RESUMO
Lettuce is one of the most widely consumed vegetables in the world, commonly eaten fresh in salads, sandwiches, wraps, and as a garnish in various dishes. Consequently, it is a very promising vehicle to deliver vitamins, such as folate (vitamin B9), to a specific population using biofortified varieties generated by conventional or molecular breeding. A new genetically modified lettuce was generated with increased folate content. However, some issues related to public perception regarding this technology should still be evaluated. The aim of this study was to analyze whether consumers are willing to accept a folate-biofortified GM lettuce that could become available to the Brazilian market. A questionnaire involving several issues regarding lettuce consumption was answered by 2,391 people from almost all Brazilian states. When informed that the folic acid biofortified lettuce is a transgenic plant, 46.1% of respondents stated that they would eat it and 30.5% stated that it would be a possibility. This study demonstrated that if there is any explanation regarding the advantage in relation to the use of biotechnology, like enrichment with folic acid, the number of people who accept it increases.
RESUMO
ABSTRACT: This paper reflects on the controversy between agroecology and modern conventional agriculture. As a counter-paradigm, agroecology criticizes and resists advances in agricultural sciences, including biotechnology. But does not offer concrete answers to the challenge of increasing food production in the world in a sustentably way. It is a view that denies the importance of modern agriculture to solve the problems of scarcity and food security and does not recognize the potential of genetic modification to decisively to promote sustainable agriculture, accelerating the overcoming of the so-called "chemical reductionist paradigm". The principal argument is that agroecology, despite being an area of knowledge that can contribute to recovering natural resources and helping nature's resilience, is not an alternative to modern conventional agriculture and has been trying to prevent advances in genetic engineering, a fundamental area for sustainability and for the low carbon agriculture. In the end, based on the importance of the controversy in the History of Science, presents the reasons why agroecology does not fulfill the requirements to be an agricultural science.
RESUMO: Este artigo reflete sobre a controvérsia entre a agroecologia e a agricultura convencional moderna. Como um contra-paradigma, a agroecologia critica e resiste aos avanços nas ciências agrícolas, incluindo a biotecnologia. Mas não oferece respostas concretas ao desafio de aumentar a produção de alimentos no mundo de maneira sustentável. É uma visão que nega a importância da agricultura moderna para resolver os problemas de escassez e segurança alimentar e não reconhece o potencial da modificação genética para promover decisivamente a agricultura sustentável, acelerando a superação do chamado "paradigma reducionista químico". O principal argumento é que a agroecologia, apesar de ser uma área do conhecimento que pode contribuir para recuperar os recursos naturais e ajudar a resiliência da natureza, não é uma alternativa à agricultura convencional moderna e vem tentando impedir avanços na engenharia genética, uma área fundamental para a sustentabilidade e para a agricultura de baixo carbono. Por fim, com base na importância da controvérsia na História da Ciência, explora as razões pelas quais a agroecologia não preenche os requisitos para ser uma ciência agrária.
RESUMO
This paper reflects on the controversy between agroecology and modern conventional agriculture. As a counter-paradigm, agroecology criticizes and resists advances in agricultural sciences, including biotechnology. But does not offer concrete answers to the challenge of increasing food production in the world in a sustentably way. It is a view that denies the importance of modern agriculture to solve the problems of scarcity and food security and does not recognize the potential of genetic modification to decisively to promote sustainable agriculture, accelerating the overcoming of the so-called chemical reductionist paradigm. The principal argument is that agroecology, despite being an area of knowledge that can contribute to recovering natural resources and helping natures resilience, is not an alternative to modern conventional agriculture and has been trying to prevent advances in genetic engineering, a fundamental area for sustainability and for the low carbon agriculture. In the end, based on the importance of the controversy in the History of Science, presents the reasons why agroecology does not fulfill the requirements to be an agricultural science.(AU)
Este artigo reflete sobre a controvérsia entre a agroecologia e a agricultura convencional moderna. Como um contra-paradigma, a agroecologia critica e resiste aos avanços nas ciências agrícolas, incluindo a biotecnologia. Mas não oferece respostas concretas ao desafio de aumentar a produção de alimentos no mundo de maneira sustentável. É uma visão que nega a importância da agricultura moderna para resolver os problemas de escassez e segurança alimentar e não reconhece o potencial da modificação genética para promover decisivamente a agricultura sustentável, acelerando a superação do chamado paradigma reducionista químico. O principal argumento é que a agroecologia, apesar de ser uma área do conhecimento que pode contribuir para recuperar os recursos naturais e ajudar a resiliência da natureza, não é uma alternativa à agricultura convencional moderna e vem tentando impedir avanços na engenharia genética, uma área fundamental para a sustentabilidade e para a agricultura de baixo carbono. Por fim, com base na importância da controvérsia na História da Ciência, explora as razões pelas quais a agroecologia não preenche os requisitos para ser uma ciência agrária.(AU)