A seminar arranged by The Farmers Club at its HQ in London on Monday concluded that the introduction of GM crops to UK agriculture was necesarry and inevitable. Delegates were unanimous in believeing the technology must be one of the tools that will help farmers produce increased yields at prices affordable by consumers as food shortages begin to bite in the next few years. They were also convinced that such a development would pose no threat to human health or the environment.
Those present and participating included farmers, scientists, plant breeders and environmentalists. The general feeling throughout the seminar was that GM was a technology whose time had come. That whereas there were genuine concerns among consumers about the safety of such crops these had now almost disappeared except among extreme lobby groups. But it was felt important to persuade consumers that their previous media generated fears had been groundless and that they could now buy GM foods with confidence.
One way of doing this, it was suggested, was to publicise a booklet recently produced by Sense About Science entitled Making Sense of GM. It tackles all the issues and concerns head on and deals with them and explains them in language readily understood by lay people. Copies can be obtained from www.senseaboutscience.org
Comments (3)
Making Sense of GM is very reassuring but typifies the problem of identifying reliable disinterested sources of information.
Times Higher Education reports that the guide's potted biographies of its contributors don't disclose their links to the industry. And an article in Private Eye (1232, 20 March - 2 April 2009, Books and Bookmen) suggests it wasn't just industry interests that weren't disclosed. An unpublished draft of Making Sense of GM acknowledges the contribution of Andrew Cockburn, a former Monsanto director. This acknowledgement is entirely missing from the published version of the guide. Private Eye has fun with the fact that the publishrs in criticising Times Higher Education claimed that any links between its contributors and industry were "tenuous".
Letters to Times Higher Education also challenge the claim that the links are tenuous. One points out that the John Innes Centre, where about 8 of the authors come from, has done deals with GM firms worth tens of millions of pounds, and that the fact that one of these deals with Syngenta fell through, very probably because of the public hostility to GM crops, hardly gives the JIC any less of a vested interest in promoting this technology to the public.
Posted by Sam Mason | April 2, 2009 11:49 AM
Posted on April 2, 2009 11:49
Dear David,
I'm afraid I cannot agree with your analysis that GM crops should be grown in the UK nor with the conclusions of The Farmers Club, who I am sad to see, are seriously misinformed.
A new report from Friends of the Earth International reveals the failure of genetically modified crops around the world, and how statistics showing their increase in Europe have been manipulated.
Figures issued by the European biotech industry lobby group EuropaBio erased the latest country to have banned growing GM crops – France – from its calculations. By doing this, the biotech industry could falsely claim an increase of 21% in the area under cultivation in the EU in 2008. Infact there has been a 2% decline over the last year, and 35% decrease for all of Europe in the last 4 years.
The report also shows that the only real beneficiaries from the technology is the biotech industry, and *not* small-scale farmers. I would recommend that you and your colleagues read this report, and draw some new conclusions.
Yours sincerely,
Raoul Bhambral
Posted by Raoul Bhambral | April 16, 2009 12:16 PM
Posted on April 16, 2009 12:16
Apologies, a link to the report is here...
http://foeeurope.org/GMOs/Who_Benefits/full_report_2009.pdf
Raoul
Posted by Raoul Bhambral | April 16, 2009 12:31 PM
Posted on April 16, 2009 12:31