GM Watch
  • Main Menu
    • Home
    • News
      • Newsletter subscription
      • News Reviews
      • News Languages
        • Notícias em Português
        • Nieuws in het Nederlands
        • Nachrichten in Deutsch
      • Archive
    • Resources
      • GM Myth Makers
      • Non-GM successes
      • GM Quotes
      • GM Myths
      • GM Firms
        • Monsanto: a history
        • Monsanto: resources
        • Bayer: a history
        • Bayer: resources
      • GM Booklet
      • GM Book
    • Contact
    • About
    • Donations
News and comment on genetically modified foods and their associated pesticides    
  • News
    • Newsletter subscription
    • News Reviews
    • News Languages
      • Notícias em Português
      • Nieuws in het Nederlands
      • Nachrichten in Deutsch
    • Archive
  • Resources
    • Non-GM Successes
    • GM Myth Makers
    • GM Quotes
    • GM Myths
    • GM Firms
      • Monsanto: a history
      • Monsanto: resources
      • Bayer: a history
      • Bayer: resources
    • GM Booklet
    • GM Book
  • Donations
  • Contact
  • About
SUBSCRIBE TO REVIEWS

INTRODUCTION TO GM

GMO Myths and Facts front page.jpg

GENE EDITING MYTHS, RISKS, & RESOURCES

Gene Editing Myths and Reality

PLEASE SUPPORT GMWATCH

Donations

If you like what we do, please help us do more. You can donate via Paypal or credit/debit card. Some of you have opted to give a regular donation. We greatly appreciate that as it helps place us on a more stable financial basis. Thank you for your support!

Melchett on Krebs

  • Print
  • Email
Details
Published: 16 April 2005
Twitter
An edited version of the following letter was published in The Times today.
------

Dear Editor,

The outgoing Chairman of the Food Standards Agency, Sir John Krebs, is quite right to say that the Soil Association represents the views of those who grow, process, sell and consume organic food ('Friends of the corporate Earth', 12 April) - not something we have ever hidden, to put it mildly! He is equally wrong to claim that his tenure at the FSA has always been characterised by complete impartiality and reliance only on scientific evidence. This is not the case with either GM or organic food.

As he surveys his tenure at the FSA, Sir John's touchiness about his critics would be surprising, were it not for the unpublicised existence of a review of his record - commissioned by the FSA itself. This review, conducted by Baroness Dean, was slipped quietly onto the FSA's website. It concludes that the "vast majority" of people consulted felt that the FSA had "deviated from its normal stance of making statements based solely on scientific evidence", when "speaking against organic food and for GM food". Baroness Dean stressed that "This view was expressed not only by stakeholders representing organic and GM interest groups, but by those who would be regarded as supporters and natural allies of the Agency".

So, as Baroness Dean makes clear, Sir John cannot blame, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, the Soil Association or Which? (formerly the Consumers Association) for this blot on the FSA's record. The FSA's promotion of GM foods failed to convince the public, while damaging its own reputation. Its attacks on organic produce have been constantly used by those with a commercial interest in trying to damage organic farming and food.

Yours sincerely,
Peter Melchett,
Policy Director, Soil Association,
Bristol House, 40-56 Victoria Street,
Bristol, BS1 6BY
T: 020 7482 3134 0117 987 4561
email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Menu

Home

Subscriptions

News Archive

News Reviews

GM Book

Resources

Non-GM Successes

GM Myth Makers

GM Myths

GM Quotes

GM Booklet

Contacts

Contact Us

About

Facebook

Twitter

Donations

Content 1999 - 2025 GMWatch.
Web Development By SCS Web Design