Mark Lynas’s recent apology for his years of anti-GMO activism and subsequent expression of support for the technology has shifted the entire debate surrounding GMOs, according to Forbes‘ Richard Levick. Levick wrote that that the environmental activist’s speech “wasn’t just an acknowledgement of error. It was the recantation of an agenda.”

Such an about-face based on scientific inquiry by a notable environmentalist strengthens the case for ag biotech, while widening the perimeters of debate. “We hope that the tremendous reaction to the speech by Mark Lynas serves as evidence that honest consideration of the science will change minds about agricultural biotechnology,” says Dr. Cathleen Enright, executive director of the Council for Biotechnology Information in Washington, D.C.

Levick concludes: “The challenge posed to the environmentalists is to rely on science everywhere or rely on it nowhere. If they opt for science, they may discover, or at least need to consider, what Lynas came to believe: that, for example, GM does not increase the use of chemicals as pest-resistant cotton and maize require less insecticide. Or that the mixing of genes between unrelated species is no more unnatural than the gene flows that have driven evolution since life began.” Read more.

After scientists internationally widely disclaimed a study on rats claiming ill effects from exposure to genetically modified foods-it appears that one pragmatic group of scientists from the University of Cambridge have found a use for it.

“I am grateful for the authors for publishing this paper, as it provides a fine case study for teaching a statistics class about poor design, analysis and reporting. I shall start using it immediately,” said the Statistical Laboratory at Cambridge University, according to Examiner.com.

Other scientists and reporters continued to condemn the French study, pointing to its reliance on emotional claims rather than sound, scientific evidence. Here are some of their comments from this week:

“There were problems with the sample sizes, issues about the types of rats used and questions about why, if the genetically engineered corn was the culprit, rats that ate a lot of the corn did not get as sick as those that ate more moderate amounts. Perhaps the most troubling aspect of the study, though, is the effort made by the researchers to ensure that the first wave of coverage of their study would include no criticism of it.” - Los Angeles Times

“The study came as quite a surprise to scientists. Reputable regulatory and health agencies in the U.S. and EU that have looked closely at GMOs found them safe, as have the National Academy of Sciences and the British Royal Academy.” - Forbes

“Within 24 hours, the study’s credibility was shredded by scores of scientists. The consensus judgment was swift and damning: The study was riddled with errors-serious, blatantly obvious flaws that should have been caught by peer reviewers.” - Slate

“What we need in the GMO controversy is reasoned argument, not scandalous headlines…The study shows nothing like that. What it does show is the readiness of some GMO opponents to jump on a questionable study to promote their fearmongering agenda.” - Montreal Gazette

Remember Mark Twain’s famous quote about “lies, damned lies and statistics”? Add to that list the widely-disclaimed junk science of the Seralini study.

Bolivian farmers welcome government decision to allow GM crops

According to Bloomberg Businessweek, Bolivian farmers suffering harsh weather conditions are calling on the government to remove export restrictions on corn, wheat, soybeans and other staple foods. The article points out that farmers welcomed President Evo Morales’s decision to sign a bill allowing the introduction of most genetically modified (GM) crops. Read more.

Forbes blog: Federal Government regulations are inhibiting technology innovations

A Forbes blog says the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) should reduce burdensome regulations for ag biotech crops. Dr. Henry Miller, Robert Wesson Fellow in Scientific Philosophy and Public Policy at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution and former Founding Director of the Office of Biotechnology at the FDA, points out that bureaucratic hurdles have “inhibited research and development.”  Read more.

Research on GM wheat could improve yields and drought tolerance

The New York Times reports that GM research by private companies could lead to drought-tolerant and high-yield genetically modified wheat. Research focuses on “strengthening the rooting structure of wheat, enhancing the intake of water, increasing the plant’s biomass and facilitating CO2 absorption.” Read more.

Increasing number of African countries conducting GM crop trials

According to Reuters, more African countries are likely to start growing genetically modified crops. Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Malawi, Mali, Zimbabwe, Nigeria and Ghana are conducting research and field trials of GM crops such as rice, wheat and sorghum, which may lead to their adoption. Ephraim Mukisira, a director at the Kenya Agricultural Research Institute, said, “We should rely on biotechnology to prevent further losses in yields and performance of crops. We need to expedite scientific methods that reduce time needed to develop new crop varieties.” Read more.

Forbes blog: Regulation of GM crops hurts agricultural trade

In a Forbes blog, Dr. Henry Miller, founding director of the Office of Biotechnology at the FDA and current fellow at the Hoover Institution, says that “discriminatory” government regulations of genetically modified crops around the world have unintended economic consequences, such as disrupting billions of dollars of agricultural trade in export markets. 

“The best and most definitive solution of all would be for the harmonization of regulatory approaches in order to eliminate the existing discrimination against and excessive regulation of innocuous genetically engineered plants.” Read more.

Brigham Young University professor says biotech crops have a long history of success

In the The Daily Herald, Professor of Biology at Brigham Young University Duane Jeffrey says that genetic modification has been around for a long time and many of the concerns about biotech crops have not been verified by facts. The article points out, “This process has been going on for millennia. Indeed, the only common crop I can think of that may not have been so modified is the pine nut.” Over the past 15 years since biotech crops were first planted, the number of hectares of biotech crops has expanded 87 times. “By now, the major concerns, both those with some basis in science and some without, have hugely been laid to rest, and it is time to get on with reality.“ Read more.

Forbes blog: nutrition benefits of GM food could help fight obesity

According to a Forbes blog, policy makers committed to fighting obesity should deregulate genetically modified foods because they provide health and economic benefits. Dr. Henry Miller, founding director of the Office of Biotechnology at the FDA and current fellow at the Hoover Institution, says, “The adoption of scientifically sound, risk-based regulation of biotechnology by USDA and EPA could transform the current trickle of commercial products into a torrent. The result would be the founding of new companies; new products; and the creation of jobs and new wealth - as well as lower prices and greater availability of healthful fresh fruits and vegetables. Read more.

USDA Sec. Vilsack calls for recognition of farmers on National Ag Day

According to the Morris Sun Tribune, USDA Sec. Tom Vilsack recognized the valuable contributions of farmers and ranchers on National Ag Day. “Agriculture touches everyone’s life in one way or another, yet our farmers and ranchers can often be overlooked for the important work they do, and we should all take time during this day to thank producers for a job well done,” Vilsack said. Read more.