Should the UK government allow genetically modified potatoe trials?

[peppermint]

A plant science company called BASF has applied to Defra to grow genetically modified potatoes that are resistant to potato blight. If they get the go ahead they will be planting next spring.

I am totally against this as not enough testing has been done on genetically modified foods, not just potatoes, to prove they are 100% safe for human consumption. Big corporations such as Monsanto involved in genetically modified foods claim they are safe, yet have done so little testing. They silence researchers that find results that prove their genetically modified foods are unsafe and stop them from publishing their work.

There is also the contamination issue, where genetically modified crops pollinate natural varieties therefore cross breeding. This could potentially lead to the natural varieties being wiped out.

[lewisa]

No.

Applying genetics to food is attempting to cure a problem we dont yet have. The world can grow enough food, what it fails at is distributing it evenly.


It SHOULD allow genetic engineering on things that do need a cure, like stem cells for cloning organs, etc.

[nightshade]

I always think that plant /insect relationships took a long time to develop
so that digestive systems were in tune, sudden GM introductions could mean
that pollinating insects find themselves with food that they cannot utilise fully
a bit like having no tin opener but plenty of tinned food.
If insects cannot have their share of a crop what other dependent species
will die

[Tormentil]

I think I read somewhere when GM crops first raised its ugly head, that seeds produced from GM crops would be infertile and cross polination could effect natural plants, with the result that eventually there would be no fertile seeds at all. A frightning thought!!

It may well have been just a bit of scaremongering by avid opponents of GM crops. But its food for thought (sic).

[Imaginos]

The biggest field experiment in the world took place in this country a few years ago on Glyphosate tolerant GM crops and whether the management of them had any effect on the environment. Despite plenty of vociferous opposition from members of the public and the media the trials were completed and found that these crops were even worse for the environment than conventional crops-a finding that, far from being supressed by Monsanto actually lead to them pulling out of Britain entirely.

I completely agree with peppermint that not enough testing has been done on health implications, but I would point out that bread wheat has four times the chromosomes as normal wheat thanks to radiation and chemical genetic modification carried out in the 40's and 50's, with little or no ill effects for the majority of people.

I vote yes, furtherance of our understanding of this issue can only improve the decision making process-after all it is not the scientists who decide to make these products legal but politicians. In the experiment outlined at the top of this post, despite the scientists finding against all the GM crops tested, the government still gave the green light to maize.

[speckled wood]

Originally Posted by lewisa

No.

Applying genetics to food is attempting to cure a problem we dont yet have. The world can grow enough food, what it fails at is distributing it evenly.


It SHOULD allow genetic engineering on things that do need a cure, like stem cells for cloning organs, etc.

Other than to remove the emphatic "no" and to say that we might never have a real need to cure the "problem" that Lewisa refers to, Lewisa sums up what my opinion is.

[peppermint]

Originally Posted by Tormentil

I think I read somewhere when GM crops first raised its ugly head, that seeds produced from GM crops would be infertile and cross polination could effect natural plants, with the result that eventually there would be no fertile seeds at all. A frightning thought!!

It may well have been just a bit of scaremongering by avid opponents of GM crops. But its food for thought (sic).

Yes you are right to some degree. It is a technology called Terminator technology conjured up by U.S. Department of Agriculture and Delta and Pine Land Company in the 1990s, Monsanto and now other biotech companies are greatly welcoming and have patented this technology.

It render the seeds infertile so that farmers have to keep going back to the biotech companies to purchase seeds every year. Basically it stops people saving seed.

Read this wiki article for more info

Terminator Technology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[peppermint]

I think the GM issue is one that needs to be highlighted a lot more than what it has been already. There are a lot of people who dont really have a clue about whats happening with our food and if nothing else, then i hope to raise more people's awareness on this issue.

Although from the UK, i am currently travelling accross Canada with my husband and i find i cannot trust the food here at all to be GM free. They are in the top 4 countries for growing genetically modified foods and there is no law that makes them label the foods which contain the GM ingredients . Personally i dont want to be eating GM food and i hope so much the UK and Europe doesn't follow suit from USA and Canada, Argentina and a few other countries.

[nightshade]

http://archive.greenpeace.org/geneng...gmo/gmo012.pdf
looking for something else entirely I came across this

[RobSutton]

Originally Posted by Imaginos

I vote yes, furtherance of our understanding of this issue can only improve the decision making process-after all it is not the scientists who decide to make these products legal but politicians. In the experiment outlined at the top of this post, despite the scientists finding against all the GM crops tested, the government still gave the green light to maize.

I must admit I agree. The technology exists and isn't going to go away. Proper scientific trials are the only way to work out how safe for both health and the environment these things are. How many technological advance would have been lost if the, entirely natural, reaction to be scared of anything new had held sway. Didn't people oppose the idea of railways because they thought the human body couldn't cope with the speed?