Letter published in The Weekly Times, August 3, 2011, p20.

WHAT about the next generations?

As an agricultural scientist (ex-CSIRO) and consumer, I am deeply concerned about the lack of evidence presented in The Weekly Times regarding safety of GM in both food and environment.

For example, your editorial “Farcical hit on science” (July 20) states that study after study has already proven GM foods are safe for human health and environment.

Please consider describing such studies for the readers.

There are no results of authorised animal feeding studies in the international literature demonstrating health over multiple generations.

Unauthorised studies show animal health and fertility problems after the first generation.

All so-called safe outcomes have been achieved in feeding studies with adult animals only.

This satisfies the requirements by our regulator to do feeding studies for at least 30 days.

Why don’t GM proponents lay our fears to rest by publishing GM feeding studies with five generations of mice or rats?

Long-term environmental impacts have also been underestimated with more and more studies in North America showing negative outcomes after 15 years of GM crops.

Dr Maarten Stapper,

BioLogic AgFood,

Holder, ACT.

Opinion published in The Land, Thursday, July 28, 2011, p24.

AS AN agricultural scientist (ex-CSIRO) and consumer, I am deeply concerned about the lack of critical questioning arising from the genetically modified (GM) GM wheat debate.

Several correspondents in The Land say GM wheat will give better crops and healthier products, and that GMs have not caused health issues. But you don’t know what you don’t monitor and measure.

Worldwide there are no multiple-generation animal feeding studies and there is no surveillance of impacts on human health.

Unauthorised studies show animal health and fertility problems after the first generation.

We don’t need GM wheat as problems can be solved by working on their causes.

For human health switch to wholemeal bread and eat less over-processed food.

GM wheat will allow us to keep eating a less unhealthy white bread.

Many innovative farmers have demonstrated improved quantity and quality of produce by increasing soil fertility through activating soil biology and improving soil carbon.

This is in association with cutting the use of synthetic fertilisers and chemicals.

During the long drought biological farmers had higher yields than neighbours, so there’s no need for drought-tolerant GM wheat.

Examples of success in biological farming are regularly reported in The Land. Science institutions and GRDC still tend to ignore it and continue to waste valuable research and development funds on GM research.

Recent UN reports about feeding the world support biological farming and reject GM.

DR MAARTEN STAPPER,

BioLogic AgFood,

Holder, ACT.