Slashdot Mirror


Anti-GMO Activist Recants

Freddybear writes "Former anti-GMO activist Mark Lynas, who opposed genetically modified food in the 1990s, said recently, at the Oxford Farming Conference: 'I want to start with some apologies. For the record, here and upfront, I apologize for having spent several years ripping up GM crops. I am also sorry that I helped to start the anti-GM movement back in the mid 1990s, and that I thereby assisted in demonizing an important technological option which can be used to benefit the environment. As an environmentalist, and someone who believes that everyone in this world has a right to a healthy and nutritious diet of their choosing, I could not have chosen a more counter-productive path. I now regret it completely. So I guess you'll be wondering — what happened between 1995 and now that made me not only change my mind but come here and admit it? Well, the answer is fairly simple: I discovered science, and in the process I hope I became a better environmentalist.' To vilify GMOs is to be as anti-science as climate-change deniers, he says. To feed a growing world population (with an exploding middle class demanding more and better-quality food), we must take advantage of all the technology available to us, including GMOs. To insist on 'natural' agriculture and livestock is to doom people to starvation, and there’s no logical reason to prefer the old ways, either. Moreover, the reason why big companies dominate the industry is that anti-GMO activists and policymakers have made it too difficult for small startups to enter the field."

2 of 758 comments (clear)

  1. Re:This is a rare breed of human. by Lorien_the_first_one · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If GMOs are really so safe, why the tremendous resistance to putting a simple label on the food?

    --
    The diversity and expression of human opinion is essential to human survival.
  2. Re:This is a rare breed of human. by jfengel · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Because "safe" and "perceived to be safe after this guy spent two decades badmouthing it" are very different things. Consumers will avoid GMO-labeled foods regardless.

    That, and the fact that there are some costs involved keeping the GMO and non-GMO streams completely separate. They've already had some notable failures in that regard.

    Personally, regardless of the benefits of GMOs, and their probable safety, I don't trust Monsanto as far as I can throw them. I don't have any faith that they've done their tests properly, and I believe they're completely willing to take a $5B fine if they can take in $40B in profits before they get called on it.