Registered user login:

Vote!

Would you feed GM foods to your children?

  • 28% are saying yes
  • 72% are saying no

comments from readers

gnuneo
26 August 2008
no

not so long as GM foods are still being produced with the primary emphasis on corporate profitability through monocultural farming, rather than on biodiversity and permaculture farming.

also not until both research and testing are fully opened up to the public, rather than corporate in-house mechanisms that have been shown repeatedly, and repeatedly, and repeatedly, to be insufficient oversight, leading to both unsuitable research (contraceptive corn - want to have grand-children? Don't eat any GM corn products aimed at the poorest consumers), environment destroying crops (that need ever greater quantities of petrochemicals and scarce groundwater), and finally inadequate testing, allowing dangerous products to enter the food chain and supermarkets.

were GM research done openly (as on the open-science part of the human genome project), were there far stricter testing done in the full light of publicity, were the motive to enrich our environment and create quality products rather than just more corporate greed and power-hunger, were there no attempts to patent natural products to create monopolies, then i would certainly consider it.

right now though, with bad products, bad testing, environmental damage and the planned destruction of bio-diverse natural farming systems across the world - no way in Hell would i risk giving my kids GM food.

Tara Rosenthal
27 August 2008
no

I am uninformed about GM foods, I thought that it was a automobile maker, excuse me for my ignorance if not.

skatenat
27 August 2008
yes

This is a question directed at an affluent few, globally speaking. This few can afford to place there agricultural nostalgia over others pressing demand for food and can maintain their arguments for "the lack of evidence for GM" only with their own ignorance. Neither could companies abuse their "monopolies", as is often claimed, because of the likelihood that these companies would like practise business for more than a year, and the option of normal crops (in fact the presence of any abuse by companies being tolerated would simply show how appalling the situation is with non-GM crops now). Its only a shame that it is these few who force poorer countries (their suppliers, who must follow suit with bans in Europe) into starvation. At least its an traditionally virtuous sentence of death.

Cybertiger
27 August 2008
no

I would not trust corporate science or corporate scientists with my children's future.

suell
27 August 2008
no

I'm not yet convinced by the scientist - common sense tells me we should not be promoting the use of GM foods without much longer-term research into human health and environmental impact.

Sue L

Anthony Z
28 August 2008
yes

I believe in science. Someone's got to.

Gerishnakov
28 August 2008
yes

Only if I knew that the crop the food came from was unable to reproduce, and therefore would not risk wiping out natural species.

Black Lily
28 August 2008
yes

If they have Nike trainers on their feet, and an i-Pod permanently stuck in their ears, why should I worry if they're eating apples almost as big as the size of their face?

Humanitarian
28 August 2008
yes

Oh no!

Mummy, Mummy, come quickly, the big scary boogeyman of rationalism and science is coming to take away that nice Mr. Starvation and his friend Mr. Malnutrion.

So kids, tune in next week for the latest thrilling installment of our hilarious hit musical, "Famine", set in the wonderful world of ChildrenDyingEarly.

julongarm
29 August 2008
no

No one will starve if you all eat a bit less meat. :-)

renumeratedfrog
29 August 2008
yes

If it's cheaper than other food, then yes. Beggars can't be choosers. I do think there's some risk in eating GM food, but it applies mostly to meats and dairies. If you're a vegetarian, I don't think there's much to be feared.

Alan Pavelin
30 August 2008
yes

Nobody has ever been harmed by eating GM. And the fact that Monsanto is a big multinational is totally irrelevant.

bedabs
31 August 2008
no

GM should be banned it's Pandoa's Box. The 'terminator seed' developed by Monsanto is a crime against humanity.
Human misery for Profit. Disgusting.

Claire
31 August 2008
no

Those who still think GM foods are harmless should look at the animal feeding studies (there's only been one human feeding study and even that showed potential problems). Many kinds of harm were found to the GM-fed animals but not investigated further. Wake up, everyone. You can start by reading Jeffrey Smith's book Genetic Roulette, which summarises all the research.

barryspivack@yahoo.co.uk
31 August 2008
no

The history of science is full of examples of breakthroughs that were subsequently found to have unforseen consequences. The differences with GM foods that the technology is at a deeper level of nature - DNA - so if something does go wrong the consequences will be much greater.

wrhite
31 August 2008
no

If DNA goes wrong the whole "pack of cards" of life will tumble down.

nigelwrites
31 August 2008
no

We must challenge the false argument that if you are against GM foods,you are therefore against all progress and a Luddite.More people must understand this trick-and fight it.Gm technology is far less precise than its advocates would have us believe,and may be an even greater threat to our long term survival than global warming.This is overlooked by many,possibly because it's an inner and less immediately visible threat.And ,against fashionable dogma,many scientists understand this too.Encourage everyone you know to vote,lobby and speak out on this-for our children's sake......

David stat108
31 August 2008
no

GM is a bogus science, the transposed gene will not behave in the same way that it did in the original organism, the long terrm consequences are unknowable and unpredictable.

Graham Orr
31 August 2008
no

The case for GMO's is NOT proven. The iniquitous linking of commercial imperatives on the part of the agro-chemical companies to the claims of increased yields and improved weed resistance has led to much misunderstanding. Most insidious has also been the claim that this is all based on rational science. In our arrogance, we assume that we know the functionailty of the genome by scything off large chunks from contention by claiming they are redundant. In truth, GMO development relies less on precision, rational construction and more on a scattergun rolling of the shotgun blast that inserts non native genetic material into carrier material. More humilty and less bombast would be in order. Curious how science has become the new orthodoxy and vigorously defineds its turf in echoes of past religious supression!!

Graham Orr

veritasvincit
31 August 2008
no

DNA research has definitely proven that gene technology inevitably has unpredictable effects and that unexpected and dangerous toxins, difficult to detect, may appear. One such toxin has already caused a major disaster, killing 37 and permanently disabling over 1500. For more see http://www.psrast.org/demsd.htm

whiteagles
31 August 2008
no

Until PROPER AND INDEPENDENT research is done then GM should be considered risky. I rememebr when Thalidomide was given to my mother in the 1950's

whiteagles
31 August 2008
no

What has ever happened to government scientific research into new and unknown risks of new foods and medicines? Has this been privatised also?

John1585
31 August 2008
no

it's just not proven safe and each one has to be proven,plus we don't understand the harmony value of human nervous system yet

joliver
31 August 2008
no

This is an example of bad government by industry lobbyists! The worst is the illegalization of natural heirloom seeds, in Irag for example. http://www.countercurrents.org/iraq-cymru030305.htm

alakananda
31 August 2008
no

Organic fresh produce is the best thing for our children and for anyone. You are what you eat. The brain needs fresh, pure, unprocessed holistic nourishment. GM foods suppress the immune system. Think about that.

dh
31 August 2008
no

We need legislation that mandates the labeling of GM food. And government must required long-term safety testing.

rolando@freeserve.co.uk
31 August 2008
no

I would not feed my family any GM foods. They are a shot in the dark and food is not something to take risks with. One easy way out of food shortage is to eat less animal products. The production of animal food uses up to 10 times more resources than fruit and vegatables and causes huge pollution currently equal to that of transport. Forget GM, go the healthy way, less meet and more vegetables.

Rolando Ciaravaglia, Leominster

manos
31 August 2008
no

No need. non-GM is good enough for me - why go GM for?

jimsara
31 August 2008
no

Almost all lab attempts at genetic modification fail and produce very distorted life-forms. Why gamble the whole future of human food by releasing those few organisms that only appear to be normal? The organisms will continue to modify over time with untold and irreversible results.

Jim Anderson, Fairfield

Jas
31 August 2008
no

GM science is flawed and the results unreliable. Scientists should be more careful when it comes to tampering with such subtle levels of natural law. 'A little knowledge is a dangersous thing' and our scientific understanding of DNA & genetics is insufficient to allow mankind to take the enormous risk of damaging our most basic commodity - food.

Andrew Bulbeck
31 August 2008
no

Un-proven and potentially dangerous technology in the hands of huge Biotech corporations that want to control the world’s food supply by means of it’s patented proprietary genes.
Andrew, Oxford, UK

alarik
31 August 2008
no

corporations and gov regulatory bodies are treating humans as guinea pigs to make proftis...there is little save about what they are doing. The research that is available documents the flaws to human existence. This has very far reaching consequences to the health of the planet, species and the human race.

Thatcher
31 August 2008
no

I have never considered my children as "experimental". Their food sources should never be in question.

akachan
31 August 2008
no

"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and consciencious stupidity." -Martin Luther King, Jr.

We had the same story with DDT…and just as, the GM biotech’ industry is (again) about creating dependence (“crating a market”) and generating big revenues, not at all about really improving agriculture or helping poor people.

ellenfinkl
31 August 2008
no

No, and the only way I know to keep GM foods out of the house is to cook almost from scratch and buy organic foods. I'm a DES daughter, which means my mother took a drug, given to women in the 50's and 60's, to prevent miscarriages. No one could have imagined that the negative side effects would turn up in the mothers' children 20 years later, but that's what happened! So, I don't experiment with my children's food -- or with mine.

kenjross
01 September 2008
no

No one understands the long-term impacts of these foods and it is incredibly irresponsible for the biotech companies to be marekting them without numerous multi-year safety studies.

Osage
01 September 2008
no

All of my reading suggests that untold damage to reproductive capability may result from GMOS, which involve carrier virus and imprecise altering of DNA. Children are most vulnerable and future generations may have not way of recovering from this experiment. And for what? So that pesticide companies can make more money?

peter.kneip
01 September 2008
no

We are working with a technology that is only partly understood. Nature built in natural barriers to disable mixing of DNS from different species. Now we break this barrier. There are too many tests that suggests there are problems when eating GM food. The pesticide companies are just too eager to get there investment back than proving that this technology is save. Governement should put a very tight grip on this technology as who has to pay when something goes wrong....

mountainman
01 September 2008
no

Until the GM industry and the government agree to proper epidemiological research comparing GM and non-GM food, we just have to believe the research that shows that animals ARE harmed by GM. The evidence shows a range of effects. Not even Tony Blair -- a rabid supporter of GM technology -- feeds GM food to his children. He knows too much!

rb
01 September 2008
no

Sooner or later a disastrous ineradicable crop will be sown and/or massive life poisoning will occur meanwhile the agri-business TNCs will strive for seed and herbicide monopoly and maximal financial gain, supported by gullible governments.

chrisdavid
01 September 2008
no

I believe GM foods to be much more dangerous than anyone yet knows. Giving OGMs to my children may effect their children's children for gererations to come.
Chris Higgins. Rome, Italy

babarji
01 September 2008
no

you have got to be kidding - GM is a massive and cynical experiment with humans.

Gordo
01 September 2008
no

A definite NO!
GMOs is world economics at its worst, creating divisions, dependencies and power struggles - therefore more war, more crime, more anger, more hatred - a reduction in human values at every level.

Jane O'Meara
01 September 2008
no

No!
and my children (age 10 &15 years ) are smart enough not to feed it to them selves!

Anne Palmer
01 September 2008
no

I read comment that GE/GM food is needed to "feed the poor". why on eath should the 'poor' have to be fed this Genetically Engineered food if WE do not want to eat it? T

mand0434
01 September 2008
no

Not ever!!!

meja102
02 September 2008
yes

Oh yeah, so much better than blue smarties...

Peekay
02 September 2008
yes

Great result so far. When global warming sends the world's crop yield down the swanny, there will be plenty food for me and mine that the rest of you decline to eat.

abla
02 September 2008
no

Many of my objections to GM use would be assuaged by legislation that ensured there was a choice i.e. ALLGM food should be labled as such and there should be a % of non-GM available for those who wish it - and not at a "premium" cost.

Emma1890
02 September 2008
no

We are told that using GM food will create more nutrition for developing countries, however, economists state that this would not be the case. We would just be ridding the world of true nature in a greedy bid to produce more.

swatantra nandanwar
02 September 2008
yes

Yes, but only as a last resort. I'd prefer normal food. We've got to get back to cultivating normal varieties, less use of fertilisers and pesticides and no more civil wars and greedy American and European farmers.

sonicdeathmonkey
02 September 2008
yes

I vote 'yes' because the technology, properly tested and controlled, is not the problem. The problem is the biotech companies who want to push poorly developed and potentially dangerous products onto third world farmers to get control of the entire food production and distribution system. Monsanto are unrefined evil. End of story.

nawawimohamad
03 September 2008
yes

There is no scientific proof that GM foods are harmful to humans,only speculation.

Subscribe

This week's New Statesman

Archive

Access 9 years
of the New Statesman

Quick Access to

Vote!

Should Darling have been bolder with the 45% tax rate?