Letter: Victory for GM prejudice
Your support helps us to tell the story
This election is still a dead heat, according to most polls. In a fight with such wafer-thin margins, we need reporters on the ground talking to the people Trump and Harris are courting. Your support allows us to keep sending journalists to the story.
The Independent is trusted by 27 million Americans from across the entire political spectrum every month. Unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock you out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. But quality journalism must still be paid for.
Help us keep bring these critical stories to light. Your support makes all the difference.
YOU SUGGEST the decision of Unilever and others to cease sales of GM foods demonstrates consumer power ("Victory for grass-roots action", 2 May). Rather, it is a victory for prejudice over evidence. There is no evidence GM foods are less safe than others coming on the market. The "victory" could therefore mean more costly food (the GM puree was 20 per cent cheaper), and avoidable environmental harm.
There is a wider issue. To imply that government can never be trusted, that big business is always corrupt, or that campaign groups are always honest, is to rely on prejudice. Scare stories may sell newspapers, but, in the long run, only they benefit.
RICHARD BALMER
Solihull
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments