Pamela Ronald « Biofortified

Jules Hoffman and Bruce Beutler share the 2011 Nobel Prize in Medicine

by Pamela Ronald on 3 October 2011

Two great scientists, Bruce Beutler and Jules Hoffman, who have changed the way we view the immune response of plants and animals, have been awarded the 2011 Nobel Prize in Medicine.

Tragically, Dr. Ralph M. Steinman of Rockefeller University, who discovered a new class of cell, known as dendritic cells, which are key activators of the adaptive immune system dies a few days ago. It is unclear if his family will be able to share the prize because Nobel Prizes are not awarded posthumously.

Hoffman’s group showed that Drosophila Toll, originally known for its function in development, is also important for the response to fungal and Gram-positive bacterial infection. Read the 1996 Cell paper for which he received the Nobel Prize here.

This post was syndicated from Tomorrow's Table You may comment on the original entry.

What makes an organically grown strawberry environmentally friendly?

by Pamela Ronald on 25 September 2011

From Tomorrow's Table

Strawberries are a particularly pest prone crop.

To control these pests, more than 9.5 million pounds of pesticides, including over 3 million pounds of methyl bromide, a toxic ozone-depleting chemical is applied each year. Methyl bromide is also associated with an increased risk of prostate cancer in farm workers.

We all like strawberries, but this pesticide use seems excessive: more pounds of pesticides were applied to 28,000 acres of strawberries than to 780,000 acres of cotton (and cotton is one of the world’s most pesticide intensive crops).

To avoid contributing to the use of methyl bromide, I have long purchased locally grown, certified organic strawberries. The organic approach is to rotate strawberries with other crops such as broccoli or a cover crop.

This post was syndicated from Tomorrow's Table You may comment on the original entry.

What would Rachel Carson say about genetically engineered crops?

by Pamela Ronald on 17 August 2011

From Tomorrow’s Table

Generalizing about “GMOs” is almost completely useless. Each food we eat and each farm is so different that the genetic technologies and farming practices needed to optimize sustainability must be different too. That is why each crop (GE or conventional) must be looked at on a case-by-case basis, using science-based evidence.

I recently wrote a short Scientific American guest blog post for their “Passions of Food” day

Stewart Brand and Peter Kareiva on "Environmentalism for THIS century"

by Pamela Ronald on 28 June 2011

From Tomorrow's Table

Peter Kareiva, the chief scientist for The Nature Conservancy, recently gave a seminar at the Long Now Foundation. His talk was summarized by Stewart Brand:

Kareiva began by recalling the environmental “golden decade” of 1965-75, set in motion by the scientist Rachel Carson. In quick succession Congress created the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Endangered Species Act—which passed the Senate unanimously.

Green influence has been dwindling ever since. A series of polls in the US asked how many agreed with the statement, “Most environmentalists are extremists, not reasonable people.” In 1996, 32% agreed. In 2004, 43% agreed. Now it’s over 50% who think environmentalists are unreasonable.

This post was syndicated from Tomorrow's Table You may comment on the original entry.

How to feed a hungry world

by Pamela Ronald on 25 June 2011

From Tomorrow's Table

This week, the G20 Agriculture Ministers gathered for their first-ever meeting to discuss potential measures to address price volatility and record high food prices. The key to any long-term solution is acknowledging that we need to empower the very people whose lives are most affected by food shortages. Three-quarters of the world’s poorest people get their food and income by farming small plots of land. The potential of small farmers for getting us out of this and future food crises cannot be overstated.

Today, we find that millions of lives depend upon the extent to which agricultural science can keep pace with the growing global population, changing climate, and shrinking environmental resources — and the extent to which this science is available to millions of the world’s poorest farmers.

Few people will argue with the idea that we need to grow more food. World economic and agricultural leaders have projected that the human population will surpass 9 billion by 2050, and 10 billion by the turn of the century. And they have forecast that we must double or even triple food production to meet demand.

This post was syndicated from Tomorrow's Table You may comment on the original entry.