Editor,

RE: "Africa should continue to say ‘no’ to GMOs” (The New Times, September 26).

Perhaps the author should read "Planting the Future” by the European Academies Science Advisory Council 2013:

"There is ‘no validated evidence’ that GM crops have greater adverse impact on health and the environment than any other technology used in plant breeding…

"There is compelling evidence that GM crops can contribute to sustainable development goals with benefits to farmers, consumers, the environment and the economy… It is vital that sustainable agricultural production and food security harnesses the potential of biotechnology in all its facets.”

Robert Wager

That report was written by a group of scientists whose careers depend on the continued development of GMO technology. The report did not include information on the food safety issues or the use of cancer-causing pesticide in the cultivation of these crops.

It was a simple promo piece for the GMO industry and the European Academies Science said it is the views of the authors and doesn’t represent the position of the European Academies Science.

Cletus DeBunkerman

If you cut through that incomprehensible jargon and convoluted formulation, intended to mystify the ordinary person, what the above says is that ‘there is no validated evidence that GM crops are safe’.

As for the compelling evidence that they ‘can contribute’, it would be more believable if we could be allowed to see such compelling evidence of the long-term health, food security and environmental effects of GMOs derived from studies by truly independent scientists (those without any ties whatsoever to the industry and therefore without any interest in coming up with slanted findings that support the industry’s PR) and with the full cooperation of the industry.

Should we have such evidence, I will happily eat both my words and GMO products.

Right now, allow me to be skeptical of any statements on GMOs emanated from compromised institutions, whether from academia, regulatory bodies and policy-makers, all of whom are enjoying funding largesse from the industry.

The current situation and the role of scientists remind me of the many decades of tobacco industry shills in the medical world who claimed there was no validated evidence linking lung cancer with cigarette smoking.

Millions of people would not have died such painful deaths had people been more skeptical about compromised ‘scientists’ shilling for the tobacco industry. Beware compromised scientists and other so-called experts for hire.

Mwene Kalinda