Comments on: Is opposition to GE crops in Europe a Scientific Flip-Flop?

By: The Council for Biotechnology Information » Biofortified Responds to SEED Magazine Article

Fri, 26 Jun 2009 17:32:50 +0000

[...] Haro von Mogel on his Biofortified blog provides his analyis of SEED Magazine’s examination of the debate over GMOs in Europe. He [...]

By: The Council for Biotechnology Information » SEED Magazine Examines the Debate Over GMO in Europe

Thu, 25 Jun 2009 16:24:30 +0000

[...] Haro von Mogel on his Biofortified blog provides an analyis of the articles. He write: “The important distinction being made here is [...]

By: Karl Haro von Mogel

Karl Haro von Mogel — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 03:40:05 +0000

Re James: I do know that there are scientists in the environmental disciplines that disagree on GE crops. There are also plenty of them who are in favor of it. In some cases I think there may be a miscommunication going on about environmental goals.
In other cases, I think there are some ecologists who aren’t thinking like geneticists – I know some believe that low-level presence of transgenes due to gene flow is a problem, yet, don’t think about all the other genes bred into modern cultivars from wild relatives, came from mutagenesis, etc. For example, there is an herbicide-tolerant wheat generated through mutagenesis – and there are absolutely no regulations covering this trait, whereas if a human being created it purposefully the alarm bells ring. Herbicide tolerance, no matter how it is generated, poses the same concerns.

I happen to know a public researcher in plant gene flow, and I asked them what the biggest gene flow risk they know of is – and the answer was Elm Trees, not GE crops.

Re: Mary – thanks for reminding me about that study. It certainly backs up the research that has occurred in Oregon that found the same result – about 20% of consumers were willing to pay more for labels, the rest were not. The question then becomes, why is the 20% in Europe more influential than the 20% over here?

By: Mary

Mary — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 01:41:39 +0000

The interesting thing about using Europeans as the model for stalwart opposition is that the data doesn’t bear that out either. I found a discussion of various survey results here: http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/news/stories/415.an_overview_european_consumer_polls_attitudes_gmos.html

It turns out only ~20% of consumers actively avoid the products. And I’ve heard that governments are pretty coy to use the activists to keep the GE products out for trade reasons.

By: James

James — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 23:41:09 +0000

Great post Karl. One thing that doesn’t come across clearly is that you mention twice the idea that while plant scientists are in consensus about the benefits of GM crops, this is not true of other branches or disciplines.

What areas of science do you mean? Obviously if quantum physicists are worried about genetic engineering that is less worth losing sleep over than if we were instead talking about the concerns of biochemists. It’s important to establish what types of scientists are unconvinced and what the connection is between their field of study and the techniques and results of genetic engineering.