The complainant focused on a passing reference to crop yields from GMO seed in an interview about the reasons for the Chinese takeover of a large seed and pesticide company.
By Esther Enkin, for the CBC
The complainant, Elisabeth Clark, focused on a passing reference to crop yields from GMO seed in an interview about the reasons for the Chinese takeover of a large seed and pesticide company. She thought the commentator was wrong and the statement had to be corrected. The truth is not so simple. The statement was appropriate and GMO was not the topic under discussion.
You were concerned about a reference to the yield of GMO crops made by a regular contributor to the CBC News Network program, The Exchange. You said you heard Ian Lee state that “GMO crops produce higher yields.” You said this statement was false and that it was unethical to allow his assertions to go unchallenged about an issue as important as the global food supply:
If Prof. Lee followed the growing body of “independent research” on genetically engineered crops he would know the opposite is true. Monsanto and Syngenta (ironically acquired by China) and their subsidized researchers have the attention of media and gov’ts and continue to cite studies riddled by conflict of interest with claims that do not hold up in field testing.
You thought that Mr. Lee’s statement was “deliberately misleading” and cited other studies that conclude the opposite is true:
The definitive study to date on GM crops and yield is “Failure to Yield”, by Dr Doug Gurian-Sherman, senior scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists and former biotech adviser to the US EPA. The study concluded, “Commercial GE crops have made no inroads so far into raising the intrinsic or potential yield of any crop. By contrast, traditional breeding has been spectacularly successful in this regard; it can be solely credited with the intrinsic yield increases in the United States and other parts of the world that characterized the agriculture of the twentieth century.”