whats the collective view on them then?
me? i'm a yay.
GM foods have the potential to provide greater yields, on more marginal lands, which will be needed to feed the ever increasing populations. there has not been a single case where GM food was scientifically found to be bad for our health, most opposition seems to be based on moral/ethical or misinformed arguments. i reckon misunderstanding in the general public has had a massive impact on why, in the UK, GM is not a commonplace food source (although anyone who eats soya products is likely to be eating GM unknowingly). the whole monsanto screw-up (and it was a total screw-up) scuppered GM tech use in the UK... if only they'd not done what they did...
but here is my caveat...
the monsanto case shows, imo, that if genetic traits of the crops are held my multi-nationals, they're probably not going to work well in the UK.
many of the GM developments are done in govt funded institutes, alongside the multinationals. once the product is released, the rights tend to be given to the multinationals.
if we are to have GM which is beneficial to the population (better yields, better nutritional value etc) then the patents/the rights/the knowledge of the crops need to be held by the public, for the public good. sure, they can be used by the corporations, but as monsanto show, when one corp has the rights, it doesn't work.
yay or nay? and why?