The Royal Society

In two submissions to the Government-sponsored GM Science Review, the Royal Society points out that the potential for GM ingredients to reduce the nutritional quality of foods or to cause allergic reactions is in principle no different to that for non-GM ingredients. Furthermore, there is no credible evidence that human health can be damaged by eating DNA sequences created by the genetic modification of foodstuff ingredients.

Professor Patrick Bateson, Vice-President and Biological Secretary of the Royal Society, said: “We conducted a major review of the evidence about GM plants and human health last year, and we have not seen any evidence since then that changes our original conclusions. If credible evidence does exist that GM foods are more harmful to people than non-GM foods, we should like to know why it has not been made public.”

He added: “The public have been told for several years that GM foods are inherently unsafe to eat. Most people would like to know what evidence exists to back up such claims. We have examined the results of published research, and have found nothing to indicate that GM foods are inherently unsafe. If anybody does have convincing evidence, get it out in the open so that it can be evaluated.

“The public have a right to decide whether they want to buy GM foods, and are entitled to have access to sensible and informed advice, based on sound science. It is disappointing to find a group like Greenpeace stating on its website that “the risks are enormous and the consequences potentially catastrophic”, without offering any solid reasons to support such a claim.”

Professor Bateson said: “Undoubtedly some important questions need to be answered about the potential impact, good or bad, of GM crops on the environment. But these should be addressed without a smokescreen of unfounded claims about their threat to human health.”

“A recent opinion poll showed that the majority of the public are opposed to GM foods. Many consumers have been made anxious by unsubstantiated claims about the safety of GM foods. The developers of GM products also have not successfully demonstrated to consumers what benefits they offer compared to conventional foods.”

The Society’s submissions also draw attention to some areas of food regulation that should be addressed to ensure that all foods, including those containing GM ingredients, are assessed properly. Professor Bateson said: “The public expect regulations to keep abreast of new developments in the way food is made, and to be just as effective for both GM and non-GM foods. We understand that the Food Standards Agency has taken on board the recommendations we made in our report last year and is taking action to address the issues we highlighted.”

Click here to read a related article from BBC News

The Royal Society has submitted evidence to the GM Science Review:

Genetically modified plants for food use and human health
The regulatory process and human health

References to Greenpeace in the above stories are from the following Greenpeace report:

"Crops of Uncertain Nature? Controversies and Knowledge Gaps Concerning Genetically Modified Crops." August 2000 Commissioned by Greenpeace Netherlands, Amsterdam A.J.C. de Visser, E.H. Nijhuis, J.D. van Elsas & T.A. Dueck. Plant Research International B.V., Wageningen.