There is no consensus on GM organism safety

Here in Britain, our Environment Secretary wants us all to love GM (genetically modified, genetically engineered, GE) food and feed. He’s Owen Paterson and some of us disagree with him on GM. I keep an open mind (see my ‘genetic modification’ tag.)

Mr Paterson’s a Tory; the Daily Mail sometimes publishes pro-Tory opinion. But this time, the Mail says no to Mr Paterson. In that newspaper, Sean Poulter wrote this week that ‘Eighty-five scientists have joined forces to challenge the claims of biotech giants and the UK government that GM food is safe for humans.’

Those scientists have ‘signed a joint statement which concludes: “The claimed consensus on GM organism safety does not exist.” They warn that most of the positive research has been run and paid for by biotech companies such as Monsanto, which have invested millions in trying to get the world to eat their crops.’

In other words, the task of feeding people and livestock is entrusted to huge companies. Do we want that?

About argylesock

I wrote a PhD about veterinary parasitology so that's the starting point for this blog. But I'm now branching out into other areas of biology and into popular science writing. I'll write here about science that happens in landscapes, particularly farmland, and about science involving interspecific interactions. Datasets and statistics get my attention. Exactly where this blog will lead? That's a journey that I'm on and I hope you'll come with me.
This entry was posted in agriculture, human health, knowledge transfer, money and trade and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to There is no consensus on GM organism safety

  1. Littlesundog says:

    Thanks for posting about this, Rachel. It is a real compliment to me that you give this subject attention. While many of these giants like Monsanto, continue to cleverly market their products, it is refreshing to note that there are millions of people from various parts of the world who question their motives. ~ Lori

    • argylesock says:

      You’re welcome. I agree that it’s an important topic. But my name isn’t Rachel so you must be confusing me with somebody else! My real name is Sam. Anyway, thanks for following my blog. I’m following yours too.

  2. Rachel says:

    I think the confusion is my fault…. I posted about both of your articles….

  3. Pingback: Food For Thought

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s