TEXT 1 [Source: US Department of State; discussion paper]
A MORE PRODUCTIVE AGRICULTURAL SECTOR
It is important to understand that biotechnology has enormous potential benefits. Not least among these benefits is the potential to reduce the environmental impact of agriculture.
Some biotech crops can decrease the need for pesticides and herbicides to control pests, weeds, and plant diseases and allow more selective application of agricultural chemicals.
Scientists are also looking at ways to use biotech to deliver more nutrients and better taste in our foods. Damaging deficiencies in Vitamin A and other nutrients among the poor worldwide may well be addressed cost-effectively through biotech agriculture. Another potential benefit of biotech is increased income for farmers, both small and large. For example, biotechnology has improved the quality of seed grains and the ability to produce bigger harvests from currently cultivated land. Equally important, increased yields and reduced chemical and labour costs can represent increased income for the farmer. Finally, farmers can save in the cost of bringing their product to market with biotech crops that are easier to store, need no refrigeration, and have a longer shelf-life.
(Abriged from) Larsen, Alan. "Biotechnology: Finding a practical approach to a promising technology." Economic Perspectives, October 1999.
http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/ites/1099/ijee/bio-larson.htm (8 January 2004),
TEXT 2 [Source: The Soil Association (organisation promoting organic farming); summary of research survey]
Genetically engineered food: still unlabelled and untested, Greenpeace, 2001
This survey of the scientific literature on GMOs found that at this time there had been only three published studies of the health effects of consuming GMOs, and none of these animal feeding trials were longer than 70 days. Other published studies that have been used as evidence of safety by the Government and biotechnology companies were in fact only tests of the health effects of the modified protein, not the whole GMO, i.e. most existing 'safety' studies have not tested the side effects of the engineering process which is the main health concern.
The Soil Association. "Evidence of the benefits of organic farming." 26 July 2002
http://www.soilassociation.org/sa/saweb.nsf/librarytites/Briefing_Sheets05092001 (8 January 2004).
TEXT 3 (Source: Monsanto (biotechnology company); media briefing)
Q: How are foods produced using biotechnology established as safe and adequately regulated?
A: Years of research and testing have shown that, commercially available foods developed through agricultural biotechnology are substantially equivalent to foods developed through traditional plant breeding and are safe to eat. The term "substantially equivalent" is used by scientists and regulatory agencies to indicate that the composition of these foods is basically the same as conventional foods and that the nutritional content is the same.
Among others, the Nuffield Council on Bioethics, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), World Health Organization (WHO), International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) and the National Academy of Sciences of seven nations have all confirmed the safety of biotech products.
Monsanto Company. "Media briefing FAQs."
http://www.monsanto.com/monsanto/media/press_kit/faqs/defauit.htm (11 May 2002).
TEXT 4 (Source; Monsanto (biotechnology company); media briefing}
Q: Despite claims otherwise, isn't it true that agricultural biotechnology cannot relieve world hunger?
A: No one with any real knowledge of the subject would claim that agricultural biotechnology alone can relieve world hunger. However, without the contributions of agricultural biotechnology, it will be difficult, if not impossible, to relieve world, hunger.
Such organizations as the Nuffield Council on Bioethics, World Bank, World Health Organization (WHO) and Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) have indicated that agricultural biotechnology will help alleviate world hunger by increasing food production. Biotechnology can increase the quantity of the harvest by addressing the factors that traditionally deplete crops: pests, weeds and disease. Furthermore, biotech crops will grow in inhospitable climates making it possible to farm in areas that have previously been uncultivated.
Monsanto Company. "Media briefing FAQs."
http://www.monsanto.com/monsanto/media/press_kit/faqs/default.htm (11 May 2002).
TEXT 5 (Source: The Soil Association (organisation promoting organic farming); summary of UN .report)
Agriculture: Towards 2015/30, Technical Report, FAO, April 2000
This United Nations report shows that: GM crops are not needed to feed the world's growing population. Several forward projections to 2030 when the world's population is expected to be over 8 billion, found that, leaving aside GM crops, the potential of current agricultural resources and technological knowledge are already sufficient to ensure that total crop production "will exceed population growth".
The Soil Association, "Evidence of the benefits of organic farming." 26 July 2002.
http://www.soilassociation.org/sa/saweb.nsf/librarytites/Briefing_Sheets05092001 (8 January 2004).
TEXT 6 (Source: Independent on Sunday (UK newspaper); news report)
GM FOOD WILL NOT EASE HUNGER
BY GEOFFREY LEAN
Environment Editor
Britain's top aid charities have told the Prime Minister that genetically modified foods will not solve world hunger, but may actually increase poverty and malnutrition.
Their intervention - in a joint submission to the Government's official debate on GM crops and foods - strikes a devastating blow at a central plank of its support for the controversial technology.
The charity leaders say claims that GM crops will feed the world are "misleading and fail to address the complexities of poverty reduction". They acknowledge that the technology may have "potential benefits" but are concerned they will not help the small farmers and poor people in the rural Third World where their groups have practical experience.
The charities say GM crops are likely to create more poverty. They point out that hunger is not caused by a shortage of food, but because the poor cannot afford to buy it.
In the past, new agricultural technologies have tended to be taken up by rich farmers. They increase production and force poor farmers out of business.
The charities fear that introducing GM will have even more catastrophic effects because it is dominated by a few multinational companies.
Lean, Geoffrey. "GM food will not ease hunger." Independent on Sunday, 10 November 2002:2,