Clos This Window Close This Window

Send To Your Printer Send To Your Printer

The Honorable Lord Taverne


Position: Member, House of Lords, The United Kingdom Parliament; Founder and Chairman of the charity Sense about Science

Education: Barrister (Queen’s Counsel), Philosophy and Ancient History, Balliol College, Oxford

Notable: Distinguished career in law, politics, economics and industry; Author, The March of Unreason

I think environmentalism is a very, very important cause, but it’s got to be based on evidence.
I think environmentalism is a very, very important cause, but it’s got to be based on evidence.
Send Link to this Page
close X

Related Article


UK PEER ENCOURAGES SKEPTICS TO REVIEW BIOTECHNOLOGY RESEARCH
Lib Dem Lord Dick Taverne Says Genetically Modified Foods are Safe and Environmentally Favorable

Critics of biotechnology raise the question: are genetically modified food safe? When in fact, genetically modified (GM) crops are considered to be among the most studied and reviewed foods in the world. Using well established, internationally accepted standards of risk assessment, regulatory authorities worldwide have reviewed all genetically modified crops now on the market and determined that they pose no more risk than crops produced through traditional breeding methods.

“The more I’ve looked at genetic modification, the more I’ve become an enthusiast for the technology,” says Lord Taverne, Member of the House of Lords’ Science and Technology Committee of the UK Parliament.  “The evidence is fairly clear on certain points.  First of all, there can be no doubt that so far there is no evidence of any damage to health — any danger to health.”

Food and feed products containing ingredients derived from genetically modified crops have a solid 12-year history of safe use with no reliable documentation of any food safety issues.  Twenty-five Nobel Prize winners and 3,400 prominent scientists have expressed their support for genetically modified crops as a “powerful and safe” way to improve agriculture and the environment.

“It’s reduced the use of pesticides. It produces greater productivity. And, if it reduces the amount of farmland you have to use, it can actually be very beneficial to biodiversity ... very beneficial to the environment,” says Taverne, a former member of Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace, who is excited about the link between biotechnology and the environment.  “And here are these people who are fighting against it — who claim that they’re benefiting the third world.  Hypocrites they are.  I mean, it is extraordinary how they don’t even look at the evidence.  They’re just dogmatically opposed to the evidence.”

Lord Taverne is founder of the charity Sense About Science, which promotes an evidence-based approach to scientific issues and the public understanding of scientific research. He is the author of The March of Unreason: Science Democracy and the New Fundamentalism.

© 2006 Monsanto Company.  All rights reserved. The copyright holder consents to the use of this material and the images in the published context only and solely for the purpose of promoting the benefits of agricultural biotechnology.

Video Transcript



Now, I myself started off as an environmentalist.  I was a keen environmentalist.  ... I mean the joys of nature are one of the great blessings of life.  So, of course, you’ve got to be concerned that nature flourishes.  And, the same applies to diversity of species.  ... So I think environmentalism is a very, very important cause.  But it’s got to be based on evidence.  ...

... And I got more and more interested in the whole question of genetic modification because that, in a sense, has been the central battlefield in which the anti-science and science forces have locked horns.  ... The more I’ve looked at genetic modification, the more I’ve become an enthusiast for the technology.  ...

... The evidence is fairly clear on certain points.  First of all, there could be no doubt that so far there is no evidence of any damage to health — any danger to health.  This is a point, which the opponents still haven’t grasped and won’t admit.  ...

... The third world academies — the Indian, the Mexican, the Brazilian, the Chinese national academies, apart from those in United States and Britain ... they say that there’s no evidence of any harm to health, or so far to the environment.  ...

... It’s reduced, quite clear, ... it’s reduced the use of pesticides.  It produces greater productivity. ... And, if it reduces the amount of farmland you have to use, it can actually be very beneficial to biodiversity ... very beneficial to the environment.  ...

And, indeed, there are any number of developments which could make a huge difference to the fight against disease in the world.  ... And here are these people who are fighting against it — who claim that they’re benefiting the third world.  Hypocrites they are.  I mean, it is extraordinary how they don’t even look at the evidence.  They’re just dogmatically opposed to the evidence. ...

Some people take the view that — you know — you must always distrust scientific research produced by companies.  My answer to that is:   Good research is good research.  And, you can have very good research produced by companies, and very bad research produced by the public sector — and, the other way around.  What matters is does the research that’s been done stand up to testing?  Has it been peer reviewed?  Is it reproducible?  Those are the tests. ...

... And if you look at the crops ... Bt cotton, for example – now benefiting small farmers all over the world. ... These are based on a lot of work, which was done by companies.  ...

People constantly invoke the Precautionary Principle.  ... But, in practice, what it’s often used for is to say:   Even if there’s no scientific evidence, but there’s a lot of concern, then we should apply the Precautionary Principle.  Well, if you do that, end of innovation.  And, in practice of course, it’s invoked by people who want to stop a technology they don’t like.  ...

... If you look at the countries, which are the most successful democracies and the most prosperous countries in the world, you don’t find them places where they turn their back on science.

© 2006 Monsanto Company.  All rights reserved. The copyright holder consents to the use of this material and the images in the published context only and solely for the purpose of promoting the benefits of agricultural biotechnology.