Photo courtesy of The Globe and Mail

In writing about the pro-biotech speech by British environmental activist Mark Lynas, during which he publicly apologized for years of anti-biotech activities, Canadian commentator Margaret Wente says the tremendous stir it caused may mark a turning of the tide of public opinion.

“People are hungry to hear from a new generation of environmental moderates who value science and pragmatism over ideology and absolutes,” Wente wrote in her column in The Globe and Mail, Canada’s largest national newspaper. “They want to hear from those like Mr. Lynas, who think technology can be a force for good, and want to find practical approaches to environmental problems.”

Lynas himself sees a shift in opinion, Ms. Wente wrote, quoting him from an interview.

“Something has moved in the terms of this debate,” she quoted Lynas as saying. “It’s like the cresting of a wave. It’s as if everyone has simultaneously realized that the anti-GM movement doesn’t actually have anything backing it up,” he said.

Ms. Wente wrote that her own opinion is: “In the teeth of all the evidence, there’s simply no argument - moral, economic, scientific, political or any other kind - for opposing agricultural biotechnology…The fight against biotech is, at root, a contest between the aesthetic preferences of the developed world’s urban elites and people in India and Africa who don’t have enough to eat.”

Lynas, she wrote, felt a moral responsibility for his years of anti-biotech activities, which included tearing up test plots in Britain.

“That’s why Mr. Lynas went public, as loudly and eloquently as he could,” she wrote. She quoted him as saying: “I’ve felt a strong burden of moral responsibility for having effectively told an enormous lie for many years,” he told me. “I was pushed by my own conscience.” Read more.

“For the record, here and upfront, I apologize for having spent several years ripping up GM crops,” Lynas told the Oxford Farming Conference in England Thursday.  “I am also sorry that I helped to start the anti-GM movement back in the mid 1990s, and that I thereby assisted in demonizing an important technological option which can be used to benefit the environment.”  Text and video of his presentation are available here.

Lynas is the author of “The God Species: Saving the Planet in the Age of Humans” (published by National Geographic) and other books on environmental challenges. 

“As an environmentalist, and someone who believes that everyone in this world has a right to a healthy and nutritious diet of their choosing, I could not have chosen a more counter-productive path,” Lynas said of his participation in attacks on GM test plots, a common feature of British anti-GM activism.  “I now regret it completely.”

Lynas said he educated himself on science as part of his study of climate change and came to realize that the arguments against GM crops are mainly “green urban myths.”

“I’d assumed that GM was dangerous. It turned out that it was safer and more precise than conventional breeding,” Lynas said.

“The GM debate is over,” he said.  “It is finished. We no longer need to discuss whether or not it is safe - over a decade and a half with three trillion GM meals eaten there has never been a single substantiated case of harm. You are more likely to get hit by an asteroid than to get hurt by GM food.”

“So my message to the anti-GM lobby, from the ranks of the British aristocrats and celebrity chefs to the US foodies to the peasant groups of India, is this,” he said.  “You are entitled to your views. But you must know by now that they are not supported by science. We are coming to a crunch point, and for the sake of both people and the planet, now is the time for you to get out of the way and let the rest of us get on with feeding the world sustainably.”

“The fight against genetically modified organisms is fueled more by fear and guesswork than by responsible evidence,” the article says. No credible scientific studies have shown that GM crops present a greater health risk than conventionally produced crops, it points out citing the position of the American Medical Association.

Furthermore, it says that labels are unnecessary because consumers can already identify GM foods: “These days, it’s a pretty safe bet that if you buy virtually any processed food, GMOs played a part in its manufacture; no label is necessary. Those who want non-GMO foods may look for the “USDA Organic” label, which indicates that no genetic modification took place.” Read more.

“It’s a huge challenge, and biotech crops are leading the way in allowing us to address it,” Carter said in a talk at a TEDx conference. Carter’s company is bringing out the Arctic Apple, which doesn’t turn brown when sliced.

Carter took on the claims by biotech opponents that the technology is unsafe, pointing out that the food safety of genetically engineered crops has been affirmed by the American Medical Association, World Health Organization, and Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, among other distinguished groups.

Biotechnology reduces food waste, makes better use of water, increases yields, improves farmer income, and improves people’s lives, Carter said.

A video of his presentation is available here.

Conference speakers cited several innovations in agriculture that enable farmers to grow more food on less land, with fewer inputs and a smaller environmental footprint. These include better soil management practices, improved water conservation methods, the use of GPS technology and other smart applications, better nutrient management systems, and the development, maturation and utilization of agriculture biotechnology crops.

Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack said innovations in crop genetics helped farmers cope with last summer’s drought. “We just suffered through the most serious drought that this country has faced since the 1930s. Had we faced this drought without seed genetics, we would have seen serious crop losses. We still had a corn crop ranked in the top 10 in productivity in U.S. history. And it’s a result of seed genetics and innovation. And it’s a result of farmers embracing new planting technologies that allow us to preserve and conserve water resources and still maintain and provide a crop,” he said.

Greg Page, CEO of Cargill, said next-generation biotechnology advances will not only help farmers better cope with extreme climate events, but provide consumers with more nutritional and healthier foods.

Blake Hurst, president of the Missouri Farm Bureau and a corn and soybean farmer, said that while the benefits of biotechnology are clear to farmers, they are not widely appreciated by consumers. He said farmers need to build trust with consumers that regulatory structures are in place to ensure a safe food supply, which are based on sound science through years of research, testing and trials conducted before any food product is commercialized.

The Chamber released a study, Agricultural Abundance: An American Innovation Story, authored by Nick Schulz, Editor in Chief of The American and a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, which highlights major areas of agricultural innovation. Read more.

Secretary Paterson’s pro-biotech stance was echoed by the British government, which confirmed that it was encouraging European Commission officials to make it easier for farmers to grow GM crops. “We think this should be based on the science and we need to ensure public safety, but if we can speed up a slow [regulatory] system then we should do that,” the Prime Minister’s official spokesperson explained. Read more.

Initial results of these field trials were positive, and the positive feedback has continued. This week, Syngenta announced that expanded results from 2012 field trials confirmed the drought-resistant variety’s impressive yields, reinforcing the importance of the role of agricultural technologies in mitigating the effects of drought on the U.S. and global food supply in the future.

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) presented a final statement on Wednesday that reaffirmed its initial assessment that “the authors’ conclusions cannot be regarded as scientifically sound because of inadequacies in the design, reporting and analysis of the study as outlined in the paper.”

EFSA noted the emergence of a broad European consensus, as each of the six assessments conducted independently by member states had determined that Séralini’s conclusions regarding the safety of GM corn were not supported by the data presented in the study. Read more.

“During the past decade, widespread adoption of an insect-resistant, genetically engineered crop called Bt-cotton has drastically reduced the use of chemical pesticides in cotton fields, enhanced food security and improved farmers’ bottom line,” he noted in The Wall Street Journal. Miller, who is a fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, added that economists Graham Brookes and Peter Barfoot estimate that the pest-resistant Bt-cotton boosted India’s economy by $9.4 billion between 2002 and 2010 and by $2.5 billion in 2010 alone. Read more.

“We’re a very productive country,” says Dr. Thomas Carter, research geneticist at the USDA Agricultural Research Service. “We are a breadbasket for the world…we’re seeing greater technological innovation, from the lab to the field.”

Thanks to modern farming techniques, America’s farmers are producing more food than ever before on fewer acres. Among recent innovations in agriculture is the use of seeds improved with biotechnology - using scientific research to enhance the plant’s ability to resist harmful pests, more effectively utilize water, and allow the farmer to control weeds more efficiently.

“Continued research and breeding, including the use of biotechnology, is essential in developing varieties that can survive and sustain economic yields despite seasonal droughts and higher temperatures we expect in the future,” says Dr. Kent Bradford, professor and director of the Seed Biotechnology Center at the University of California, Davis. Read more.