Quote:
Originally Posted by Thor
Which is why anti-GMO people are ridiculous because they go against the science of GMO. There is nearly 30 years of peer reviewed science that supports the safety of GMO.
|
I disagree with that statement.
Off the top of my head I can think of at least one very famous Nature paper in the late 90s that suggested that GMOs were killing monarch caterpillars. I use Nature as an example because many know how hard it is to get published there. In fact I would argue that the safety and credibility of GMOs was still up in the air in the scientific community and was only properly heavily debated in the late 90s, early 00s. I say this from experience from living in the east of England, right next to the John Innes Centre where there was serious concerns, research and debate regarding their effects on farmland biodiversity and overall environmental wellbeing and where many of the country's test trials were located at secret locations.
So, to say that there is nearly 30 years of science supporting it is imo wrong. I would say that it is only in the last 10 years that the science has slowly swung towards recognising the negative hypothesis .... in many cases.
I would have considered myself an anti GMO person during that time and will readily admit that I was wrong and that many of my fears have been disproven. Having said that I still today have concerns on some fronts.