From lab to table: how biotech breeds hope, doubt and fear

5.30pm - By ARIFA AKBAR

LONDON - The Independent asked four people to comment on a study linking GE crops with damage to the environment.

The Producer

Name: Dr Colin Merritt

Position: Head of Biotechnology at Monsanto UK

I have been responsible for our part of the trials and we were looking at the indirect effects of managing these crops.

At this stage, we need weeks to study the data properly before coming to any conclusions.

We also need to be aware that when we measure the insect population, the higher or lower number of insects depends on when we measure.

We need to monitor this kind of information for conventional agriculture, the effects of other chemicals, fertilisers and ploughing, and not just for GM.

We also have to keep in mind the idea of scale.

If you have one field in 100 that contained GM crop, the insects can live in other fields and their population is unlikely to be affected.

For those who are frightened of the so-called 'Frankenstein Foods', most people are unaware that in every spoonful of food, they eat DNA which comes from plants or animals.

There's nothing different about GM plants.


The Scientist

Name: Professor Chris Lever

Position: Head of plant science at Oxford University and on the GM review panel chaired by Sir David King

The aim of farming is to maximise crop productivity which is competing against pests, disease and weeds.

The more we can grow on one square acre, the less acres we need to grow.

The question I would pose is that is it better to have higher yielding crops on a smaller amount of land or far less yield on a larger area of land? GM crops kill the weeds that compete with crops and some insects are lost because they live on the weeds.

But we can return insects to the environment so the potential is there for GM to benefit wildlife.

If we do not have GM in the case of sugar beet, we will have to import it from elsewhere.

We are already farming intensively but the world's population is estimated to increase from six to eight billion and we have to find a way to accommodate this growth.

Organic farming is a lovely idea but in Britain alone, it can only support up to 10 million people but we need enough food for 60 million.




The Farmer

Name: Nick Wells

Position: Arable farmer who specialises in sugar beet in North Lincolnshire.

I have no real qualms about GM crops so far but I would emphasise the 'so far'.

I take a scientific approach to this report by saying that if we can have higher yields through having less weed in sugar beet crop, then I am satisfied.

We can overcome the reduction of insects by taking some land out of production and planting vegetation specifically for butterflies and bees to feed on.

If we are competing with the world market where GM is used in other countries, it is possible we may not be able to grow sugar beet in Britain if we carry on with the conventional crop.

The way we farm sugar beet now also requires much higher labour input.

It needs intensive monitoring and it has to be sprayed more times with crop chemicals than GM sugar beet.

The sugar we extract is highly refined from the plant so the consumer is not getting any GM residue through that.

The sugar beet pulp is fed to cattle.

Some might argue that GM crops enter the food chain this way, but it is not a worry for me because the pulp is highly processed and goes through a lot of heat treatment and has no connection to the original modification."


The consumer

Name: Stella Cridge, 27, from Vauxhall, London

Position: Business development consultant

When I heard about the results of the trials on the radio, I felt it was a surprise victory for environmentalists.

I believe that it is a commitment to short-term gains that is leading us down the GM path.

It is important to balance growth in the economy - which can deliver good quality food to a growing population - with its social and environmental impact.

Productivity and ecology are not mutually exclusive and a balance has to be met.

In the case of GM, I don't think the environmental and social effects are worth the gains.

Some may dismiss this as naive but I would like to see all farmers use organic methods.

Others may say that there is no other way of feeding the world than by using intensive farming but we need to study the long-term effects and we need to find another system whose side effects are not so damaging.

All the processed food I buy is organic but, at the same time, I don't think it is the individual consumer's responsibility.

We need to heed caution with this report and this issue can always be revisited in another 10 years.

- INDEPENDENT