Letter: Wrong GM trials
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.Letter: Wrong GM trials
Sir: Sarah Burton (letter, 24 May) is right to make the point that when it comes to pollution from a GM crop, size does not matter. One plant can be as infective as thousands.
But I question whether these GM crop trials are really intended to assess ecological damage. For that to be so an ongoing ecological audit of the surrounding area would be necessary. There is no indication that this is being done.
It seems to me that it is more likely that these trials are intended to determine yields under various conditions of weather and chemical control, and any information of ecological damage resulting from these trials will be fortuitous.
GUY PATTERSON
Berkhamsted, Hertfordshire
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments