The Times

Few specialist researchers believe that the Cornell or Iowa State studies prove anything of the kind. Even as his work was published, Cornell's Dr Losey himself sounded caveats. New research into the actual effects of GM maize on monarchs in the wild has now cast further doubt on the environmentalists claims. Yet while Dr Loseys 1999 study was reported on front pages, the latest findings have barely had a hearing in Britain.

The data is now starting to pour in, and it is not to the environmentalists liking. At the end of last month, entymologists from universities across the US and Canada gathered at a conference in Chicago to discuss the first results of field trials launched in the wake of the Cornell study. The message was strikingly different from Lord Melchetts. In separate experiments conducted in cornfields in Minnesota, Iowa, Maryland, Michigan and Ontario, researchers from different universities found no significant differences between butterfly survival in areas planted with GM maize, and those planted with conventional crops. If there are any differences out there, they arent very profound, said Richard Hellmich, an entymologist from the US Department of Agriculture, attached to Iowa State University.

As Guy Poppy, a leading British entymologist, says: The Cornell study just identified that Bt corn could be hazardous to monarch butterflies: if a monarch has no choice and eats Bt corn, most will die. What is really important, though, is quite how widespread the hazard actually is in nature. We now have a string of studies that suggest the hazard is remote. But as the first study was the worst case scenario, it is the one everyone remembers.