GM Watch
  • Main Menu
    • Home
    • News
      • Newsletter subscription
      • News Reviews
      • News Languages
        • Notícias em Português
        • Nieuws in het Nederlands
        • Nachrichten in Deutsch
      • Archive
    • Articles
      • GM Myth Makers
      • GM Reports
      • GM Quotes
      • GM Myths
      • Non-GM successes
      • GM Firms
        • Monsanto: a history
        • Monsanto: resources
        • Bayer: a history
        • Bayer: resources
    • Videos
      • Latest Videos
      • Must see videos
      • Agriculture videos
      • Labeling videos
      • Animals videos
      • Corporations videos
      • Corporate takeover videos
      • Contamination videos
      • Latin America videos
      • India videos
      • Asia videos
      • Food safety videos
      • Songs videos
      • Protests videos
      • Biofuel myths videos
      • Index of GM crops and foods
      • Index of speakers
      • Health Effects
    • Contact
    • About
    • Donations
News and comment on genetically modified foods and their associated pesticides    
  • News
    • Newsletter subscription
    • News Reviews
    • News Languages
      • Notícias em Português
      • Nieuws in het Nederlands
      • Nachrichten in Deutsch
    • Archive
      • 2022 articles
  • Articles
    • GM Myth Makers
    • GM Reports
    • GM Quotes
    • GM Myths
    • Non-GM successes
    • GM Firms
      • Monsanto: a history
      • Monsanto: resources
      • Bayer: a history
      • Bayer: resources
  • Donations
  • Videos
    • Index of speakers
    • Glyphosate Videos
    • Latest Videos
    • Must see videos
    • Health Effects
    • Agriculture videos
    • Labeling videos
    • Animals videos
    • Corporations videos
    • Corporate takeover videos
    • Contamination videos
    • Latin America videos
    • India videos
    • Asia videos
    • Food safety videos
    • Songs videos
    • Protests videos
    • Biofuel myths videos
    • Index of GM crops and foods
  • Contact
  • About
SUBSCRIBE TO REVIEWS

GMWatch Facebook cornfield banner

INTRODUCTION TO GM

GMO Myths and Facts front page.jpg

SCIENCE SUPPORTS REGULATION OF GENE EDITING

Plant tissue cultures

GENE EDITING: UNEXPECTED OUTCOMES AND RISKS

Damaged DNA on fire

GENE EDITING MYTHS AND REALITY

A guide through the smokescreen

Gene Editing Myths and Reality

ON-TARGET EFFECTS OF GENE EDITING

Damaged DNA

News Menu

  • Latest News
  • News Reviews
  • Archive
  • Languages

News Archive

  • 2023 articles
  • 2022 articles
  • 2021 articles
  • 2020 articles
  • 2019 articles
  • 2018 articles
  • 2017 articles
  • 2016 articles
  • 2015 articles
  • 2014 articles
  • 2013 articles
  • 2012 articles
  • 2011 articles
  • 2010 articles
  • 2009 articles
  • 2008 articles
  • 2007 articles
  • 2006 articles
  • 2005 articles
  • 2004 articles
  • 2003 articles
  • 2002 articles
  • 2001 articles
  • 2000 articles

Please support GMWatch

Donations

You can donate via Paypal or credit/debit card.

Some of you have opted to give a regular donation. This is greatly appreciated as it helps place us on a more stable financial basis. Thank you for your support!

Enviro secretary Gove says genome-edited animals could be allowed in UK after Brexit

  • Print
  • Email
Details
Published: 05 January 2018
Twitter

Extending the practice from crops to livestock would be likely to trigger protests, says Mail Online report

UK environment secretary Michael Gove has been enthusing about the prospect of opening up the country to genome-edited animals in the wake of Brexit, as the article below from the Mail Online reports.

In messianic words that are all too familiar from the way UK politicians promoted the first generation of GM crops, Gove claimed that "Gene editing technology could help us to remove vulnerabilities to illness, develop higher yielding crops or more valuable livestock, indeed potentially even allow mankind to conquer the diseases to which we are vulnerable. Food in abundance, improved health, greater longevity: these are all goals to which our species has aspired since the first farmers waited for the first harvest."

There are many things wrong with this ad for the agricultural biotech industry, which has every appearance of having been written by industry lobbyists. First, Gove is disingenuously mixing medical applications of genome editing for diseases with genome editing of animals. Genome editing for medical uses is largely not contentious unless it involves germline inheritable changes. And this field of research can and does progress entirely independently of genome editing of food crops and animals. But genome editing of animals and food crops is wildly unpopular and entails the risk of producing off-target effects that pass undetected to consumers.

Plus if GMO lobbyists get their way, genome edited products will escape GMO labelling and GMO-specific regulation.

Further, Gove's suggestion that genome editing will bring a brave new world of abundant food and high-yielding crops is unsubstantiated hype. Even if genome editing were able to produce higher-yielding crops, which isn't proven, we don't need more food. We already produce more than we will need even at peak population in 2050. And up to 40% of food in the US is thrown away. In the developing world, food rots in storage while people go hungry.

Gove would do better throwing his weight behind the many agroecological approaches that are proven to improve food production for farmers and consumers in a safe and equitable way.
---

Gove says 'Frankencows' made using genetic modification could be allowed after Brexit to help farmers produce 'more valuable' animals

By TIM SCULTHORPE
Mail Online, 4 Jan 2017
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5236067/Gove-hints-allowing-Frankencows-Brexit.html#ixzz53K61KjFC

* The Environment Secretary, Michael Gove, mapped out plans for a 'green Brexit'
* He will tell farmers that improving the environment is seen as a 'vital mission'
* Farming is one of the economic sectors most affected by Brexit

Genetically modified animals could be allowed in Britain after Brexit to help farmers produce more valuable livestock, Michael Gove suggested today.

Leaving himself open to a charge of giving a greenlight for 'Frankencows', Mr Gove said 'gene editing technology' could come to Britain in a major speech.

The Environment Secretary raised the prospect in a speech outlining his vision for a 'green Brexit' but warned it was a moral question that had to be carefully considered.

Genetically modified food is deeply controversial in Britain and many consumers refuse to buy it for fear of unintended consequences. Extending the practice from crops to livestock would be likely to trigger protests.

In his speech today, to the Oxford Real Farming Conference, Mr Gove said technology in farming was at a crucial tipping point.

He said 'big data, artificial intelligence and machine learning' would streamline farming practices - but warned there were also 'political and moral questions'.

Admitting the industry could be 'biting off much more than can chew', Mr Gove said: 'Gene editing technology could help us to remove vulnerabilities to illness, develop higher yielding crops or more valuable livestock, indeed potentially even allow mankind to conquer the diseases to which we are vulnerable.

Food in abundance, improved health, greater longevity: these are all goals to which our species has aspired since the first farmers waited for the first harvest.

'But in attempting to shape evolution more profoundly than any plant or animal breeder ever has done before are we biting off much more than we can chew?'

In his speech, the Environment Secretary mapped out plans for a 'green Brexit' that will focus future payments to farmers on enhancing the environment rather than paying 'subsidies for inefficiency'.

He told farmers that improving the environment is now seen as a 'vital mission for this Government'.

Other key aims include improving public access to the countryside, reducing flooding, and investment in technology to boost food production – all of which could attract public funding in the future.

Farming is one of the economic sectors most affected by Brexit, with subsidies to British farmers worth about £3.2billion a year.

In a speech to the Oxford Farming Conference today, Mr Gove pledged to continue funding at the same level until 2024 – effectively giving farmers a unique five-year transition out of the EU. Only the largest landowners will have payments capped.

But he will also made it clear that ministers want to move away from the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) in the longer term.

Mr Gove acknowledged that Brexit will mean major changes for many farmers.

But he added: 'It means we don't need any longer to follow the path dictated by the Common Agricultural Policy.

'We can have our own –national – food policy, our own agriculture policy, our own environment policies, our own economic policies, shaped by our own interests.'

Under the existing payments system, farmers and other landowners receive subsidies based on the size of their farm and the number of livestock they have.

Mr Gove warned the system is 'fundamentally flawed', adding: 'Paying land owners for the amount of agricultural land they have is unjust, inefficient and drives perverse outcomes.

'It gives the most from the public purse to those who have the most private wealth. It bids up the price of land, distorting the market, creating a barrier to entry for innovative new farmers and entrenching lower productivity.

'Indeed, perversely, it rewards farmers for sticking to methods of production that are resource-inefficient and also incentivises an approach to environmental stewardship which is all about mathematically precise field margins and not ecologically healthy landscapes.'

But Mr Gove today made clear he wants taxpayer support to focus on environmental improvements.

He offered the prospect of new grants available to almost all landowners to plant trees, enhance wildlife habitats and water quality and return unproductive farmland to wildflower meadows to encourage butterflies and insects.

But there will be no return to direct subsidies for food production. His intervention comes as a report warns that trade deals after Brexit could pose the 'biggest peacetime threat' to the UK's food security if standards are not protected.

The Parliamentary Group on Agroecology called on the Government to ensure trade deals protect British farmers and do not undermine them by allowing imports of food produced with lower welfare or environmental standards.

 

Menu

Home

Subscriptions

News Archive

News Reviews

Videos

Articles

GM Myth Makers

GM Reports

GM Myths

GM Quotes

Non-GM Successes

Contacts

Contact Us

About

Facebook

Twitter

Donations

Content 1999 - 2023 GMWatch.
Web Development By SCS Web Design