This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Risk Expert: GMOs Could Destroy the Planet
Related:
The Government Hack Trying to Squash Discussion of Government Corruption – Cass Sunstein – Doesn’t Understand BASIC Math Or Law
Risk analyst Nassim Nicholas Taleb predicted the 2008 financial crisis, by pointing out that commonly-used risk models were wrong. Distinguished professor of risk engineering at New York University, author of best-sellers The Black Swan and Fooled by Randomness, Taleb became financially independent after the crash of 1987, and wealthy during the 2008 financial crisis.
Now, Taleb is using his statistical risk acumen to take on genetically modified organisms (GMOs).
Taleb’s conclusion: GMOs could cause “an irreversible termination of life at some scale, which could be the planet.”
Sound crazy?
Sure it does … but only because we don’t understand statistics, and so we have no handle on what’s risky and what’s not.
Taleb and his 2 co-authors write in a new draft paper:
For nature, the “ruin” is ecocide: an irreversible termination of life at some scale, which could be the planet.
***
Genetically Modified Organisms, GMOs fall squarely under [the precautionary principle, i.e. the rule that we should err on the side of caution if something is really dangerous] not because of the harm to the consumer because of their systemic risk on the system.
Top-down modifications to the system (through GMOs) are categorically and statistically different from bottom up ones (regular farming, progressive tinkering with crops, etc.) There is no comparison between the tinkering of selective breeding and the top-down engineering of arbitrarily taking a gene from an organism and putting it into another. Saying that such a product is natural misses the statistical process by which things become ”natural”. [i.e. evolving over thousands of years in a natural ecosystem, or at least breeding over several generations.]
What people miss is that the modification of crops impacts everyone and exports the error from the local to the global. I do not wish to pay—or have my descendants pay—for errors by executives of Monsanto. We should exert the precautionary principle there—our non-naive version—simply because we would only discover errors after considerable and irreversible environmental damage.
Taleb shreds GMO-boosters – including biologists – who don’t understand basic statistics:
Calling the GMO approach “scientific” betrays a very poor—indeed warped—understanding of probabilistic payoffs and risk management.
***
It became popular to claim irrationality for GMO and other skepticism on the part of the general public —not realizing that there is in fact an ”expert problem” and such skepticism is healthy and even necessary for survival. For instance, in The Rational Animal, the author pathologize people for not accepting GMOs although ”the World Health Organization has never found evidence of ill effects” a standard confusion of evidence of absence and absence of evidence. Such a pathologizing is similar to behavioral researchers labeling hyperbolic discounting as ”irrational” when in fact it is largely the researcher who has a very narrow model and richer models make the ”irrationality” go away).
In other words, lack of knowledge of basic statistical principles leads GMO supporters astray. For example, they don’t understand the concept that “interdependence” creates “thick tails” … leading to a “black swan” catastrophic risk event:
Fat tails result (among other things) from the interdependence of components, leading to aggregate variations becoming much more severe than individual ones. Interdependence disrupts the functioning of the central limit theorem, by which the aggregate is more stable than the sum of the parts. Whether components are independent or interdependent matters a lot to systemic disasters such as pandemics or generalized crises. The interdependence increases the probability of ruin, to the point of certainty.
(This concept is important in the financial world, as well.)
As Forbes’ Brian Stoffel notes:
Let’s say each GM seed that’s produced holds a 0.1% chance of — somehow, in the intricately interdependent web of nature — leading to a catastrophic breakdown of the ecosystem that we rely on for life. All by itself, it doesn’t seem too harmful, but with each new seed that’s developed, the risk gets greater and greater.
The chart below demonstrates how, over time, even a 0.1% chance of ecocide can be dangerous.
I cannot stress enough that the probabilities I am using are for illustrative purposes only. Neither I, nor Taleb, claim to know what the chances are of any one type of seed causing such destruction.
The focus, instead, should be on the fact that the “total ecocide barrier” is bound to be hit, over a long enough time, with even incredibly small odds. Taleb includes a similar graph in his work, but no breakdown of the actual variables at play.
Taleb debunks other pro-GMO claims as well, such as:
1. The Risk of Famine If We Don’t Use GMOs. Taleb says:
Invoking the risk of “famine” as an alternative to GMOs is a deceitful strategy, no different from urging people to play Russian roulette in order to get out of poverty.
And calling the GMO approach “scientific” betrays a very poor—indeed warped—understanding of probabilistic payoffs and risk management.
In addition, the United Nations actually says that small organic farms are the only way to feed the world. And growing your own food helps prevent tyranny.
2. Nothing Is Totally Safe, So Should We Discard All Technology? Taleb says this is an anti-scientific argument. Some risks are small, or are only risks to one individual or a small group of people. When you’re talking about risks which could wipe out all life on Earth, it’s a totally different analysis.
3. Assuming that Nature Is Always Good Is Anti-Scientific. Taleb says that statistical risk analysis don’t use assumptions such as nature is “good” or “bad”. Rather, it looks at the statistical evidence that things persist in nature for thousands of years if they are robust and anti-fragile. Ecosystems break down if they become unstable.
GMO engineers may be smart in their field, but they are ignorant when it comes to long-run ecological reality:
We are not saying nature is the smartest possible, we are saying that time is smarter than GMO engineers. Plain statistical significance.
4. People Brought Potatoes from the Americas Back to Europe, Without Problem. Taleb says that potatoes evolved and competed over thousands of years in the Americas, and so proved that they did not disrupt ecosystems. On the other hand, GMOs are brand spanking new … created in the blink of the eye in a lab.
GMOs Also INCREASE Pesticide Use, DECREASE Crop Yield, And May Be VERY Dangerous to Your Health
As if the risk of “ecocide”isn’t enough, there are many other reasons to oppose GMO foods – at least without rigorous testing – including:
- Potentially severe health effects
On the plus side? A few companies will make a lot of money.
- advertisements -
And I even managed to get junked by Anthony Weiner's gerbil.
I will say some things to Taleb's credit, he has pointed out some stupidity of mankind, the regular stupidity of conventional wisdom, and the utter stupidity of our political leaders. But "the sky is falling" urgency will move few people, and move more to call him a kook. He's a smart man, but he's a bit obsessed with his Black Swan concept--which few understand, and many more misuse it as shorthand for something they clearly don't understand.
I don't believe that you understand his argument. Systemic risks are routinely dismissed or swept under the carpet. And to what purpose? Usually it boils down to money in one form or another. The arrogance of modern man is something to behold. This hubris will pay dividends. Negatively.
Taleb is right to be concerned, as we all are.
His argument about GMOs is similar to his pointing out that the economy was unstable prior to 2008 ... it's called risk and statistics.
But that's okay, just as nothing changed after the 2008 crash (Most Economists Fall Back Into Neoclassical Stupor … “If They Don’t Know Anything, Then Why Should We Listen To Them?), Monstanto will win this battle, also.
After all, they own Washington, just like JPM and Goldman own Washington.
So to continue youy analogy they can just create an ag type QE that will cure cancer and other side effects, but will only work for the wealthy?
This is catnip for Luddites. Precautionary Principle has been debunked over and over. It's been used to support blocking anything risky with a microscopic probability of occurance. I've yet to hear an argument supporting it--asserting it, yes, but not rendering it as valid. It's a near inverse of the Peter Principle. Taleb needs to go back to the drawing board.
I suggest someone retake biology and gentics.
What happened to the Scarlett Johansson avatar?
Natalia Poklonskaya ranks higher at the moment, especially in Japan.
Well no worries here that you are the real Forbes.
Former horticulture student here. My professor spoke on the danger of monoculture crops before Monsanto really got going on their GMO project. When a fungus, virus, bacteria, nematode, etc. affects a type of crop the more varieties extant the better as it increases the likelihood that some varieties will have resistance.
Do you happen to know the old preparedness saying? Three is two, two is one, and one is none. We were already at some risk due to farmers selecting a smaller variety of crops due to industrial factors like transport, market timing, and storage. Said professor spoke on the need to preserve heirloom varieties from being lost due to mass adoption of hybrids. Now toss in GMO crops that cross pollinate with non GMO crops.
Or haven't you seen the cases of Monsanto suing farmers for allegedly violating their patent because seed/pollen from adjoining fields was found on said farmers' properties?
The arctic seed vault is the Plan B for all of us. Pray we don't need it.
good points - We don't need Monsanto to demonstrate the evil of monocultures. Nature did that in Ireland.
and a helpful tip - there's an organization called "Seed Saver's Exchange" where you can get those heirloom seeds everyone talks about. and if you can get to one of their "farms' you can take a workshop that will teach you how to save and preserve your seeds. (why buy the crap that's being sold as "seed" at Major retailers?) Check it out!
https://exchange.seedsavers.org/index.aspx
Fukushima worked out REALLY well ... Good thing they didn't follow the precautionary principle!
Precautionary principle? Isn't that where a multinational company, before making billions for exec bonuses with a harmful new product, increases the PR and legal budgets as a precaution? on basic principle?
no?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_principle
Because testing for human safety would be ... anti-scientific?
Non-sequitor.
The remote possiblity that you could be "the" Forbes makes me hate you all the more.
Bullshit
The GMO scare is worst than the Global Warming/Climate Change.
Unless you intent to cut the global population down to 1 billion or so I don't see how you can possibly have this non-GMO all-"natural" world (without widespread starvation).
"I refute the claims of the biotechnology companies that their engineered crops yield more, that they require less pesticide applications, that they have no impact on the environment, and that they are safe to eat. The scientific literature is full of studies showing that engineered corn and soya contain toxic or allergenic proteins." – Dr. Thierry Vrain, 30 plus years in the field
Not bullshit.
GMO's and the lovely pesticide "round up" that covers them from seed to harvest is crime against humanity. Everyone working at Monsanto needs to be strung up by the balls and fed their GMO poison until they die. The sooner we stop the war against agriculture the sooner we can heal the land and have "victory gardens" in every home across the world. Wake up people -YOUR BEING POISONED.
Thanks again GW for shredding some light on the dark creature under our beds.
Monsanto company caffeterias only serve non gmo food to their employees,
as that was demanded by them.
Interesting.
Do you have a reference for that?
It would be a great talking point at social gatherings to put on the back foot anybody that says GMO foods are harmless.
as reported in 1999 by the Independent and the CBC:
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/gm-food-banned-in-monsanto-cant...
but "debunked" in 2012
http://monsantoblog.com/2012/02/10/whats-served-in-monsantos-cafeterias/
If only the Monsanto caterer hadn't signed a non-disclosure agreement we might know the truth.
They think.
Depends on what you mean by GMO. Lots of hardy hybrids around that are important and were made by centuries-old cross breeding methods. The modern GMO includes real problems that you are welcome to read up on.
Russian heritage "Black Krim" tomatoe tests about many times nutrients of several popular hybrids supposed to be improved...actual tests
Taste test the Russian is even bigger winner...
American agriculture went to sell bulk pounds for greed, and evidenced by very sick health undernourished population...
First century mined the soil, then poisoned first the soil and now people and all living thing...
UN Report Says Small-Scale Organic Farming Only Way to Feed the World
*Everyone* should have a small ( or large ) organic garden in their back yards growing tomatoes, beans (easily frozen for the winter ) and whatever else you like. Squash are great too. It's great family fun and teaches the kids important SKILLS on how to survive and not be hooked up to the industrail tit of food production. If we ALL did this we could put these monster matrix poison producers out of business.
If we start now, globally, we could slowly start reversing the damage and the danger.
If we don't, we are sealing the fate of mankind and dooming us and our children's future.
The hour is late, and the war is almost lost.
Victory gardens again !!
GMO foods have dominated grocery shelves for decades. Check out the history of GMO products here.
I would suggest learning to can those beans instead of freezing them. Just in case your power goes out.
And beans must be pressure canned to keep botulism at bay. and when you open the jar, make sure you heat/cook the beans to kill any bacteria that may have survived. (Botulin is anerobic - ie it can survive and thrive in an oxygen free environment) Dried beans are easier and keep longer without the danger.
The American "Indians" had what they called the "three sisters" - they companion planted beans, squash, and corn. and If you plant the squash around the corn (on the outside edge of the corn field/plot), the raccoons won't eat the corn before you can.
fat finger dp
"SKILLS on how to survive"
Survive what? If you don't have a job that can pay for your property tax, say goodbye to your backyard organic garden. That's survival.
Then you grow at your buddy's place, your parents, find a field...whereever the hell you hang your hat- grow! . We cannot afford to let Monsanto take any more control of the seeds and food production. It's pure poison and it's infiltrating the entire food supply. Know anyone with cancer ? I do. Lots. There is no cure fir cancer. The "cure" is to not get it in the first place. Cancer epidemic ? Start with the basics. Eat clean, poison free food!
Good catch, GW. I am surprised they would publish this. Maybe some of the "deep staters" are beginning to realize they will undoubtedly go down with the ship if the ecosystem fails, seed vaults notwithstanding.
GMOs will cut the global population down to 1 billion or so.
Let's hope he has the ear of people who can make a difference.
I hear the high court in Brazil blocked GMO corn recently. This could be a counter-trend blip, or perhaps a signal of a global turning point. Let's hope the latter.
Many of the scientists I know these days have simply stopped thinking, along with most everyone else. Time for a turn around.
LOL! So Taleb is a "risk expert" now, with expertise in any field of human endeavour?
Is that like when the "chaos mathematician" predicts the demise of your dinosaur amusement park?
Ok, you don't accept Taleb as an expert in the field (pun). I get that.
How about Dr.Thierry Vrain then, who has 30 years experience with the technology; 'expert' enough for you?
Look, even something everyone uses everyday, like money, is defended the way it is constructed: as debt and compound interest, that creates the force of exponential economic growth on our beautiful but limited planet.
It is OBVIOUS that a monetary system built on exponential growth is not sustainable, we see EVERYWHERE how the force to invent growth wastes energy, resources, creates useless gadgets, makes people lonesome, destroys the families, infects every aspect of the culture with greed and materialism and makes people mentally sick, burnt out from living a hollow life with a job nobody needs.
But nevertheless this system is accepted by 99%, although everyone with open eyes sees, that it will turn the planet in less than thousand years into a desert.
I don't have any hopes, that GMO could be banned. The Synagogue of Satan with their debt slavery has become that mighty, that nobody can stop them anymore.
It would be fantastic if the block lasted, but look at how Monzanto buys the courts and governments around the world. Wasn't that long ago Europe banned them too and now have a look. I suspect the Brazilian judges, whether we like it or not, will change their votes for a few dollars, even if they're fake, fresh from the printer. Monzanto is simply the best example there be of what greed and fascism can accomplish. Yup, kill the world even.