Science correspondent, BBC News
The ban on GM crops by European countries should be reassessed, the president of UK science body the Royal Society says.
Prof Venki Ramakrishnan said the science of genetic modification had been misunderstood by the public and it was time to set the record straight.
He said it was inappropriate to ban an "entire technology" and products should be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
But opponents say GM crop technology is untested and the ban should remain.
Prof Ramakrishnan said that the blanket ban on GM crops by European countries was misconceived.
His comments coincide with a guide published by the Royal Society, which describes itself as the UK's independent scientific academy, for the general public.
"GM is simply a technology for introducing a particular set of traits into a plant. And you have to decide on a case-by-case basis which of those traits are appropriate or not," he told BBC News.
"You should regulate each product, which should be properly tested for its health and environmental effects."
GM foods are not on sale in supermarkets and nor are they commercially grown in Europe for human consumption.
The Royal Society guide sets out to answer 18 key questions that it obtained from focus groups. These include:
- Are GM crops safe to eat?
- Could they harm the environment?
- In the long term, could there be unexpected and untoward side-effects?
The answers have been produced by an expert group of researchers who have drawn on evidence from scientific studies. The answers acknowledge areas of uncertainty and some of the technology's drawbacks.
Reputation and potential
The guide's stated intent is to provide clear, unbiased information on the science of GM crops.
It states that GM crops are safe to eat, though it acknowledges that they can cross breed with non-GM varieties and there might be unexpected and untoward side-effects.
Prof Ramakrishnan acknowledged there were some "legitimate worries".
One he said was the fear that a small number of multinational corporations would monopolise food production.
This could in turn lead to the loss of thousands of varieties of fruits, vegetables and cereals unless the technology was properly regulated.
"We should not conflate the issue of GM's reputation with its potential," he said.
"I hope the whole thing gets put on a more rational footing.
"With a growing world population - with a projected need for 50% more food by 2050 - I don't think we can afford to give up on useful technologies especially to help poorer countries have a reliable and nutritious source of food."
'One-sided'
In a statement, the Soil Association said it believed that the Royal Society guide was neither neutral nor unbiased as it claims.
"Everyone knows that there are at least some scientific controversies, and disagreements about evidence concerning GM crops. None of these are mentioned in the Royal Society document," the statement read.
"This may not be surprising, given that there are no scientists who have consistently expressed scepticism about the application of GM technology to agriculture listed among the authors.
"Scientific enquiry normally proceeds by open discussion of disagreements about evidence - the Royal Society's involvement in GM has been consistently one-sided, ignoring scientists with dissenting views, and overlooking facts which do not fit with the views of supporters of GM crops."
An analysis of 900 pieces of published research into GM technology by the US National Academy of Sciences concluded that GM food was safe to eat - though it did highlight some environmental concerns.
Prof Ramakrishnan said he recognised that the answers in the Royal Society guide would not end the controversy.
"But we hope that they will inform people about the science and allow those who might previously have felt excluded from the discussion to form a view," he said.
The Royal Society will hold a series of public panel discussion events (Growing tomorrow's dinner - should GM be on the table?) across the UK during the summer and autumn.
영국, 유럽의 GM 작물 금지에 대한 검토 촉구
영국 왕립학회 학회장 벤키 라마크리슈난 교수는 BBC에 유럽 국가들의 유전자변형(GM)작물 금지 조치에 대한 평가가 수행되어야 한다고 전했다. 교수는 대중이 GM 과학을 잘못 이해하고 있기 때문에 이를 바로 잡아야 한다고 언급했다.
유럽에서 GM 식품은 인체 섭취용으로 슈퍼마켓에서 판매되지 않으며 상업적으로 경작되지도 않는다.
교수에 따르면 '기술 전체'를 금지하는 것은 부적절하며, 제품들은 사례별로 평가되어야 한다. 이와같은 의견은 영국 왕립학회에서 발표한 가이드와도 일치한다.
왕립학회 가이드는 다음을 포함하여 18가지 주요 질문에 대한 답변을 제시했다,
- GM 작물은 섭취하기에 안전한가?
- GM 작물이 환경에 해를 끼칠 수 있는가?
- 장기적 관점에서 예상치 못했거나 해로운 부작용이 나타날 수 있는가?
전문가 집단이 과학 연구결과로부터 근거를 추출하여 해당 질문들에 답했으며, 답변에서 불확실한 영역과 일부 기술적 결점들을 인정하고 있다.
그러나 반대자들은 GM 작물 기술은 검증되지 않았고, 금지 조치는 유지 되어야 한다고 주장하고 있다.
* GM식물 Q&A 전문 :
https://royalsociety.org/~/media/policy/projects/gm-plants/gm-plant-q-and-a.pdf
