Time to love GM foods

Time to love GM foods

The sudden rise in the price of food surely focuses the mind on how the world's population can be fed in the future, says Country Life

Thursday, 20 March 2008

Editorial


The phrase 'Frankenstein foods' has been one of the most successful coinages of modern journalism. The theme of a Daily Mail campaign, it sums up the public's instinctive fear of developments it doesn't understand, and which at one point seemed about to be foisted on them by uncaring multi-national companies. The biotec food giant Monsanto was cast as the mad scientist, and, it has to be said, didn't make matters easier for itself by the arrogance with which it treated the consumer. Greenpeace ought to have been more roundly condemned for destroying test sites. The Blair Government, having appeared to champion genetically modified (GM) technology at the outset, quickly recognised the tide of opinion was against it, and sat on its hands. The NFU tells us that only one GM product is being trialled at the moment: a blight-resistant potato in Cambridge.

Does anyone now believe this state of affairs can continue? The sudden rise in the price of food must surely focus minds on how the world?s population can be fed in the future. Previously fertile areas will become desert, or disappear under the sea. At the same time, the remaining farmland will be expected to grow a greater range of crops. In just two centuries, mankind has managed to deplete the planet of reserves that took Nature hundreds of millions of years to lay down. We shall look to plants to produce not only fuel, but replacements for the plastics, fibres and pharmaceuticals that are at present also derived from oil. Meanwhile, the population of the world is expected to grow from the present 6.7 billion to nine billion. We shall need different kinds of plants - more productive, multi-tasking - and need them quickly.

Article continues...

Start advertisment

End advertisment

Genetic modification is a means of speeding up the process of selective breeding that's been practised for millennia. In a hungry world, the refusal of a rich and well-fed country such as Britain to exploit its agriculture to the full could soon be regarded as immoral. Elsewhere on the planet, pressure to adopt GM technology will become irresistible. Places where deeper and deeper boreholes have sucked the land dry will need drought-resistant crops, if they?re to grow any crops at all. Where too much water has been abstracted from aquifers, allowing seawater to seep in, there will be a demand for saline-tolerant plants. As GM crops are more widely adopted around the globe, British farmers will not be able to compete without them.

Once, the public might have turned a deaf ear to agriculture, while continuing to gobble up its products. Attitudes will change quickly when food becomes not merely dearer, but scarcer. Unfortunately, the appetite for GM in other countries is so great that agribusinesses aren't putting money into researching products suitable for Britain, when the regulatory climate and threat of direct action are against them.

Opposition to GMOs is led by the Green lobby - the self-same people who are most exercised by the need to curb greenhouse-gas emissions. Paradoxically, an argument for GM crops is precisely that they will help farming reduce its carbon footprint. Roots that fix a greater proportion of nitrogen from the soil will require less fertiliser made using fossil fuels. We want to discourage farmers from ploughing the land because that releases carbon; it's possible to imagine the development of a perennial wheat that makes ploughing unnecessary.

This Easter weekend, we shall celebrate the rebirth and resurrection that is symbolised by spring. It provides a moment, perhaps, to contemplate the long-term future of the world, which looks far from bright. Wars could break out over water. Flooding and desertification could cause huge movements of people, on a par with those experienced during the Dark Ages. We're running short of oil; before long, we may find ourselves running short of metals, too. Our children and grandchildren will be hard pressed to meet the enormous challenges that face them. But GM technology has the potential to alleviate some of the dangers. Future generations will think us crazy, or criminal, not to embrace it.

Comments


September 30 23:38

The government clearly recognizes that there is no reason to be afraid of GM foods. Their benfits far outweigh the risks. Examples of the benefits can be the fact that we no longer need the use of pesticides since we inject crops, such as tomatoes, with DNA that allows them to survive in cold temperatures, and another DNA gene that gives it the ability to repel bugs; as a result we can save more crops. In general, the benefits of GM foods involve better nutrition, increased yields, resistance to disease/pests and adaptability to varied environments. The sum of these benefits could result in an increasingly reliable of food supply in the face of starvation as well as malnutrition in large parts of the wourld. It seems that the main problem people have with GM foods is that it has concentrated a lot on the moral issues of our right to alter nature, the risks to the natural environment, to human health, as well as the risks to biodioversity. What those protests have failed to accept are the potential benefits that arise from GM foods. "So here's your option. Accept the fact that GMOs are not harmful, and on the scale of what our ancestors did to domesticate crops millenium ago it is a drop in the bucket, or tear down the rain forests for low yield farm land so you can have organic food."-Anonymous.


April 21 10:57

People must be utterly mad to think that GM crops will be beneficial, the contrary is the case. Farmers have had trial fields with GM crops and normal crops and noticed that none of their lifestock chose the GM crops but turned to the normal crops. Animals do KNOW BETTER! Now we are losing our bees, who - no doubt - visit GM crops, take up the toxins in their system and die! After all lectin as well as roundup are toxins, the first keeps pests off the pretty snowdrops it being part of the plant itself and the second is used to spray and protect plants from pests. Worst of all is the fact that once you eat GM crops, the toxins stays within your system for good! I hope that Europe will NEVER allow GM crops to be introduced.Ingrid Khan Hessle, E.Yorkshire


April 13 13:28

Mr. Hedges
first of all I would stress that I have quite similar thoughts as you uttered in your editorial. I am also concerned about the increasing population in China and India and about the resulting threat of starvation.
However, we also have to think about possible risks of GM. You didn`t mention a single one. That`s bizarre and strangely biassed. We may be able to rescue lives in a short while with the help of GM, but we don`t know how we will fare the the long-run due to the yet unknown long term effects of GMO`s.
The threat by nature superweeds for example is serious and plenty of other hazards go hand in hand with this.
I think since there are ample disadvantages as well, your responsibility as human beings should be not to act too fast and find a middle way.


Thank you for this opportunity to post a comment


April 04 23:09

Numerous scientific studies have shown the dangers to humans of GMO products

Show the study. Not a single human has ever been harmed by a GE food, and had that confirmed. Even the guy who ran around videotaping himself being allergic to GE maize got tested and was found to have no reaction whatsoever.

There's a sore need for education in this area. Anti-GE activism has become like creationism in my country (USA). The same tired falsehoods are trumpeted around for political and social reasons, and big quotes are put around "Science" as if it was some sort of intangible thing. Science means basing conclusions off of evidence, not ideology.

BTW - Raw food won't feed the world. You get a lot more out of certain foods by cooking them.


March 31 00:14

What a load of rubbish your "GM represents the future" Editorial was. Not sure who wrote it but it was disappointing to see CL aligning itself the dodgy GM "science".
If you really want to know how we are to feed the future world, think raw food, wasting less of what we grow, consuming less (reducing obesity) etc. Not rocket science, just palin old logic!


While there may be a need to grow more crops as the 'seeds of change' in agriculture continue to turn, one should question if the quest for greater production should come at the expense of human health and quality of life. Numerous scientific studies have shown the dangers to humans of GMO products, and the business practices of biotechs like Monsanto have contributed to the contamination of waterways and groundwater sources alike that humans need to sustain life. To call the failure to embrace GMO immoral is absolutely ludicrous. In America today, farmers are sued for Monsanto's plants polinating their non-GMO plants. The expansion of pantenting being allowed to extend to living things is what is truly immoral, not to mention unethical. They have poisoned American citizens, to include their own workers! If this is a turn of events the author feels the UK should embrace, perhaps he need look back to Monsanto's history of dumping toxic waste on UK shores between 1965-1972. The doomsday fears addressed in the last paragraph of the article could well come to pass, but given who the author supports, you may want to consider who we will need to feed if once we have contaminated our water stores and teh rest of our planet - we certainly will not be here to eat it.


March 24 18:25

Mr Hedges: finally some rational arguments, and true facts concerning GMO's. I am in Canada, and we are continually at the mercy of 'What is happening in Europe' concerning our food and mehods of growing/raising this food. A bold step for your magazine, and one which I commend you. Tell the truth, not what is popular. Should I ever move to England, (my girfriend is a Yorkshire lass) I will certainly seek your magazine for a subscription for life in England.

Best Wishes
Neill Vroom
Woodstock Ontario Canada


Mr. Hedges,
In this article you raise very salients issues about GM crops. It's unfortunate that anybody who supports GM foods is branded an apologist for the biotech industry. Such charges, mainly from anti-biotech organizations like the Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth, only help to distract us from the real debate about GMO. This is an issue I have discussed repeatedly in my blog (http://www.gmoafrica.org.) It's high time that the world tells off merchants of fear and misinformation about GM foods. The only debate that we should condone is that grounded in science. Everything else should be treated with the contempt it deserves.


Post your comment:




IPC Media Limited, owner of countrylife.co.uk, will collect your personal information solely to process your request.

Houses for sale

View houses for sale in UK and premium overseas property for sale or Find property estate agents.

Most Popular Articles

Today's latest properties

More properties for sale

 

The Magazine

Country Life is the essential weekly read for those who are passionate about the British countryside, fine art, gardening and property.
 

Classifieds

Get Instant Quotes

Free for for HIPs, removals, conveyancing and more.