Saturday, March 30, 2024

BLOG: Time to get on with GE debate

Avatar photo
There are growing calls for another look at genetic modification. With gene editing now a reality some say our laws banning GM are outdated and these new technologies could help us better achieve our environmental goals in terms of water quality and greenhouse gas emissions.
Reading Time: < 1 minute

Our story on P17 gives an update on AgResearch’s high metabolisable energy (HME) ryegrass, which is being tested in the United States as law forbids it being done here. If the grass does what AgResearch thinks it might, there would be benefits for farmers and the environment through lower methane emissions and drought resistance. It seems like a no-brainer when you just look at this science but these sorts of decisions have a wider impact.

New Zealand is looking to forge a path as a sustainable producer of high quality grass-fed food. We want to tell a good story to consumers willing to pay a premium for our products. So, is the possible gain from embracing GM in our systems more than the gain we might get from staying GM-free and leveraging that globally? Is finding tools to let us continue producing at current levels better than producing a bit less at higher value? Should we ask our customers what they want first?

It’s a big decision because we’re either all in or all out. There are no half measures. It’s a decision that takes in more than food as well. Gene editing could provide benefits in medicine and other areas as well though it is easier to contain in a lab than in a field. GM divides people pretty intensely and we won’t please everyone whatever we decide. But our law does need to keep up with the times so it is time to take a new look at this issue.

Bryan Gibson

Total
0
Shares
People are also reading