The release today of the results of the Government's farm scale trial clearly show that Tony Blair should ban GM crops.
The trials did not even begin to address the possible catastrophic effects that GM could bring about. Yet even so, the results show that the alleged "benefits" of GM simply do not exist.
We believe the real comparison should be between GM and organic agriculture. But organic is so obviously better for the environment that the GM industry refused point blank to have this included in the trials. Instead, the trials compared one highly damaging form of agriculture with one that's even worse.
SUMMARY OF GREENPEACE'S ANALYSIS OF THE TRIALS
Which crops were tested?
- Spring oilseed rape tolerant to the herbicide glufosinate ammonium (known commercially as Liberty) - developed by Bayer.
- Winter oilseed rape tolerant to glufosinate ammonium - developed by Bayer.
- Fodder maize tolerant to glufosinate ammonium - developed by Bayer.
- Sugar beet resistant to glyphosate (known commercially as Roundup) - developed by Monsanto.
- Fodder beet resistant to glyphosate - developed by Monsanto.
What did the trials miss?
The Government claimed the trials would answer concerns about the safety of GM crops. However there are many areas that the research did not address:
- Unpredictable nature of GM technology - the trials only looked at one GM trait (herbicide tolerance). GM crops engineered for different purposes, for example changed nutritional content, were not studied.
- Whether GM crops are safe for humans and farm animals to eat.
- Impacts of GM crops on soil ecology -according to soil scientists, GM crops could have "long term adverse and unexpected effects on soil micro-organisms or their functioning and could prove to be the greatest major hazard for the environment". This impact could either be from herbicide usage or from the genetic material itself.
- Contamination of neighbouring crops -though research from the EU has suggested it will be impossible to grow GM without contaminating neighbouring crops, this problem was not considered in the farm scale trials despite high-profile examples of seed contamination in the UK.
- Possible negative impacts of GM crops on bees - no studies on this have been carried out during the trials, yet bees are extremely important to the pollination of commercial crops in the UK.
- Comparison of GM crops with organic farming systems - the environmental impact of GM crops in comparison with sustainable farming systems such as organic or low impact systems was not studied. The GM crop was only compared with a conventional chemical intensive farming system.
- Incremental effects of growing GM crops over time - the GM trial crops were only grown on each field for one year. In commercial use GM crops are likely to be grown in rotation, the same crop returning every three to four years to a particular field, or in the case of maize, it may be grown in the same field year after year.
- Effects of widespread growing of GM crops - impacts on biodiversity that might manifest themselves only when GM crops are used widely in the UK were not studied.
- Trials "not sufficient" evidence for deciding on GM commercialisation - one of the Government's GM advisory bodies, the AEBC, clearly stated in their Crops on Trial report that the FSTs "are not a sufficient condition" for deciding on GM commercialisation. The Government subsequently agreed that the results of the trials "are only one part of the decision-making framework."
In fact the farm scale trials cannot answer a whole range of uncertainties concerning the growing of GM crops and food. The Government GM Science Review gave its first report over the summer and pointed to areas of considerable uncertainty, especially in relation to food allergies, the impact on soil and soil ecology, possible genetic changes that would make a plant invasive, and a generally poor predictive understanding of ecology.
Why shouldn't maize growing proceed?
Some claim that the trials will show GM maize is better for the nature than regular maize. This is flawed for two reasons.
First, during the trials the non-GM maize was frequently treated with a weedkiller that that will soon be banned. Secondly, the GM maize in the trials may well have been treated more "lightly" with weedkiller than it would be in real life. In the USA, where GM maize is already grown, some farmers have had to use extra and stronger weedkillers, because the GM method on its own didn't kill weeds effectively enough.
Greenpeace believe that the GM maize trials did not reflect reality and that if GM maize is ever grown commercially in the UK the impacts would be much worse for biodiversity than the trials indicate.
Greenpeace executive director Stephen Tindale is a former government advisor who was closely involved in designing the farm scale trials. Read his latest column.
