Two perspectives
Prince Charles (claim to fame - accident of birth) -
genetically modified foods are a 'gigantic experiment with nature and the whole of humanity which has gone seriously wrong'.
Norman Borlaug (claim to fame - saving more lives than anyone else in the history of ever) -
'It took some 10,000 years to expand food production to the current level of about 5 billion tons per year. By 2025, we will have to nearly double current production again. This increase cannot be accomplished unless farmers across the world have access to current high-yielding crop production methods as well as new biotechnological breakthroughs that can increase the yields, dependability, and nutritional quality of our basic food crops.'
and yes he's including genetically modified foods in that (that whole article is a great read incidentally).
So there's the problem with the royal family. Some man, who by accident of birth has the funds to start a bunch of farms in a prosperous first world country, where consumers are well enough off to have, as NB puts it 'the luxury of adopting a very low-risk position on the genetically modified crop issue, even if this action later turns out to be unnecessary', versus the man who has actually taken practical steps to feed the hungry. One who runs a line of luxury organic food products with a turnover of less than £5 million, and one who produced a line of crops which have saved two people for every penny the other has in turnover. Which one do the media listen to? The BBC has just two stories ever mentioning Borlaug, according to Google.
It's just flat out dangerous. The guy's fear-mongering about biotechnologies that do have the potential to feed the hungry, he's putting out arguably dangerous literature and people are listening to him.
And it's a real danger. In 2002, Zambia turned down food aid whilst in the grip of a famine thanks to this sort of misinformation.
And people are listening to this guy spouting this out with no real clue just because he's a prince.
genetically modified foods are a 'gigantic experiment with nature and the whole of humanity which has gone seriously wrong'.
Norman Borlaug (claim to fame - saving more lives than anyone else in the history of ever) -
'It took some 10,000 years to expand food production to the current level of about 5 billion tons per year. By 2025, we will have to nearly double current production again. This increase cannot be accomplished unless farmers across the world have access to current high-yielding crop production methods as well as new biotechnological breakthroughs that can increase the yields, dependability, and nutritional quality of our basic food crops.'
and yes he's including genetically modified foods in that (that whole article is a great read incidentally).
So there's the problem with the royal family. Some man, who by accident of birth has the funds to start a bunch of farms in a prosperous first world country, where consumers are well enough off to have, as NB puts it 'the luxury of adopting a very low-risk position on the genetically modified crop issue, even if this action later turns out to be unnecessary', versus the man who has actually taken practical steps to feed the hungry. One who runs a line of luxury organic food products with a turnover of less than £5 million, and one who produced a line of crops which have saved two people for every penny the other has in turnover. Which one do the media listen to? The BBC has just two stories ever mentioning Borlaug, according to Google.
It's just flat out dangerous. The guy's fear-mongering about biotechnologies that do have the potential to feed the hungry, he's putting out arguably dangerous literature and people are listening to him.
And it's a real danger. In 2002, Zambia turned down food aid whilst in the grip of a famine thanks to this sort of misinformation.
And people are listening to this guy spouting this out with no real clue just because he's a prince.