LONDON - Scientists on both sides of the heated debate over genetically modified (GM) foods have called for calm and more information on the possible impact on health and the environment.
The United States, backed by big business, leads the pro-GM lobby. Europe is more cautious because of consumer fears over
biotech foods, and at least one African nation has outlawed GM foods completely - even food aid.
Last month a group of senators from US farm states called on Washington to file a World Trade Organisation complaint against the European Union, which for four years has enforced a moratorium on approving any new biotech products, from agricultural goods to pharmaceuticals.
Tempers are fraying on both sides, with advocates arguing that GM crops can end hunger and save the environment, and those against citing unknown implications of releasing mutant genes.
Vyvyan Howard, a toxico-pathologist at the University of Liverpool, told a London conference on GM issues: "We have to assume that GM genes are going to get everywhere in the environment. What we have to do is work out if that is a good thing or not.
"When you use the whole world as a test tube you need extra safeguards. We don't want to be looking back in 50 years time and regretting it," he said.
Some supermarkets are now declaring as a marketing tool that they don't stock genetically manipulated food.
Howard said many studies on the risks associated with GM crops and foods were notable for a complete absence of facts.
"We need to do proper risk and hazard assessments. We will need human feeding trials," he told the conference.
But pathologist Colin Berry said there was already evidence that GM crops had produced major benefits in countries such as India and South Africa where crop yields had risen, costs declined and the environment improved.
- REUTERS
Herald feature: Genetic Engineering
Related links
