Letter: The GM `monster'
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: Your piece covering the launch of the Nuffield report on GM crops ("Blair blames GM hysteria on the press", 28 May) quotes me as saying that environmental groups were unfair to call for bans on GM crops.
What I actually said was that it is unfair to suggest that all uses of GM - present and future - are necessarily dangerous. Particular types of GM crops may well pose unacceptable risks to health or to the environment and should not be allowed. This is clearly stated in the report.
The report sounds a series of highly cautionary notes, and should not be interpreted as an endorsement of the Government's present approach.
JULIE HILL
Programme Adviser to Green Alliance, member of Nuffield Council Working Party
London W2
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments