Do Activist Tactics Promote Or Hinder Open Debate About GM Foods?

Please find below a representative sampling of submissions since this discussion was launched in early January 1999. Some submissions have been edited for length. Submissions which were not accompanied by a name, location, and valid e-mail address and those that did not pertain to the topic or used profanity were omitted.

I believe that these test crops should be left as they are and not vandalised so as proper test and examinations can be performed but each to their own oppinion...

Tom Stephenson
UK
tom@step19.freeserve.co.uk

Bst is bad for people and animals...the european governments say so...and the canadian government agrees...what is the matter with you people...stop selling harmful products...

Harold Ramis
France
fob@ix.netcom.com

It seem like a good idea, but won't it make the rich, richer and the poor, poorer? Is it suitable for human consumption without leaving any side effects?

Diane Hurst
Oldham, Lancs
dianehirst@hotmail.com

People are responding to the unbelievably cynical and complacent attitude displayed by your company. They are not happy about what you are doing and feel powerless to express their very deeply held misgivings in any other way. What reaction do you expect? You are attempting to hijack the worlds food supply, what you are doing is not acceptable to democratic people.

Organic food sales grew in Britain by 40% last year, projected to be even more this year. Yes it is undemocratic for people to destroy your test sites, but introducing your GM soya in the way you did is a much worse crime in my opinion.

Steve Jones
Wales, UK
ata@cleanslate.force9.co.uk

World wide culture is stopping technology improvement. I'm sure biotechnology will be seen in a better way in the next 20 years. Anyway, there is no gain today in wasting a GMO test.

Denis
Italy
madmaniac@beer.com

What are the implications and uses of genetic engineering, both good and bad?

Nicky
London
miss_magik@yahoo.com

Surely the actions of various activist groups is not the true issue here?

At the end of the day, whether you agree with GM foods or not, everyone has (in my opinion) the right to know what they are eating, and an equal right to have a choice if they are unhappy.

If Monsanto, Lord Sainsbury, Tony Blair or whoever else, is perfectly happy to risk the futures of themselves and their families, then so be it, but at least give the rest of us a choice.

I am told by many people that GM foods should not be banned, but unless there are much stricter controls brought into effect immediately, then I feel that mankind could quite happily continue to exist without this excessive manipulation. What gives us the right to play God anyway?

Amanda Clarke
Essex, England
amandadc@hotmail.com

It seems in my opinion that this GM issue is a very important issue and one which requires a detailed understanding before someone of influence (i.e the media and other's) should voice there opinion. I believe that I have researched a great deal on this issue and I have looked both sides of this argument and I believe that GM foods set the way forward for "safer" foods because in general GM crops will be treated with less chemicals which has to be good news for the consumer.

Another thing most of the people who object to GM foods don't seem to realise is that the process of altering plants DNA is far from a new idea in fact it goes back to the last century when the first plant hybrids were produced by plant breeder's this resulted in crops with larger yields and better quality. In that case up to 50% of the plant's genes could have been changed whereas with GM plants in most cases only 1 or 2 genes are changed. It seems we suffered no ill effects in the last 100 years from what is considered more worrying manipulations, so why should we be so concerned now. GM crops could very important in solving the problem of famine in third world countries which until now seemed out of human control. Crops with a greater resistance to drought and disease could be engineered, which would have the potential to wipe out famine. It is for this reason that I think the concerned groups need to get things into perspective. They talk of organic crops being the way forward. Is organic farming going to feed the starving? I think not.

The key to this debate is a greater understanding of the issue by everyone because it seems that those who know very little on the issue are the one's who are in greatest fear.

Edmund Garry
Ireland
yr398053@cs.may.ie

How has the Weather Action programme assisted your production yields and your understanding of plant growth in certain weather conditions?

Neil McKnight
Queen's University, Belfast
M9640541.qub.co.uk

Don't you think that publicised vandalism is the only way individuals can be heard over the top of the voice of such huge corporations such as yourself who have wealth and power to get your own interest messages out to the world populace? I personally think that if the the world needs GMO crop cultivation then we are just applying band-aid solutions to a drastic situation. I would like to choose the kinds of foods put into my body, such as foods nature intended, but as I understand Monsanto wants to patent seeds and spread non-self propagating plants into the world wide market. Saturation equals domination. It's a frightening thing to hear that engineered genes cannot be recalled once they are put out into the ecosystem. Negligent and irresponsible.

D. Dwyer
Canberra, Australia
ss3159769@bohm.anu.au

I feel that biotechnology can be beneficial - if it is tested and proven to be safe. There are many benefits from the use of biotechnology in agriculture and other areas. For all of those who are environmentalists, think about this hypothetical situation: A very rare species of animal is almost extinct, because of people. Cloning and other procedures could be used to bring up the numbers and hopefully, in time, get the animal off the endangered species list.

I agree that there are very real risks to biotechnology and every precaution possible should be taken to prevent a disaster. Monsanto and other companies should have to test their products for years before they are released to the public, and then, they should be labeled as GM foods. I have found that many people are misinformed, or completely uninformed about the risks and benefits of genetically modified foods. Before you jump to conclusions, get all of the information you can find and make an educated decision.

Cari Clayton
Minnesota, United States
cclayton@means.net

I feel this debate is all rather one-sided and would like to stick just one hand up for Monsanto and their corporate friends.

Large faceless multi-national corporations do not just appear. They are built up over years, decades, even centuries of hard work selling products that the public want. Without a good product there is no sale, with no sale there is no profit, with no profit there is no reinvestment and without reinvestment there is no enlargement.

So next time you blame the 'satanic corporations' take a look at why they are there and consider that every small business in the country would like to be in their position.

Where Microsoft and Virgin are the winners are that they put a face at the front. Billy and Ricky can both take the praise and the blame whilst allowing their companies to carry on trading unaffected.

My one criticism of you Monsanto is your total inability to market yourselves. How much money do you spend on communications and the media, £10 - 20?

Get out there and tell people what you are doing.

Charlie Cowan
Royal Agricultural College
charles.cowan@royagcol.ac.uk

The most amazing thing about the British is they are well protected against "old-fashioned" terrorism (with guns), due to the Ireland situation. They even have special laws to protect the country. At the same time, they have proven extraordinarily vulnerable to attacks of "mis-informational terrorism", as recently evidenced by Greenpeace's success in creating the GM scare.

In other words, I have little doubt that Greenpeace specifically targeted the UK for terrorist campaigns -- using misinformation instead of guns -- since they knew they had a vulnerable victim, due to the unfortunate BSE "mad cow" scare. I don't think the politicians know this yet, but I think the UK Royal Society has figured it out.

In a modern technological world, information can be used like a weapon, and its much harder for such criminals to get caught. For example, run around in London with a gun, you'll be jailed. Run around spreading bad science and causing damages -- as the Royal Society describes -- and the government is dumbfounded and powerless.

The Royal Society was so very correct. Last night, I was reading messages from an English lady who was afraid her backyard gardens would be "attacked" by GM pollen. And then there are several other folks worried that the "land value will go down due to GM crops". It was then I felt really bad about this in a human way, and understood how the Royal Society's words rang true. There are human damages from misinformation. The UK government needs to be so very careful in pointing fingers. The true criminal could be running away in the opposite direction.

Dan Spillane
United States
CFSeattle@aol.com

Having read through the comments already left, it is clear that the majority of people commenting have reservations about this new technology, and the ethics of companies like Monsanto. I would like to hear Monsanto's response to the comments so far. What do they intend to do in response to the issues raised by those who have commented?

Claire Brady
Edinburgh, UK
claire@moebius.psy.ed.ac.uk

Does Monsanto believe that their seed technology will help to cultivate new food for the third world?

If this is true, then maybe they were unaware to the fact that there is already enough food for every single human being in the world. Thus, the advertising 'hook' of a wonder food-source is a little naive.

Why bother to contribute to this farcical website? Monsanto will not directly, and intelligently answer these messages. Haven't you folks heard of the term "keep your friends near, but keep your enemies closer"? Basically, this whole page is just a doodle pad, designed to appear that Monsanto are 'listening', while you put your energy against them into a pointless message to them.

Craig Bennett
UK
ade80334@port.ac.uk

I am an Irish woman living in Sweden who happens to have a rather keen interest in the current controversy surrounding the recent G.M. foods debate. Sweden as you may be aware has a reputation for the highest standards in environmental awareness and protection. As you may also be aware there is a strong opposition amongst the general public to the introduction of GM foods here, and until such time as both the Swedish government and ordinary consumers believe that GMO. Foods are 100% safe such scepticism and opposition will continue.

I personally will never be persuaded of the need for these new "products". Myself and many other people will continue to be very much opposed to the idea of being used as guinea pigs to test these new foods. I shall continue to boycott GMOs, and urge my friends to do likewise, until such time as the threat to public health and the environment is eradicated by the removal of these products from supermarket shelves. You will doubtless have found to your cost that we in Europe are not as easily taken in by your slick PR machine´s attempts to try to explain just why we should be buying these unnecessary and dangerous products. Perhaps we´re not as gullible as U.S. consumers seem to be.

I and many others like me will continue to support farmers who choose to produce safe and healthy food, in particular organic produce. I shall also continue to support groups such as, in my own country Genetic Concern who work to bring to the publics attention the potential damage which will be inflicted if crop trials are allowed to continue.

Christina Power
Sweden
power@.utfors.se

Why do we need it when the European Union is agonising over food, mountains and lakes and are now totally revising the Common Agricultural Policy and its subsidies to farmers. All this is because of 'over production' (in the western world) - a global political solution, not a genetic one is what is required!

Tony Stoneman
Wiltshire, UK
tony@stoneman1.freeserve.co.uk

The destruction by activists of GMO test plantings, whilst not acceptable as a sustained tactic in what will inevitably be an ideological, or even philosophical debate, is nevertheless justifiable as a protest against the undemocratic release into the environment of a new bio-technology. Polls show that there is considerable public resistance to GMOs and a perception that all possible risks have not been addressed.

Colin Johnston
West of Ireland
roundhouse@postmaster.co.uk

I personally think too much fuss is being made by certain environmental bodies.

Wright
Hertfordshire, UK
aldbury@tesco.net

You must first ask yourselves why this kind of activity is brought about in the first place? Why do people go to these extremes at all? Is it because they fear the railroading power of multinational corporations like yourselves and feel disempowered by the legally available options to demonstrate their concern. The loss to your company was minimal but it served to bring the debate into the public domain where it should have been all along! Nick Chase
University of East Anglia, UK
n.chase@uea.ac.uk

I am amused by how injured you are making yourself sound on these pages. You are saying that you will display arguments from both sides yet your background materials are clearly one sided.

My personal view is that they (the activists) are promoting a fair case, not hindering it. After all we are already eating GM Foods that we did not even know about. Even the fast food companies have been shocked by the amount of GM foods they have been using. It seems to me that you are the company that have been underhanded. Not telling us and the industry what they were using and how it had been affected.

The activists are just using your own tactics, when you are fair to us I think that people should be fair to you. You are only getting what you deserve.

Jemina
London, UK
Jemina_puddleduck@yahoo.co.uk

Next Page