News 
 National Rural News 
 Grains and Cropping 
 General 
 BIO debunks myths in anti GM report 

BIO debunks myths in anti GM report

20 Apr, 2009 05:44 PM
A report last week by the United States Union of Concerned Scientists, Failure to Yield: Evaluating the Performance of Genetically Engineered Crops, has been quickly countered by the US Biotechnology Industry Organisation, (BIO).

In the report, the union questions biotechnology's ability to increase crop yields and claimed that successes to date have not been the result of genetic engineering.

Responding to the report, Sharon Bomer Lauritsen, executive vice president of BIO, said: "It's absurd to deny biotechnology's contribution, among other factors, to increased crop production. Since the introduction of agricultural biotechnology in 1996, we have seen double-digit growth in corn and soybean yields."

Referencing the US Department of Agriculture's 2009 Annual Summary Crop Production Report, she noted that 80pc of the nation's corn acreage is planted with biotech varieties, and yields have increased 36pc since 1995, the last year before biotech varieties were commercially planted.

And with about 92pc of the US soybean acreage now planted with biotech varieties, yields have increased 12pc since 1995.

Acres planted to biotech crops in the US have been steadily rising each year, with 309 million acres planted in 2008.

"At a time when the US and the world are looking for science-based solutions to help meet the demands of a growing population, agricultural biotechnology is able to deliver heartier crops that yield more per acre in a more environmentally and economically sustainable way," Lauritsen said.

"The biotechnology industry is committed to providing solutions to enlist in that effort."

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
BIO technology still doesn't get the picture. The public wants original genre food & which is stable for the past thousands of years. If the money was put into green growing practices, it would benefit all population levels & the crop production that is being yielded through GM is no where near what can be achieved by Hydroponics.
Posted by Atheistno1, 21/04/2009 7:26:31 AM
It's simple, don't buy it. I no longer buy any product with soy, or canola regardless of its origin. Meat, milk etc must be organic or biodynamic. Science is totally discredited these days, we no longer have objective sound science, it is emotionally or commercially driven.
Posted by Denis, 21/04/2009 11:22:25 AM
Of course the acreage of GM crops have risen in the US. They now grow 50% of all the GM crops globally, and are so heavily subsidised it actually pays farmers to grow them. Due to trade agreements made by the US government and Mexico US corn is sold that country, drastically undercutting the local corn market. This has resulted in more farmers becoming landless as they suffer hardships. It's no coincidence that the four major GM crops (corn, cotton, canola and soy) get about 80% of all of the farm subsidies in the US. Grown at a loss, they are then transported around the globe and used as animal feed, or hidden in processed food...all untested and unlabelled. As for yield, it is still not possible to increase this by using GM technology, and we are now hearing of smaller yields from GM crops, especially soy.
Posted by Hebe, 21/04/2009 7:06:41 PM
Fewer and fewer will buy it as time goes on. We still have the problem of children in the UK becoming allergic to vegetables.
Posted by E, 22/04/2009 7:25:14 AM
If you take the glyphosate gene out of the plant what do you have? I believe it is just a plant whether it's canola, corn, soybean, what ever, so the big claim of yield increase must therefore be weed control or traditional cross breeding techniques. I have no problems with the chemical groups and rotations and the hybrid varieties I have been using in my farming system at present. Damn!!! I wish I had thought of inserting this miracle gene and tie every farmer up into a one sided legal contract to pay a royalty straight into my bank account so it returned so much money I was able to buy out almost all of the seed companies. I could, then pull the conventional varieties off the market forcing every farmer within cooee to only be able to buy my patented product, then jump into the newspaper and tell everyone, hey look at this everyone's using it . Anti-GM debunks myth in Bio report
Posted by David, 22/04/2009 9:31:21 PM
Of course, the acreage of GM crops have risen. Contamination happens and when the non-GM farmer gets sued by Monsanto as they do, they have to, from that moment on, be tied to the GM industry and their "scientific" GM crops.
Posted by Concerned, 24/04/2009 9:47:57 AM

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Related Coverage
ARTICLES
MULTIMEDIA
17 April, 2009
16 April, 2009
POLL
Q: Do you think tree changers generally have realistic expectations of rural life when they move to the bush?

Yes
(9.8%)

No
(89%)

Other
(1.2%)

Total Votes: 764
Poll Date: 19 April, 2009

Most popular articles




Stock & Land







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...