivi kansa imeongezeka hadi watoto wadogo wanumwa kansa.Pia mmeshajiuliza kwanini sasa hivi kuna tatizo kubwa l nguvu za kiume na kwanini waganga wanaojitangaza wanatibu nguvu za kiume wameongezeka.Haya yote yanasababishwa na vyakula hivyo vya GMO ambavyo huko vilikotoka wanavikataa kuna kipindi zimbabwe kulikuwa na njaa wazungu wakampa msaada wa vyakula vya gmo alivikataa akasema hawezi kuwalesha watu wake chakula ambacho hakitumiki huko kilipotoka.Sisi hatuhitaji vyakula vya gmo na tutakaporuhusu ndio tutajiangamiza kwani hatutaweza kuzalisha na kuuza nje vyakula sasa hivi kuna kampeni kubwa ya kuruhusu matumizi ya gmo na rushwa ikiwapo lakini tujiulize hivi ukosefu wa chakula cha kutosha nchini unasababishwa na nini?ni kutokuwa na mvua ya uhakika ?si kweli kwani iran wanalima n kumwagilia kutokana na maji ya mvua wanayovuna sisi hatuvuni maji ya mvua pia tumeshindwa kutumia mito,maziwa na mabwawa kwa kilimo cha umwagiliaji.Kila mtu amesikia jinsi baadhi ya wakulima walivyouziwa mbegu na mbolea feki pia baadhi ya wakulima wamezuiwa wasiuze mazao nje ya nchi wakati serikali imeshindwa kuyanunua.Wakati rwanda wananunua mtrecta na kuyagawa kwa wakulima sisi yameletwa na kukabidhiwa jkt na kuwa mapambo kwani ni bei aghali kiasi cha kwamba wakulima wengi hawayamudu kuyanunua pia hayana ubora unaotakiwa .tunahitaji kupata majibu ya haya maswala badala ya kukimbilia kuingiza gmo.Nimewahi kuongea n wataalamu wa kilimo wizarani wanalalamika hawashirikishwi kwenye mipango mingi ya kilimo ikiwemo kilimo kwanza ndio maana unasikia kauli za ajabu kama hizo.GMO haifai

 

[Moony]

hivi mmeshajiuliza kwanini sasa hivi kansa imeongezeka hadi watoto wadogo wanumwa kansa.Pia mmeshajiuliza kwanini sasa hivi kuna tatizo kubwa l nguvu za kiume na kwanini waganga wanaojitangaza wanatibu nguvu za kiume wameongezeka.Haya yote yanasababishwa na vyakula hivyo vya GMO ambavyo huko vilikotoka wanavikataa kuna kipindi zimbabwe kulikuwa na njaa wazungu wakampa msaada wa vyakula vya gmo alivikataa akasema hawezi kuwalesha watu wake chakula ambacho hakitumiki huko kilipotoka.Sisi hatuhitaji vyakula vya gmo na tutakaporuhusu ndio tutajiangamiza kwani hatutaweza kuzalisha na kuuza nje vyakula sasa hivi kuna kampeni kubwa ya kuruhusu matumizi ya gmo na rushwa ikiwapo lakini tujiulize hivi ukosefu wa chakula cha kutosha nchini unasababishwa na nini?ni kutokuwa na mvua ya uhakika ?si kweli kwani iran wanalima n kumwagilia kutokana na maji ya mvua wanayovuna sisi hatuvuni maji ya mvua pia tumeshindwa kutumia mito,maziwa na mabwawa kwa kilimo cha umwagiliaji.Kila mtu amesikia jinsi baadhi ya wakulima walivyouziwa mbegu na mbolea feki pia baadhi ya wakulima wamezuiwa wasiuze mazao nje ya nchi wakati serikali imeshindwa kuyanunua.Wakati rwanda wananunua mtrecta na kuyagawa kwa wakulima sisi yameletwa na kukabidhiwa jkt na kuwa mapambo kwani ni bei aghali kiasi cha kwamba wakulima wengi hawayamudu kuyanunua pia hayana ubora unaotakiwa .tunahitaji kupata majibu ya haya maswala badala ya kukimbilia kuingiza gmo.Nimewahi kuongea n wataalamu wa kilimo wizarani wanalalamika hawashirikishwi kwenye mipango mingi ya kilimo ikiwemo kilimo kwanza ndio maana unasikia kauli za ajabu kama hizo.GMO haifai

Sijui kama hawashirikishwi, ama labda wananyimwa rushwa. Yaani anapewa waziri au mtu ambaye hana utalaam wowote lakini ambaye kashika mpini.
Kila mara kuna mikutano ya kilimo na watu wanakwenda lakini hakuna taarifa inayotolewa kwa waandishi wa habari.
Waandishi wa habari wenyewe ni mbumbumbu hata wakiongopewa ni vigumu kuelewa kwa vile si wataalamu.
Nchi za wenzetu waandishi wa mambo ya kilimo wamesomea kilimo, hivyo hawadanganyiki, watajua kuandika jambo la uhakika.
Tumekuwa wavivu wa kufikiri na kutafiti, tunchotaka ni semina na posho tu. Maafisa kilimo wetu wanashinda maofisini, si wabunifu wapowapo tu.
Hawawezi hata kuwa na initiatives zozote. Hataa mashamba ya mifano hakuna. Zamani usingekosa mashamba darasa. GMOs zinaingizwa nchini na hata vyuo vya utafiti hapa nchini wanatengeneza ama wanazalisha mbegu za mahindi.

Hivi unadhani SAGCOT kweli hawalimi GMOs? wako na Monsanto, pioneer wa GMO. Google search grant za Monsanto Tanzania uone kama siyo rushwa ni nini? Kwa hiyo wizara wangesema tu kwamba si kitu kipya bali wanahalalisha uwepo wa GMOs na kansa ndo hivyo ten haiepukiki tena.

 

[Ufipa-Kinondoni]

Kansa haiwezi kusababishwa na Gmo wakuu. Ukiangalia kwa wenzetu gmo inakuwa labelled. Kwa tz hata majaribio hatuna na wizara ya kilimo haihusiki. Hii iko chini ya Ofisi ya makamo wa rais.

 

[Moony]

Labda tusome hii:

Pro-GMO lobby seeks to weaken Tanzania's environmental protection legislation.

The world is deeply divided on GMOs, with – on one side – multinational agribusiness corporations / US government / USAID / Gates Foundation pushing and promoting the export of GM biotechnology, and – on the other side – UNCTAD / UNEP / African Union / IAASTD / NGOs / CSOs / environmental organisations / consumer's rights organisations / civil rights organisations / biodiversity organisations calling for ecological approaches that support agricultural biodiversity and strengthen seed and food sovereignty.
The pro GMO lobby has been aggressively lobbying Tanzanian Government officials to relax environmental legislation so as to speed up the introduction of GMOs. They have been pressing for the abandonment of the ‘precautionary principle' enshrined in the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, and the removal of the ‘strict liability' clauses that protect citizens and the environment. Tanzanian TV reports that one or two MPs have begun calling for the legislation to be relaxed.
The International Regulatory Framework
Tanzania is one of 163 countries that signed "The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity" – an international agreement which aims to ensure the safe handling, transport and use of living modified organisms resulting from modern biotechnology that may have adverse effects on biological diversity, taking also into account risks to human health. It was adopted on 29 January 2000 and entered into force on 11 September 2003." http://bch.cbd.int/protocol/
It is interesting to note that the USA along with other major exporters of GMOs refused to sign up to this international agreement. http://bch.cbd.int/protocol/parties/
The protocol commits signatory countries to set up national laws, policies and procedures to prevent or reduce the risks to biological diversity and human health as a result of the development, transport, use, transfer, or release of GMOs. It also requires countries to establish a national focal point and provide information on GMOs to a central database.
The Precautionary Approach
A central pillar of the Cartagena Protocol is the ‘precautionary approach' which refers to a principle established by the Rio ‘Earth Summit' 1992
Principle 15 states: In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by States according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.
Liability under International Law
The original Cartagena Protocol (adopted 2003) failed to agree on common liability rules, however international negotiations continued and culminated in the Nagoya Supplementary Protocol being adopted in 2010. The Protocol establishes an internationally binding claim for countries importing GMOs to make the responsible producer in the exporting country liable for any possible damage caused by the imported GMOs. Especially for developing countries the treaty offers better legal compliance.
In the case that it is proven that the cultivation of imported genetically modified plants has had negative consequences for the biodiversity of a country and limits the economic exploitability, the affected country is entitled to demand redress payments or reparation of the damage. The affected importing country is responsible for proving that its biodiversity was in fact harmed and that the damage was caused by a specific imported GMO.
Tanzanian law
Under its commitment to the international agreement, Tanzania developed The Environmental Management (Biosafety) Regulations 2009. This covers the procedures for dealing with applications for the testing, risk assessment, release and commercialization of GMOs, including liability for any damage caused by GMOs.
In terms of liability the Regulations have adopted a ‘strict liability' approach, as follows:
6. All approvals for introduction of GMO or their products shall be subject to a condition that the applicant is strictly liable for any damage caused to any person or entity.
56.-(1) Any person or his agent who imports, transits, makes contained or confined use of, releases, carries out any activity in relation to GMOs or products thereof or places on the market a GMO shall be strictly liable for any harm, injury or loss caused directly or indirectly by such GMOs or their products or any activity in relation to GMOs.
(2) The harm, injury or loss includes personal injury, damage to property, financial loss and damage to the environment or to biological diversity as well as taking into account socio-economic, cultural and ethical concern.
(3) Liability shall be attached to the applicant, the person responsible for the activity which results in the damage, injury or loss, as well as to the provider, supplier or developer of the GMOs or their products .
(4) In case of harm to the environment or biological diversity compensation shall include the costs of reinstatement, rehabilitation or clean-up measures which actually are being incurred and, where applicable, the costs of preventive measures.
58. In the case of harm to the environment or to biological diversity, redress shall include the costs of reinstatement, rehabilitation or clean-up measures actually incurred or to be incurred and, where applicable, the costs of preventive measures and any loss or damage caused by the taking of the preventive measures; provided that the person responsible may be required to carry out the reinstatement or rehabilitation at its own cost and to the satisfaction of the National Biosafety Focal Point.
59. Liability shall also extend to harm or damage caused directly or indirectly by the GMOs or products thereof to the economy, social or cultural principles, livelihoods, indigenous knowledge systems, or indigenous technologies. Such harm includes the following: disruption or damage to production systems, agricultural systems, reduction in yields, and damage to the economy of an areas or community.
The Regulations also require GMO introducers to take out liability insurance in case of damage – at considerable cost, which the GMO lobby would likely prefer not to pay.
Liability (Strict Liability versus Fault Based Liability)
The Tanzanian Biosafety Regulations apply ‘strict liability' meaning that whoever introduces the GMO shall be automatically liable for any damage caused. The pro GMO lobby want Tanzania to remove this liability and perhaps replace it with ‘fault based liability' which would mean that anyone claiming compensation for damage would have to prove that whoever introduced the GMO was somehow at fault.
For example, under the existing strict liability rules, if a farmer's crop was contaminated by GMO seeds then the farmer could expect to get compensation from whoever imported or introduced the GMO. Under the proposed ‘fault based liability' the farmer would have to prove that the person introducing the GMO was somehow at fault, e.g. that they had failed to follow correct safety procedures.
Similarly the introducer of the GMO is currently strictly liable for any loss of biodiversity, damage to the economy, reduced yields etc.
The pro GMO lobby claim that their products / technologies are safe and beneficial yet they do not want to be liable for any damage caused. Is there something they are not telling us?
Why should Tanzania retain the Precautionary Principle?
Because it is the internationally accepted pillar of good practice in environmental legislation and policy, and because it makes obvious sense to be cautious about untested technologies. And frankly it is outrageous that GM biotechnology lobbyists are suggesting Tanzania should throw caution to the wind.
Why should Tanzania retain the strict liability approach?
Because Tanzania's Parliament supported by the best national environmental and legal experts have adopted this approach recently (2009) following considerable thought and discussion of the pros and cons. Why should pressure from outside interests overturn their wise decision?
Tanzania is one of the 20 most biodiverse countries on Earth. In a world facing environmental meltdown Tanzania should be justly proud and fiercely protective of its rich environment.
Any person carrying out an activity that seeks profits should be prepared to pay for any damage that results. An innocent party that suffers damage should not have the onerous burden of proving liability and be uncompensated for others' profit ventures.
Strict liability will deter reckless behaviour and claims in the development and marketing of GMOs. Strict liability may also be one way of operationalising the precautionary principle which governs the key elements of the Biosafety Protocol.
Tanzania has very limited capacity for policing / enforcing regulations relating to GMOs, because of it large area, porous borders, lack of GMO testing equipment, shortage of trained staff. Therefore the strict liability approach is more enforceable / feasible to implement.
Typically in many countries, strict liability is applied for those activities that are deemed to be hazardous and in respect of damage where the victim has not agreed to risk the injury by his own conduct. Hazardous activity also incorporates those situations where the probability of the incidence incurring may be low but the magnitude of the harm huge. Such as in the domains of marine transport of crude oil, transport and management of toxic chemicals and wastes, and nuclear activities. There is growing evidence that no matter how low the incidence of occurrence is claimed to be, the magnitude of the resultant harm from a GMO gone wrong could have catastrophic results – causing irreparable harm to agricultural ecosystems, crops, export earnings, indigenous knowledge systems and threatening food security. This qualifies any activity relating to GMOs as ‘hazardous.' As such, strict liability would be an appropriate standard for liability for damage caused by GMOs.
………………….
Tanzania needs to wake up to the very real threat posed by the ‘race for what's left' of the planet's natural resources, and balance the desire to attract inward investment against massive environmental risk, loss of biodiversity and food sovereignty, and further impoverishment of its many millions of small scale farmers.

[With grateful acknowledgement of Third World Network for a discussion of liability issues.]