Genetic engineers on the offensive - Farmers Weekly

Subscribe and save

Farmers Weekly from £133
Saving £46
In print AND tablet

SUBSCRIBE NOW

sub_ad_img

Genetic engineers on the offensive

14 October 1999
Genetic engineers on the offensive

GENETIC scientists have launched a counter-offensive in the battle over genetically-modified (GM) crops in science journal Nature,

Five scientists protest against a claim that genetically altered crops could not be regarded as safe until they had passed the toxicity tests used for new drugs.

They make the attack in response to an article by a research team from the University of Sussex in the previous weeks issue.

That group had claimed the idea that GM plants would be chemically the same as conventionally bred plants was “pseudo-scientific”.

There had been too few tests on Monsantos herbicide-resistant soya-bean, they believed.

They argued that the combination of a newly introduced gene and herbicide spray could have made the GM plant toxic.

The five scientists dismiss these views as “ill-informed”, “bizarre” and a “mish-mash of old-hat sociology and poor science”.

    Read more on:
  • News

Genetic engineers on the offensive

14 October 1999
Genetic engineers on the offensive

GENETIC scientists have launched a counter-offensive in the battle over genetically-modified (GM) crops in science journal Nature,

Five scientists protest against a claim that genetically altered crops could not be regarded as safe until they had passed the toxicity tests used for new drugs.

They make the attack in response to an article by a research team from the University of Sussex in the previous weeks issue.

That group had claimed the idea that GM plants would be chemically the same as conventionally bred plants was “pseudo-scientific”.

There had been too few tests on Monsantos herbicide-resistant soya-bean, they believed.

They argued that the combination of a newly introduced gene and herbicide spray could have made the GM plant toxic.

The five scientists dismiss these views as “ill-informed”, “bizarre” and a “mish-mash of old-hat sociology and poor science”.

    Read more on:
  • News
blog comments powered by Disqus