
Opposition within the European Union has so far prevented the widespread adoption of GM crops
Related Articles
- This week's changes to the Ecologist.org
- Climate change 'will wreak havoc on Britain's coastline by 2050'
- Huhne accused of 'hypocrisy' for promoting offshore oil in Scotland and Arctic
- Tanzania urged to accept World Bank funding of alternative Serengeti highway route
- UK's 'fracking' gas-extraction is not unconventional says industry
US calls for an end to the EU block on GM and nanotechnology
Tom Levitt and Vi Nguyen
7th December, 2010
US officials say they remain ‘surprised and disappointed’ over Europe’s refusal to embrace technologies like genetic modification (GM) and nanotechnology in farming
European agriculture is being left behind because of its opposition to GM crops and nanotechnology, US officials have warned.
Speaking to the House of Lords Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Farming, officials from the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) said both technologies needed to be accepted by EU consumers to allow for ‘more sustainable agriculture’ in the future.
‘I’m a little surprised and disappointed that agriculture, which began so strong in Europe hasn’t taken a greater leap forward to being a part of the economy that might be if these new technologies and approaches were carried forward,’ said USDA chief scientist Dr Roger Beachy.
He said scientists had to find ways to make new technologies like GM sound ‘non-threatening’ to consumers.
Many European countries have opposed the introduction of GM crops with a recent Greenpeace and Avaaz petition calling for a ban gaining more than one million signatures of support. MEPs voted in July to ban meat and dairy products from cloned animals and a introduce a moratorium on foods using nanotechnology until potential health risks can be ruled out.
However, committee member Baroness Howarth of Breckland spoke out in support of the US line and said the EU had ‘failed to look at the research objectively’ on GM and had been ‘driven by particular lobbying groups’.
‘I think that is likely to happen with other new technologies unless scientists find ways of presenting the information differently and engaging consumers on a different level,’ she said.
| READ MORE... | |
![]() |
NEWS EU votes against compulsory GM food labelling Campaigners angry at EU's decision to keep consumers 'in the dark' over food from animals given genetically modified (GM) feed |
![]() |
NEWS EU's 'dangerous' move to nationalise GM decision-making Individual countries will be allowed to ban GM crops in a move the EU hopes will stop them blocking new crops being grown by farmers in other member states |
![]() |
NEWS EU approves 'stepping stone' legislation for cloned meat European Union ministers have given an initial thumbs-up to the Novel Foods Regulation, a draft proposal that could lead to meat from cloned animals entering the human food chain |
![]() |
NEWS Industry and activists clash over environmental footprint of nanotechnology Conflict grows between green campaigners and the nanotechnology sector following publication of a critical Friends of the Earth report into the industry's environmental impacts |
![]() |
INVESTIGATION Lab grown meat: a low-fat, low-carbon, cruelty-free future? The technology isn't fully developed yet, but when meat really can be grown in a lab it's going to turn all our arguments about carnivorous diets on their heads... |
Previous Articles...
Users Comments
Re: US calls for an end to the EU block on GM and nanotechnologyI am surprised and disappointed GM and nanotechnology are considered sustainable in the US. One of the main reasons Americans are so fat and unhealthy is their food production being an integrated part of their economy. Why do they insist their way is the right way, instead of learning something about healthy nutrition from Europe. The only acceptable use of GM is to stop famine in 3rd World countries. Even that is doubtful as we cannot surely know this food is not harmful on the long run. | |
Re: US calls for an end to the EU block on GM and nanotechnologycould we expect some mindset shift from Producers perspective to consumers perspective please ?! Producer's priority seems to be productivity or maximising returns but is it so wrong for consumers to be clearly wanting any health hazards to be ruled out?
could Scientists with their intellectual inquisitiveness focus their research on clearly ruling out any health implications especially on growing children? But then who would fund them?! Is it surprising their focus is only economic benefits? |








