No one need blindly trust Monsanto, but not supporting the development of Genetically Modified Organisms is lunacy. The ability to create strains of food impervious to drought and disease is not just a matter of choice but one of national security–of species security, actually. There’s no reason for thinking natural good and GMOs bad, especially since plenty of poisons exist in nature.
Sadly, many European nations are making it difficult for scientists and private enterprise to pursue these needed safeguards on the global food supply, with their policies having ramifications in Africa.
From Mark Lynas at the New York Times:
CALL it the “Coalition of the Ignorant.” By the first week of October, 17 European countries — including Austria, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands and Poland — had used new European Union rules to announce bans on the cultivation of genetically modified crops.
These prohibitions expose the worrying reality of how far Europe has gone in setting itself against modern science. True, the bans do not apply directly to scientific research, and a few countries — led by England — have declared themselves open to cultivation of genetically modified organisms, or G.M.O.s. But the chilling effect on biotech science in Europe will be dramatic: Why would anyone spend years developing genetically modified crops in the knowledge that they will most likely be outlawed by government fiat?
In effect, the Continent is shutting up shop for an entire field of human scientific and technological endeavor. This is analogous to America’s declaring an automobile boycott in 1910, or Europe’s prohibiting the printing press in the 15th century.
Beginning with Scotland’s prohibition on domestic genetically modified crop cultivation on Aug. 9, Europe’s scientists and farmers watched with mounting dismay as other countries followed suit. Following the Scottish decision, signatories from numerous scientific organizations and academic institutions wrote to the Scottish government to express grave concern “about the potential negative effect on science in Scotland.”
The appeal went unheeded.•
Tags: Mark Lynas