It would be very interesting to know the real source of this piece in the Scotsman. Did the Scotsman really assign a reporter to cover a science conference in Norfolk? Or was this just possibly supplied to the paper pre-digested by Tony Trewavas, a rabidly pro-GM scientist who boasts his ability to get his material published in the Scottish press, and who just happens to have been a speaker at the JIC jamboree. (This piece also turned up today on Prakash's AgBioView list to which Trewavas is a regular contributor.)

We only ask because when Trewavas spoke at an agricultural college in the south of England, his speech was subsequently reported in great detail by a Scottish newspaper without a single mention of the views of any of the 3 other speakers on the same platform. This piece notably makes no reference to the 'Feeding or Fooling the World?' counter event.

So was this a Trewavas 'press release' and if so did it perchance come complete with that headline?
---

World demand too great to ignore GM
http://www.thescotsman.co.uk/business.cfm?id=66518
The Scotsman
April 24, 2001, Tuesday
Vic Robertson

WORLD agriculture can't afford to ignore any system which will help it meet the demands of an increasing world populations, say scientists.

Genetically modified crops able to deal with low water supply will be needed increasingly in arid areas, while other countries may demand extensive or organic agriculture for ethical and environmental reasons. A three-day meeting of 200 scientists at the John Innes Centre in Norwich - a research station at the leading edge of GM research - tried to reach consensus on how global farming could meet the likely food and other demands of 2020.

The guru of the "green revolution" of the 1960s and 1970s, Professor MS Swaminathan, said projections for foodgrains demand and supply in 20 years' time ranged between hope and despair, but with a whole range of technologies now available there were hopes for a revolution. "Most developing countries have no option except to produce more from less arable land and irrigation water resources," he said. "This is why there is a need for an evergreen revolution based on achieving continuous improvements in productivity without associated social or ecological harm."

Injecting a note of concern for the biodiversity of the countryside, particularly in developed countries, Professor Alan Gray, the director of the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology in Dorset, said the challenge for the developing world was to find ways of reducing the environmental impact of increased intensification. He was optimistic that, given the political will, science would provide the global agricultural systems needed to feed an extra two billion mouths in 2020, as well as retaining an acceptable level of countryside biodiversity. "Tweaking the edges of conventional agriculture can have amazing effects," he said.

However, the third keynote speaker, Dr Barbara Mazur, of Dupont Agriculture products in the US, remained unshakeable in her view that biotechnology offered the best hope of meeting future demands. Her reply to questions on public acceptability of bio-engineered foodstuffs remained the standard company response of being "committed to safety".

At first sight this might have caused a knee-jerk reaction among consumer representatives, but Robin Simpson, the director of special projects with the National Consumer Council, conceded that, while he had not been the subject of Damascene conversion, he had been impressed by the seriousness of the wider implications of the conference.

"It is very difficult to be dogmatic about the situation worldwide. For example, there was a lot of discussion about the need to develop strains of crops that were low in their use of water and water is clearly something which will be a major issue fairly soon."

But he pointed out that agronomic progress had the potential to create havoc with "demented policies" that lead to chronic oversupply.