Wednesday, August 13, 2008

Genetically modified crops - detrimental

Prince: Genetically modified crops not the answer

Aug 12, 8:51 PM (ET)

By DAVID STRINGER

LONDON (AP) - Britain's Prince Charles, owner of an organic farm, says that increased use of genetically modified crops to help solve world food shortages could lead to environmental disaster.

The heir to the British throne was quoted as saying in an interview published Wednesday that he believes new experiments with modified crops could worsen problems with food supplies.

Prince Charles, whose farm has supplied products to stores since 1992, is a longtime critic of genetic modification of food.

His stance puts him at odds with Britain's government, which has said that genetically modified crops could help lower food prices and urged those opposed to the technology to reconsider their position.

"What we should be talking about is food security not food production - that is what matters and that is what people will not understand," Prince Charles in The Daily Telegraph interview.

He said he believed that genetically modified crops could lead to unsustainable demand on irrigation systems, have detrimental effects on farmland and lead to small farmers being driven out by agricultural conglomerates.

"It places impossible burdens on nature and leads to accumulating problems which become more difficult to sort out," he was quoted as saying.

Prime Minister Gordon Brown said genetically modified crops have a key role in boosting agricultural production and lowering the spiraling prices of food staples.

"We must take the initiative to further develop higher-yielding and climate resilient varieties of crop," he wrote in a letter to G-8 leaders in April.

Britain has authorized about 50 separate trials of genetically modified crops and is considering requests from some biotechnology firms to keep the test locations secret amid vandalism fears.

1 comment:

David Gerard said...

Charles didn't hammer home that GM is for Monsanto to take ownership of everything. Scientific opinion doesn't affect abuse of the law.