Science, News and GMOs - Why Mark Lynas Has More Evolving To Do

Mark Lynas is a British activist known for being a founding father of the anti-GMO movement in the UK. He built his career writing convincing pieces on GMOs, nuclear technology and global warming; an ambassador for environmentalists. He also has a history of being very well respected by both sides of these important issues.

You may have seen the piece in the NewYorker revealing that he has has completely reversed his opinion on GMOs and went even further in a speech to the Oxford Farming Conference, to apologize for starting the GM movement and any subsequent damage he has done to the pro-GM movement. This news, of course, has shaken the movement spawning comments and critiques from both sides of the fence.

Doug Gurian-Sherman is a plant pathologist and a senior editor at the Union of Concerned Scientists. He has responded to the apology and announcement from Mark Lynas and in-so-doing, sparked quite a debate. Lynas actually responded to his blog post, to which Gurian-Sherman then replied (which can be seen at the bottom of the page linked to above).

Lynas stated that he changed his mind because he "discovered science". The consensus among activists and some environmental scientists is that he still has quite a bit of science for which to answer.  John Vandermeer, professor of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at the University of Michigan, posted at FoodFirst.org. He muses about how, as a science teacher, despite being excited when people "discover science", the issue is not so simple. And further exploration and education will surely reveal the vast complexities of the issue, issues which its possible that Lynas hasn't even begun to grasp, never mind make definitive statements about.

"He has discovered high school biology. Now its time to go to college."

There are a slew of different websites reporting on this story, mostly blogs. The opinions have been all over the place. Some bring concerning scientific studies to the table for discussion, some whisper of conspiracy.

The most troubling statement he made, in our humble opinion is the following summary: "So my conclusion here today is very clear: the GM debate is over. It is finished. We no longer need to discuss whether or not it is safe..." Any true scientist knows that this statement is weak enough to discredit the rest of what he has to say. Even on-board GM scientists agree that currently available research is limited and that ongoing studies are needed. People seem to speak in general, broad statements about whether GM crops are safe or not, like its so simple. Thats like saying "drugs are safe" without talking about a specific drug. Its not that simple. Every drug is different and needs to be individually evaluated, same goes for GMOs.

The specifics are important, and need to continue to be researched, especially as new GMs are created. In the absence of adequate evidence, Innate Response chooses not to include GMO ingredients in our products. But as far as board statements go, we'd like to make one of our own. Everything that has evolved is a part of the natural ecosystem. Within an ecosystem, everything fits within a specific place. Nature has been around on this planet a lot longer than meddling humans. And when you change the natural order of things, you run the risk of nature self-correcting the problem. The human race would be wise to avoid playing mother nature and becoming that problem.

Labels: genetically, GMOs, lynas, mark, modified, organisms