There are several and divergent strongly-held points of view.

People generally favourable to the introduction of GM technology see it as a mainstream development from existing plant breeding. They see many benefits and few risks. They put much of the concern down to a recent history of food scares (BSE) and agricultural disasters (foot-and-mouth disease).

There is also a widespread lack of understanding of modern biology and the technology that derives from it. These factors were exploited by newspapers running scare stories in an attempt to increase their circulations and by various individuals and organisations pursuing agendas of power, increasing their membership and income, riding a protest movement and furthering their commercial or other financial interests.

Some people are generally worried about risks to human and animal health, damage to the environment and the involvement of large multinational corporations. They see agricultural biotechnology as a fundamentally new departure from existing practice with many risks and uncertain benefits. Moreover, they fear that not enough is known (and may never be known) about genetic interactions and their consequences, and think they may be other, better ways of meeting agricultural needs. Some of them also see the whole development as being driven by commercial greed with inadequate regard for safety and the public interest, with governments acquiescing because of perceived national economic considerations.

It is up to individuals to make up their own minds but that is difficult when people do not have the necessary technical background and experience. One way of trying to sort things out is to ask each side for the sources of their statements and then to make at least some attempt to judge who is sticking to facts and evidence, and who is going for assertion and flights of fancy.

Source:

Saleema Saleh-Lakha and R. Glick (2005). Is the battle over genetically modified finally over? Biotechnology Advances, 23, 93-96.

<<<back