Growing gains: Unyielding opposition to GM crops ignores the wider picture

 

Editorial
Thursday 26 March 2015 23:31 GMT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

The series on genetically modified food that has appeared in The Independent this week has revealed how a bogus cancer link was used by an aid agency employee in Africa to scare farmers away from growing GM crops. It has also revealed that Monsanto, the bête noire of the anti-GM movement, now admits that company hubris over its attempts to introduce herbicide-tolerant GM crops in Europe helped to foster a consumer backlash in this country.

Two decades ago, when the very real scare over “mad cow” disease undermined people’s trust in the safety of the food chain, the news of GM food being sold in Britain was greeted with horror. The mistrustful public mood was not helped by home-grown health scares over “Frankenstein food” promulgated by some within the anti-GM movement.

Yet the fact is that no one had been harmed from eating GM food, and there are now many millions of people around the world who eat it regularly. Similarly, there is no convincing evidence that growing GM crops per se is any more destructive to the environment than non-GM crops. This is not to say that we should automatically accept any new GM crop or food product that comes along. The regulatory authorities have to judge each one on a case-by-case basis, as they do in the United States where GM crops have been grown for many years.

A new generation of GM crops is now being developed with obvious health and environmental benefits. We also revealed this week that British scientists are working on a GM variety of potato – the “super spud” – that is resistant to pests and storage damage as well as being more nutritious. If this boosts yields while diminishing reliance on environmentally damaging pesticides then surely this is a win-win development we cannot afford to miss.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in