Monsanto

Letter To The Editor Of The Independent

A Director of biotech firm Monsanto replies to a recent, critical leading article which argued that the courts should bring the biotechnology industry to account.

The Independent's editorial (25 October) made two claims that just aren't true.

Biotechnology has not given us crops that can tolerate higher doses of pesticides and weed-killer. If it had, there would be no market for GM crops. Why on earth would farmers choose to buy GM seeds if they had to fork out more money on weed-killer and pesticide?

The reality is that GM crops need less chemicals than conventional crops. The latest independent figures from the US department of agriculture show "significant decreases in herbicide use" as a result of farmers adopting GM soya. And pesticide reductions of up to 80 per cent have been achieved over the past three years with GM cotton.

Equally misleading is the suggestion that the "terminator gene" will force farmers to buy new seeds from their suppliers. "Terminator technology" doesn't even exist. It's no more than a concept and Monsanto has made a clear commitment not to develop this kind of technology commercially. But it's worth noting one agricultural practice that rarely gets a mention. Millions of farmers around the world already re-purchase seeds from suppliers every year. These seeds - known as hybrid seeds - can only be planted once if the yield and quality of the crop are to remain high.

So farmers go back for more because these seeds offer them value for money.

Of course, strict regulation of GM foods is essential and we support that. People have a right to know that the food they are buying is safe. And they have a right to choose, which is why Monsanto supports labelling of foods which contain GM.

It's important that there's a dialogue between the industry and its stakeholders about GM foods. But it serves no one if science fact starts to become science fiction.