Kiran Mazumdar-shaw With Sadhguru (part-2) #inconversation

So now coming to the ethics of modernscience I think which is what you know we I was very keen to discuss with youand you know that I come from a field called biotechnology which is a bad wordin in the vocabulary of many many people because we are tampering with life youknow we are we are engineering DNA I’m also.

Doing in engineering so this is avery very this is a an amazing science this is an amazing technology but it itis also a very controversial.

And sensitive technology and you know I wantto start with.

That says look we actually embrace biotechnology whenit comes to saving lives when it comes to genetically engineered drugs which isyou know saving blood you know cancer patients and many many other types ofpatients who are suffering from debilitating diseases and yet we havethis huge activism.
Against genetically modified crops which is.

Also savinglives by the way because you know there is enough data and evidence to show thatgenetically modified crops never killed people but hunger and starvation haskilled many many lives and today if we have.

Solutions to actually feed thesehungry feed the starving and we know that you know genetically modified cropscan actually do a lot for our kind of country because you can you.

Know havedrought resistant crops you can have crops that grow in saline conditions andyou know that.

The marvels of this technology are many but people are notwilling to have a scientific debate people are not willing to look at datapeople are not willing to look at evidence they always want to look atlong-term absolutely guaranteed you know safety of of a.

New technology how do wedeal with this I want your suggestions on how we deal with these kind ofquestions anything new people will resist.

There will always be first peoplewho will resist our model groups and other kinds of activism groups this isalways being solved anything new means they will resist not only inbiotechnology area in any area clear oh not you don’t have to go to that kindof very what to say revolutionary things even something you know.

Why why doesn’tManju get stoned socrates get poisoned or the Jesus get crucified.

Simplybecause they’re talking something new one little extra step you get that youget killed so resistance for new things is not new to humanity they’ve alwaysbeen resistant because lot of people.

Think status ko is the answer foreverything any change resists and we have aspeciality a lot of people are specialized in that is for everysolution they.

Come up with the problem whatever the solution they will find aproblem in the solution endless leads going on having said that at the sametime see anything that concerns with the basic life making process of humanbeings or plant or animal or whatever this we must read little carefully Ithink generally the concern I know.

Of people who are resistingsimply because it’s new that’s different the main.

Concern is commercial forces ofleading the thing for commercial forces it is not even fair to expect thatthey’ve invested a certain amount of moneyand they have found something which will be very very what I know really valuablein the marketplace and now you tell them don’t use it because we are stillthinking what it will do after a.

Thousand years it’s not fair for thembut when commercial forces are leading everything because we have madeeconomics the main force now commercial forces are being allowed to tamper withthe basic life material of who we are there is a certain amount of cautionthat needs to be exercised.

Is there an alternativeI think non commercial forces may be government-funded forces should investheavily in research after it has been incubated well for a period of time itmust come out when it is a commercial enterprise doing this because every daycosts money every day is either pushing your balance sheet up or down socommercial aspects will take precedence over other things you can’t blame themfor that because they are there to do business so in this context we must belittle more careful about growing more food we can grow as much food as.

We wantif you keep the natural ecosystem.

The way it should be we destroy that andthen come up with other kinds of hybrid answers which may be temporary solutionbut which can completely destroy everything for us for example right nowin this country we have 1.3 billion people we have done many things we havedone some really wonderful things we have done some very nasty things allkinds of things we have done there are a lot of achievements to show in the.

Last50 years for this nation we are on the way to the Mars many great businesssense enterprises have been built scientific discoveries of happen manymany things have been done but one of thegreatest things that we have done is without any support of Technology or.

Anygreat amount of infrastructure our farmers with traditional knowledge havemanaged to generate food for 1.3 billion people it is it is not a small thingbecause there is no infrastructure there is no technology just traditionalknowledge is keeping them going but it will not keep them going that’s whyyou’re talking about these new additions but for this to happen in this land onemain reason is we have a land where.

Crops 12 months of the yearvery few nations in the northern hemisphere can do this we are one ofthem that we.

Can grow crops twelve months of the year and we integral andin the same piece of land we are going four to five crops in a year because.

Ofintercropping and all this this ability is being seriously depleted right nowbecause the quality of the soil has been completely destroyed in the last 25years simply because of Technology recommendations that came 25 30 yearsago they said all these animals this nonsense not needed all you need is atractor and a bag of fertilizer everything is done for you I was alsointo farming at that time you will see you’re trying to do this yourneighboring farm I just throws urea and urea and.

Urea and his plans boom theycome up like this yours are looking like this you look like a fool but you didall this now we know many studies are showing in the last 25 years thenutritional value of vegetables in this country has gone down by 40 percentbecause soil can be replenished only by leavesfrom the trees.

And animal waste or we must all die the three ways to replenishthe soil that also when we die now people putting themselves in stone casesso that they don’t become part of the.

Soil now one of the most eco-friendlythings you can do is when you die you’re buried or burnt and part of the soilthis you must do you know you shouldn’t go away somewhere why I am saying thisis technology is also doing this people are making bookings that yourbody can be allowed to float in the space.

Forever right now what is oneconcern which is going on people think it’s a religious concern it’s of noreligious concern to me fortunately religion is only a.

Not included but people aretrying to get them also into the religious stage for example right now weare slaughtering millions of cattle and exporting it elsewhere what this meansis you’re exporting your topsoil almost everything that you eat except the fruitthat come from trees almost everything that you eat is coming from the first 4to 18 inches of the soil on this planet just this much if you are going onexporting topsoil of this.

Country in the form of meat or whatever what will youhave in 25-30 years times already your nutritional value has come down so muchthe only way.

You can make the soil which is animal waste and this right now I ampushing for this that there must be a policy if you want 1 acre of landminimum for cattle you must have on the land not not for its milk not.

For its milknot for the meat but further down which is the most valuable thing of.
An animalthat it drops it all over the place this is how the land can be.

Enriched treesyou’ve taken out animals you’re taking it out what are you planning so now youwill tell me that in this spot you can grow all the grains that you needbecause of biotechnology I won’t take it I know there are many many positivesthere are many many positives to.

The biotechnology we must use it carefullysensitively but without culturing the social situation where we.
Take care ofour soil and on top of that.

We do something that’s troubling us we fixsomething genetically troubling I am NOT againstany technology technology if we don’t use it’s like saying we should not useour intelligence we must use technology but not taking away the base and tryingto do on the surface this will.

Happen when people jump into something becauseit’s commercially right now good all kinds of modifications no but I want totell you you made a statement saying that yes commercial interests mightalways be suspect and that the government should actually startinvesting in technology yes but that is what is happening in our country thegovernment is actually investing in this technology and yet there is an issueabout accepting that technology so it’s not.

As if it’s only curly I agree inother parts of the world it’s been commercial but in India for sure thegovernment labs have also been partners in environment is so and if that is so Idon’t think we should excessively fear the little bit of activism that you seeI think that mad brakes are.

Needed here and there they can’t stop it if thegovernment is invested money and there is sufficient data to show thethis doesn’t cause any serious damage or Distortion it will.