Government wonks have once again been druming up support for GM food, the latest tub-thumping courtesy of science minister Ian Pearson. He's been saying that if engineered crops can be demonstrated to alleviate hunger around the world, then the great British public will be only too happy to see them being cultivated in our green and pleasant land as well.
I wouldn't be surprised if Pearson is being egged on by various biotech companies eager to see a return on the millions they've pumped into transgenic research, and just a few months ago Mark Lynas noted that it's economic concerns driving GM technology, not philanthropic ambitions.
Former chief scientist Sir David King also went on record recently to say the rise in organic farming is largely to blame for people starving in Africa, which is a favourite brick the pro-lobby likes to lob in the direction of those opposed to GM food and crops such as Greenpeace, painting us as anti-development. But whether the technology exists or not, hunger and malnourishment would still be rampant in Africa and other parts of the world because the underlying political and economic conditions would still be in place.
And the evidence from a recent study by the University of Kansas has shown that GM crops actually produce smaller yields, not bigger ones. So be wary of misty-eyed PR spin from the likes of Monsanto, Syngenta and BASF and their political poodles about feeding the world - it ain't worth a hill of beans.
