Apple of the future?

Posted by Krystle On 11/18/2009
Scientists have done it again. And by “it,” I mean something mildly disturbing that results in all kinds of ethical debate. The RS103-130 apple is supposed to stay fresh for four months without rotting and it’s more resistant to bacteria so it doesn’t need as much fungicide or pesticide. On the one hand, the miracle apple sounds pretty good. Less pesticide use means fewer chemicals in the environment and longer shelf life could mean less wasted food gets thrown out. On the other hand, should be we really be eating the Frankenfoods? The genetically modified food debate is a tough one that will only get tougher if food shortage becomes a bigger problem than it already is.

Of course, I think the biggest question on people’s minds is: “does it take any good?” In a taste test of five apples, it scored the highest.

Be sure to sound off in the comments with what you think Australia’s never aging apple.

2 Response to 'Apple of the future?'

  1. Anonymous Said,
    http://blog.brandaware.org/2009/11/apple-of-future.html?showComment=1259026514268#c6445431511879897646'> November 23, 2009 at 8:35 PM

    I recently had a grapple. That is, an apple that tastes like a grape. It was strange. I'm not really sure what need was being met by this particular product. If I wanted a grape, I could eat one, and the same goes for apples.

    As for this everlasting apple, I'm curious to learn more. Assuming that it's safe, the potential benefits to having a fruit that doesn't rot seem like they could be quite high.

     

  2. Phil Said,
    http://blog.brandaware.org/2009/11/apple-of-future.html?showComment=1259028688477#c4172452146420688789'> November 23, 2009 at 9:11 PM

    These apples don't sound particularly controversial. If they require less pesticide/fungicide, last longer, and taste better than regular apples, then it looks to me like they have basically no downside.

     

Post a Comment

Follow Me