Commentary on New Scientist editorial concerning "insect mortality"...
I have researched this issue specifically, and what I have found is interesting. When considering the big picture, you must consider all chemical pesticides have an extremely high propensity for wiping out entire fields of insects such as ladybirds and honeybees immediately upon application. Conversely, gene crops with this trait do not have this "armageddon" effect. So, the way things are done now without gene crops, these beneficial insects will die, and never contribute to reproduction. On the other hand, gene crops can support the life and reproduction of such beneficial insects, even if there is some lesser long-term negative effect. Moreover, in the case of chemical pesticides, the residual effects would likely have some long-term negative consequences for insect predators...some are partially poisoned, but don't die, so citing the same as a "drawback" for GM crops doesn't seem to hold up. I'm surprised the New Scientist does not comment on this aspect of the story. I'm sure more data will become available in the future.
Perspective is obviously important. The "bad science" stories never give that. Since these are farm issues, we must put them in that perspective. And as for environmental issues, why not ask the question as to what happens to a bird which eats an insect which is covered with pesticide, but isn't quite dead? Or, what about a bird who is IN the field when it is sprayed?
...by the way, Monsanto and others have already addressed this issue in case there is any risk, by providing for the "insect refuges" mentioned. The environmentalists don't mention this in the "bad science" articles either.
Dan
(NS comments)
The story is similar with crops engineered to be resistant to
insect pests. Ecologists worry about these crops because
they are designed to produce a steady supply of a natural
insecticide that could harm beneficial predators such as
ladybirds (see p 5). They argue that the wider effects of this
could be quite different from those of chemical sprays
which, because they are used intermittently, can allow insect
populations to recover. To minimise any problems, it may be
necessary to set aside areas of land to serve as GM-free
refuges for insects |
