In effect, due to Greenpeaces's efforts, the bioag industry now has many years of research which has been further validated by the devil's advocate.
I believe Greenpeace et al. may be running out of steam. Considering the obvious campaign over the last several weeks -- involving many media stunts -- they have increased public fear, yet they haven't revealed a single relevant scientific item to support their claims. In a way, this validates GM crops all the more. With all that effort, none of their scare stories seems to hold up when examined in the light of day. The best thing they offer is "evidence" which points out a scientist was successful in producing the toxic potato he set out to produce? And speculation that GMs will harm the countryside, which fails to mention the positive benefits of certain varieties which have the opposite effect?
GM crops have been out for years, and Greenpeace has been trying to find something wrong for years, but hasn't come up with anything other than imaginary items...so it has to resort to publicity stunts like the recent UK soy dumping. The question is, why emphasize this whole subject now rather than years ago? The answer has little to do with science. It's an issue of GMs being so successful that has competing interests upset...
...and there is also the issue of Greenpeace needing a cause, in order to solicit contributions.... |
