GM WATCH comment: The Independent recently broke the story about the renewed support within Gordon Brown's Government for GM crops. At the same time it published an editorial that made it clear that - unlike its sister paper The Independent on Sunday - it was adopting a pro-GM editorial stance. Since then the character of some of its reporting on this issue suggests it may have been influenced by its new editorial enthusiasm for GM.

On Monday, for instance, the following article (reproduced in full below) was published:

Farmers praise GM crops in EU study
The Independent, 30 June 2008
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/farmers-praise-gm-crops-in-eu-study-856907.html

The article claims that, 'European farmers who grow genetically modified crops enjoy higher yields and    revenues than conventional growers, according to a new study'. But reading further down the article it becomes clear that the study only looked at one GM crop - a GM maize grown in Spain - and although the article repeats the claim that farmers 'found they produced higher yields and earned up to 122 euros more per hectare (GBP50 per acre) than conventional maize farmers', the study, in fact, failed to find that most farmers did increase yields - nearly 90% didn't!

Moreover, the gross margin increase being as high as 122 euros per hectare was found in just one region of Spain - Zaragoza in Aragon. (The full paper is available - to subscribers - at
http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/v26/n4/full/nbt0408-384.html )

The Independent also failed to report news of a study by a researcher at the Institute of Environmental Science and Technology of the Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, who analysed the situation in Catalonia and Aragon as regards coexistence with GM maize. His results published in the Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics (April 2008) makes it clear that the cultivation of GM maize has caused a drastic reduction in organic maize cultivation, making their coexistence practically impossible. (An Impossible Coexistence: Transgenic and Organic Agriculture, Innovations Report, 3O June 2008)
http://www.innovations-report.de/html/berichte/studien/bericht-113314.html

The following day The Independent reported that a study had shown that Monsanto's GM hormone for cows (rBGH) helped reduce greenhouse gases.

Bovine growth hormone 'could cut CO2 emissions'
The Independent, 1 July 2008
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/bovine-growth-hormone-could-cut-co2-emissions-857645.html

Its report gave absolutely no indication that this was effectively an industry study. By contrast, the coverage in Scientific American - not normally a bastion of radicalism, made the conflict of interest abundantly clear and allowed critics to point out that the study's findings were in conflict with earlier findings by the FDA that use of the GM hormone might actually slightly increase carbon emissions.
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=can-bovine-growth-hormone-slow-global-warming

And it's not just Scientific American that covered the conflict of interest and Monsanto's past failure to sell this idea to the FDA. Reuters coverage from the day before The Independent mentions both these points.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/feedarticle/7621130

The driving editorial line behind all The Independent articles at the moment seems to be that there's pressure on the UK and the EU to lift GM bans. In the case of the rBGH article, it was claimed that the EU's ban on Monsanto's GM hormone was under pressure thanks to this new study. This is nonsense as rBGH is not only banned in the EU on clear human health and animal welfare grounds - something not mentioned in the article, but it's banned even in Canada, which tends to shadow US regulatory decisions.

On 30 June a letter was sent to The Independent criticizing its claim that EU farmers increased yields and incomes with GM crops. To date it has not been published. Neither have any other leters critical of the reporting of either study. Given the controversial nature of the claims made in the two articles, it might seem surprising if The Independent received no letters of criticism.

If The Independent wants GM bans lifted, it needs to start supporting its editorial stance with factual reporting, rather than just regurgitating industry spin.
---
---
Farmers praise GM crops in EU study
The Independent, 30 June 2008
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/farmers-praise-gm-crops-in-eu-study-856907.html

European farmers who grow genetically modified crops enjoy higher yields and revenues than conventional growers, according to a new study.

Scientists from the Joint Research Centre, the European Commission's scientific body, surveyed more than 400 Spanish farmers who grew Bt maize the only GM crop allowed for cultivation in the EU. They found they produced higher yields and earned up to €122 more per hectare (GBP50 per acre) than conventional maize farmers.

It is the first time scientists have looked into the impact of GM in Europe, said Dr Emilio Rodriguez Cerezo, who led the research. "There are definite economic advantages for farmers for the reason that their crops are not destroyed by pests," he said.
The European Commission president, Jose Manuel Barroso, wants to remove regulatory obstacles to the controversial technology, arguing that GM crops could counter soaring food prices. However, the French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, who takes over the EU presidency tomorrow, will be calling for more controls on GM organisms. Environ-mental groups accuse the GM industry of exploiting the global food crisis to win approval for its products.