Horizon (1964–…): Season 45, Episode 4 - Jimmy's GM Food Fight - full transcript
'My name's Jimmy Doherty
and this is my farm. '
Morning, ladies!
'120 acres of rural Suffolk...
'.. where we raise our livestock
the old fashioned way.
Traditional farming, rare breeds,
free range.
I suppose I've sort of
turned the clock back
on farming, in some ways,
and it's working with nature,
really. That's how I see it.
'But elsewhere,
food production is in crisis.
'We need to double the amount
we grow in the next 50 years. '
I've never seen anything
quite like that in my life.
'And I'm going on
a worldwide journey
'to investigate one of the most
controversial potential solutions. '
Let's see these top bananas!
'It's a journey that will
take me from the most traditional
farming systems... '
It's unreal.
It's like going back in time.
'.. to the cutting edge of genetic
science. ' That's unbelievable.
Cathie, what have you done to these?
Now, I love the way that I farm,
but I am...
I am a realist and I realise
that the way I produce food
won't feed the world,
and a lot of people think
that the only way to do that
is to use biotechnology,
GM crops,
and I'm not sure about that.
I don't know if it's safe or not,
I don't know what the consequences
are, but what if...
what if the answer to feeding
the hungry is using biotechnology?
Can GM crops save the world?
So, I am actually now
in the process
of creating a genetically
modified plant? Yes, you are.
My journey begins on
the Argentinian pampas.
If you had to send me anywhere
in the world, it would be here.
It's like a scene out of Bonanza.
It's brilliant,
it's proper cowboy country.
This is my kind of farming -
free-range cattle ranching
on a massive scale.
It's got to be
every boy's dream to do this.
The dust, the smell of the horses,
these guys,
and you really start to get...
I'm in Argentina.
This may seem a million miles
from your local supermarket
but the reason I've come to
Argentina is to see a revolution
that's happened to farming here.
It's a revolution
that affects what we all eat.
And it's all down to these -
genetically modified soya beans.
This single crop has made Argentina
the GM capital of the world.
This doesn't look much at the moment
because all the soya beans
have been harvested,
but you can imagine
that this was just a huge field
full of soya bean crop
and, uniquely about
this particular strain,
is that it's been
genetically modified to be resistant
to a particular weedkiller,
so you could put the weedkiller
down, it kills
all the weeds but not the crop.
And it's that fact that has led
to a huge revolution in
Argentina's agricultural output.
If you grow GM and ordinary soya
side by side, it's impossible to
tell the difference between them...
until you spray them
with weedkiller.
This one small change means
it's possible to grow the crop
using less herbicide.
It's made soya farming
much more profitable
and I'm wondering if it's a
technology that we should all adopt.
A lot of people, if they hear that,
would think it's a bit strange
because the way I farm.
You know, I'm all about
traditional breeds, free range,
that sort of whole wholesome thing,
but in terms of science, and
coming from a science background,
I think the technology
is fascinating
and there needs to be lots of
science done on GM so
we've got a better understanding
but I don't think it's right
to straight away brush it aside
as the devil's work
because you can't have an opinion
on something until you see all the
facts, so I'm here to see the facts.
The first thing I want to see
is the scale of the soya industry.
Oh, no!
And to do that,
I have to take to the air.
Oh, whoa!
A dozen years ago,
Argentina grew virtually no soya.
This year, over half their arable
land, an area the size of Britain,
will be planted with
genetically modified soya beans.
Just below me here, all these
huge fields are being prepared
to sow the GM soya in,
and the large-scale farmers
have really benefited
from the soya bean here
because they get the most profit out
of it when they grow it on this
scale, and it is absolutely huge.
It is super-size farming.
I've never seen anything like it.
But there is a down side
to the soya boom.
Huge areas of natural forest
are being burned down and cleared
to make way for more fields,
and it's all being done to put food
on our tables.
To see how the soya gets to us,
I've come to the
Vicentin processing plant...
Get out of the way!
.. a vast factory where, every day,
they take delivery
of 20,000 tons of soya beans.
And this is what it's all about,
the humble little soya bean,
and what's inside it -
the protein and the oil.
OK, this is...
Good lord, look at that.
The beans are ground up
to produce soya meal.
It's the world's biggest source
of vegetable protein and a
vital component of animal feed.
I've never seen anything
quite like that in my life.
It is just unbelievable.
It's like a volcano, it's
like a mountain. Yes, it's huge.
It's genetically modified soya like
this that feeds the world's animals.
It could well have fed your Sunday
roast and, without it, the world's
livestock industry would collapse.
And this is all GM?
It's all GM crops, yes.
Whether we like it or not, GM crops
are already part of what we eat.
Look at that.
Ships coming in, all along here,
they're loading up
and clearing off,
and they're going
all round the world.
For me, it's blown me away a bit
because I thought that GM
was a bit on the periphery,
but the globe
is a consumer of GM soya,
and it's funny because, you know,
the people that think that
GM doesn't affect the UK,
it's quite naive thinking, that, and
it's quite a revelation for myself
because GM soya is going
into animal feed, and I just wonder
how many consumers in the UK
have ever thought about
indirectly eating GM food.
In countries like Argentina,
the GM revolution is well underway
but in Europe, the approach
has been quite the opposite.
To shop in Britain, you'd
never guess that nearly 10% of
the world's crops are now GM
because Britain has become
a virtual GM-free zone.
I wouldn't normally
go to a supermarket -
this is the first time I've been in
one for four years - but I've come
here for a very special reason -
to try and find some products
which I can use to test British
people's attitudes towards GM.
Well, most supermarkets in Britain
are proudly GM free
and they advertise the fact.
There's stuff labelled all over the
place saying GM free
and you have to look pretty hard
to find anything
that is made out of GM crops.
There we go... sausages.
Wonder how many of the pigs
were fed on GM soya.
This is what I'm after,
tucked away in the world food aisle.
Vegetable cooking oil,
and it's made out of
genetically modified soya.
And this is probably one of the
very few products in this whole
supermarket that's got GM in it.
This is what I'm after.
The reason we don't have many GM
products in our shops is supposedly
because of public opposition,
but are people really that anti-GM?
I'm going to try and find out
by asking the citizens of Norwich.
So, what we're doing here is, we're
going to do a little comparison
and see what people think of GM.
So I've got some sausages here.
One batch is cooked in non-GM oil,
the other is cooked in GM soya oil,
and we'll see what people think.
Hello. ladies.
I've got a little experiment here.
I know that face.
I cooked this batch up
in vegetable oil that's GM-free,
the other one in GM cooking oil.
If I was to ask you which
sausage do you like,
GM or non-GM, what would it be?
GM free. GM free?
Given the option, I'd go non-GM.
OK, why would you go non-GM?
I don't think we should really
be messing with things
unless we absolutely have to.
I just don't like to think of things
being too fiddled with, really.
Bit Frankenstein science? Yeah.
It's a bit new. Maybe in 100 years,
we'll know for sure
it's safe or not safe.
Which one would you choose?
The normal one.
The normal one, why?
Because it's normal.
I don't like genetically modified
crops or messing with Mother Nature.
Life is love, and messing around
with love is not a good idea.
So, for you, messing around with
the genetics is wrong? Is wrong.
The first thing that became very
clear was that no-one wanted
their sausages cooked in GM oil.
Ordinarily, I'd go for the GM free.
You'd go for GM free?
Why would that be?
Just prejudice, really, there's not
a rational explanation for it.
But with a little information
about the possible benefits of GM,
most people were prepared
to be more open-minded.
What if I said that this one could,
potentially, the technology,
could feed a lot of people
round the world?
Then I'd go for GM, I guess. Yeah.
So this one could, potentially,
be better for the environment,
the GM one.
It could be better? Yes, because
they use less pesticides
on the land to grow this one,
less herbicides on the land
for this production system
than the conventional one.
Well, then I would change my mind.
I'll go for a GM
and eat it triumphantly. Brilliant.
It's perhaps not surprising
that many people don't
know what to think about GM.
There's been so many mixed
messages about the subject.
Frankenstein food.
Customers loved it, actually.
Confusion and hysterics
over genetically modified food...
The company Monsanto
has launched a campaign to promote
so-called GM foods.
It's time for us to say,
"No, we don't want it... "
Genetic engineering could bring us
healthier and cheaper foods...
For the past decade, a propaganda
war has been waged over the
advantages and dangers of GM.
Many people are using this research
to continue the propaganda
against genetically modified plants.
These crops offer us a safe, highly
nutritious, affordable food...
While the pro side see it
as a valuable tool
that may help feed the world,
the anti side see it
as an unnecessary and
potentially dangerous technology.
Clearly, the public are getting
increasingly concerned about GM food.
It's something that we simply
can't afford to take a risk about.
At times, the debate
has resulted in confrontation.
In the late 1990s,
a series of anti-GM protests
destroyed experimental crops that
were meant to test the technology.
It helped put an end to the
planting of GM crops in Britain.
MAN SPEAKS IN GERMAN
Elsewhere in Europe, the protest
movement is alive and well.
Today, I've come to Bavaria,
along with hundreds of activists
from all over Europe
who have come to protest
at the planting of just a few
small fields of GM maize.
Most, but not all of them,
have come to protest peacefully.
The demonstration's sort of
heating up at the moment
and I've just got the nod that
there's a small splinter group
that are just going to veer off,
and they are pretty determined
to basically get into a field
and physically remove the GM crop,
and I can just see a movement.
There's a couple of girls
and a guy in a white hat.
We've got to follow the guy in
the white hat, so we've got to go.
Many of the protesters are farmers
worried that the GM maize
will contaminate their own crops,
so they are determined to destroy
the fields before they can
flower and spread their pollen.
But to do that, they have to get
past the police who have turned
out in force to protect the crops.
As we make our way up,
there's more and more police.
You can see these squad vans
and there's more cop cars up there.
They all seem very peaceful,
except something's happening.
HORNS BEEP
All of a sudden,
it's all kicked off
and a whole group of people
have sprinted off,
and now they're going through
this oilseed rape,
heading towards the crop,
and the police are pretty fast
off the mark, so I think they're
going to try and catch them.
THEY SPEAK IN GERMAN
The police protect the GM field.
Why?
Who is the criminal?
We farmers and beekeepers,
or the guys who...
who harvest and plant GM crops?
I don't understand what
the police is protecting here.
But it turns out
the damage had already been done.
WOMAN SHOUTS IN GERMAN
In a dawn raid,
a separate group of saboteurs
had managed to get into the field
where they filmed themselves
destroying the crop.
I don't know who's right
and who's wrong,
but it's obvious that this is
the clash of two
different worlds here...
.. and this is the result.
This is the battlefield.
For now, it seems pretty clear
who's winning the battles.
Direct action like this, the
work of a tiny group of activists,
has had an enormous effect
on the take-up of GM.
The threat of sabotage means
that in many areas of Europe,
few people are prepared to grow it.
I know this isn't an experiment,
this is actually a cash crop,
but even the experimental plots
get pulled up, as well,
which... I don't know
if that's the right thing to do
because you can never understand
what the consequences of GM
are going to be
unless you do the experiments.
I do have some sympathy
with the anti-GM protesters
but while I'm not sure we need GM
crops, I'm also not convinced that
they are as scary as they believe.
One thing I do know is that
modifying plants is nothing new.
We have been doing it
for thousands of years.
None of the crops or vegetables
we grow are truly natural.
They're mutated forms of wild plants
that have been selectively bred
over thousands of years.
In some parts of the country,
like up here
on the white cliffs of Dover,
Look, amongst all this grass here...
Now, this scruffy little plant here
is, in fact,
wild carrot,
but to get at that,
we're going to have to dig it up,
and get this spade and dig in.
Now, you're not usually
allowed to dig up wild plants
but we have got special permission
from the National Trust.
And in there...
.. is... the wild carrot.
Now...
smells like carrot, and the leaves
certainly do as well,
but it's tiny, absolutely miniscule.
Imagine if you were
going to chop that up and have it
with your Sunday roast!
Let's have a little taste...
Carroty flavour...
.. stringy...
slightly bitter quality to it.
I think I'll put that back
in the ground!
You can clearly see how much
we've changed the carrots
we buy in our supermarkets,
but what I've really come here to
find is an inconspicuous wild plant
that has been bred
over the centuries to become
a huge part of our diet.
Here we go,
this is what I'm looking for.
Now, this is wild cabbage
and it grows all along here,
and it's amazing
that from this one plant,
over hundreds of years
of selective breeding,
we've got a whole array of
vegetables, and the first
was this loose-leaf cabbage.
It's not a huge leap of imagination
to see how that's changed
but then we go on.
Different varieties of cabbage, like
this crinkly leafed variety here,
and then this densely packed
cabbage,
and that's just like a big bud, the
But it's not just cabbage.
Broccoli...
cauliflower...
kohlrabi...
and Brussels sprouts have all
been bred from wild cabbage.
They're all classified
as the same species,
but none of them could
survive outside the protection
of a farmer's field.
In the wild, plants produce
bitter-tasting chemicals
or have spines to protect themselves
against predators,
but for us humans
to eat a plant like that,
we don't want all that,
so we've bred them over generations
to get rid of all that,
to produce vegetables like this,
but, of course,
we've rendered them defenceless
so they only really survive
if humans look after them
and grow them.
If you think about it, man has been
tinkering with plant breeding
for thousands of years
and all the crops that we grow
and eat are basically man-made,
so is GM just an extension
of that process?
Or is GM pushing
the boundaries of nature too far?
To find the answer, I've come to
the John Innes Centre,
one of the world's leading
independent plant research
institutes.
I trained as a scientist,
so I've been in plenty of labs
but it's my first time in one
where they do genetic modification.
Hi, Wendy, I'm Jim.
Nice to meet you. Nice to meet you.
'I've come to see Wendy Harwood,
who has promised to show me
how the GM process works. '
People are obviously concerned
about GM and is it good for you,
is it bad for you,
but there's a big gap in
people's knowledge of what is GM.
I mean, basically, what is GM?
GM is modifying a plant by
taking a gene from somewhere else,
so it could come from anywhere,
and introducing that gene,
that piece of DNA, into the plant.
We do that in order to change
a particular trait in the plant.
So, absolutely anything that,
that's living on the planet,
we could take the genes from?
In theory, yes, we could do,
but in practice, most of the genes
that we work with are plant genes
going into a plant.
So you're taking genes from
different species, different
organisms and putting them together.
I mean, isn't that unnatural?
It is a surprisingly natural
technique, the method we're using,
because we're actually using
a natural bacteria
called agrobacterium,
but the amazing thing about this is
that this bacteria has the ability
to transfer a bit of its own DNA,
its own genetic information,
into the plant, and of course
that's exactly what we want to do.
Agrobacterium is often referred
to as nature's genetic engineer
because that's what it does.
Normally, agrobacteria use
their ability to infect plants
to make them grow crown galls,
the perfect habitat
for the bacteria to live in.
Their secret lies in a ring of DNA
called a plasmid.
This extra chromosome carries
all the genes the bacteria need
to infect the plant cells
with a section of their own DNA.
In nature, the transferred genes
turn the plant cells into factories
for producing the bacteria's food.
What the scientists are able to do
is remove and replace
the bacterial genes.
Using this technique, it should
be possible to put
any gene into almost any plant.
The first step is to remove
the embryos from the barley seeds.
Now, let's just try and get hold of
this. This is really fiddly,
cos tiny, tiny little things
we're dealing with, tiny seeds,
and a little tiny embryo inside.
Swine!
No...
Ah, put it in here?
Yes, that's great.
'Then comes the vital stage
of applying the bacteria
with a drought-tolerant gene. '
OK, I need just a tiny drop? Yes.
On each one? Tiny drop on
top of each... each one of these.
So, I am actually now in the
process of creating
a genetically modified plant?
Yes, you are, yeah.
That's huge.
It's getting bigger and bigger.
And that's that.
Well, that wasn't that difficult.
No, it's fairly straightforward.
I thought it was going to be
a lot more complicated.
You imagine some sort of, you know,
some sort of massive machine
or highly technical...
It's actually quite simple.
Yeah, it's very simple.
As you said, it's using a natural
process, using this bacteria,
so it's very straightforward.
The process doesn't work on
every embryo,
but once they germinate, the
seedlings that have incorporated
the gene can be selected.
Right, OK, now we can see
some later stages of the process.
They look different, don't they?
There's green on that one.
The plants are developing,
they're beginning to form roots
and you've got strong little shoots.
This is it, this is the GM. That
is a little GM..... plant in here.
Yeah, GM barley plant.
A GM barley plant.
And so this barley plant in here
should have resistance
to certain plant stresses,
including drought?
Yes, that's right, yeah.
Wow!
'But as well as producing
plants that may grow better,
'scientists also hope that GM
can help produce food
with real health benefits.
'Professor Cathie Martin is another
scientist at the John Innes Centre.
'One of her latest creations
is a startling-looking tomato. '
Wow, Cathie,
what have you done to these?
Unbelievable! The difference
in colour! Normal tomatoes here,
and then you've got these,
that look like...
the most purple, deep-chocolate-y
Maltesers. What have you done?
We've been engineering them
to make them more nutritious,
so a lot of berries
contain high levels of pigments,
which are called anthocyanins,
which are very good for you,
but people don't eat a lot of
berries and they're quite seasonal,
so we've been able to engineer
high levels of the same compounds
in these fruit,
so that people can get
the levels that they need,
that they would otherwise get
from blackberries and blackcurrants
in tomatoes instead.
The whole idea is that we can
help to protect people against
certain major chronic diseases,
such as cardiovascular
disease and cancer,
by providing dietary antioxidants.
Can I cut one of these open?
Yeah, please do.
It's unbelievable.
Look at that colour!
Just for a thing of beauty, they're
amazing, aren't they? Well,
they'd make quite a nice salad!
I should prefer that colour.
I mean, when would people be able
to start buying this crop here?
When regulations allow us to do it,
and that means that we have to
go through a lot of tests
because it's
a genetically modified crop.
But conventionally, you don't need
testing? It can go straight to the
market and people can eat it? Yeah.
But yet you have to go through
rigorous testing? Yes.
How does that make you feel?
Because you've spent
a lot of time doing this.
Um... sanguine. I want
what I have produced to be useful
and beneficial to people,
but I want people to be reassured
that they are safe to eat,
and while there's concerns because
they're genetically modified,
then we should go through the
appropriate testing.
Despite Cathie's hopes for
her tomatoes, it's uncertain
if they'll ever make it to market.
In 12 years, the EU
have only licensed one GM crop
to be grown commercially,
and that's maize,
like the variety I saw in Germany.
For now, at least,
the scientists have lost the battle
over GM in Europe.
'It's been won by anti-GM
campaigners like
Lord Peter Melchett,
'policy director
of the Soil Association. '
Why don't you like GM crops?
What have you got against GM?
GM is a really uncertain, imprecise,
risky technology,
and you put it out into the
countryside, into soil
which we don't understand,
where we haven't even identified
everything that lives in it.
They don't know what they're doing,
and we shouldn't take that risk.
That's my fundamental objection.
So, for you, it's an unknown?
It's an uncertainty with
tremendous risks attached to it,
and it's something, you know,
like grey squirrels,
like the Romans releasing
rabbits, once they're out there,
you can't get it back.
And, for you,
what are the potential risks
for growing these crops
in the wider environment?
They reduce wildlife, there are real
risks to human health which haven't
been investigated,
and there are risks
to every other sort of farming
that doesn't want to use GM
because it's going to be
contaminated. It comes in and
blasts away - organic, for example.
So you couldn't have GM farming
in the village up the road, and then
have organic farming next door?
Not if they were growing the same
crops as we were. But if GM has the
potential to help produce more food,
shouldn't we investigate it further?
No, we're facing completely
different challenges now.
We're facing the challenge
of climate change, incredible
horrible problems we face,
and we've got to really change
the way we produce food radically.
GM has no part to play in that. It's
on the way out. Good thing, too.
But there is a place you can go
where attitudes to GM
are very different.
In America, genetically modified
crops have been widely planted
for more than ten years.
So far I've seen different stories,
in terms of GM.
I can see how it could offer
great potential in the future.
I've seen how it has
affected the country's economy.
You know I've seen a bit
of the bad side but, for me,
in theory at least,
the science is absolutely amazing
and it offers an element of hope,
but there's a couple of things
that really bug me.
One is the effect on human health
over a long period,
if we're eating the stuff,
and two,
the effect on the environment, which
we don't really know about yet.
So I've come to the US of A,
which is basically the homeland
of GM crops,
to find out a bit more, and I've
heard that you can find GM crops
growing in pretty unusual places.
In the heart of Pennsylvania,
on America's east coast, live the
Amish, a devout religious society
whose way of life has been
unchanged for decades.
It's unreal!
no machine whatsoever,
obviously no tractor or whatever.
It's like going back in time,
going back 60-odd years.
The Amish are the epitome
of sustainable farming.
Fugitives from religious persecution
in 17th-century Switzerland,
they settled in the US determined
to preserve their way of life.
The Amish avoid most mod-cons.
Few of their homes have electricity,
and they certainly don't
watch television.
But that doesn't mean they're
opposed to all new technology.
I'm here to see an Amish farmer
called Gideon,
and because of his religious
beliefs, he can't be filmed
directly in the face
so we have to film him
from behind, which is fine,
but the unusual thing is, despite
all that religious belief and not
being filmed, he grows GM crops.
The machines that you use
in the fields, they're
all horse-drawn aren't they?
There's no tractors used
in the fields? No.
But I think a lot of people would
find it surprising that you use GMOs
Why do you use genetically
modified organisms?
We have to keep farming
in a way that our farms
are both profitable and practical.
As a church group, you know,
we are not opposed to... to GMOs.
It's just a tool that we're using in
the same way that we use pesticides.
Pest control is important for all
farmers, but especially so if
you rely on horse-drawn machinery.
So some Amish farmers like Gideon
grow a variety of corn known as BT,
that's modified
to resist insect attack,
specifically from a caterpillar
called the corn borer.
The corn borer is a major problem.
What's the consequence of it?
Well, a corn borer is a worm or a
caterpillar which will actually bore
up through the stalk of the corn
and weaken that stalk to the point
where the top of the corn stalk
is now dying.
So the heads of
the corn would just drop off?
They'll break off and hang there,
and if you have a whole field
like that,
and you're wanting to harvest that
with our harvesting methods,
it's very tough,
it's very hard work, so we will use
this BT corn to make our harvesting
methods more practical and easier.
And as you can see, we're getting
very high yields and we're getting
great returns per acre.
And for you, you know, working with
the land, maintaining the soil,
if you thought GMO crops were going
to harm your soil,
you wouldn't use them?
No, we wouldn't. If we would know
this is going to harm our soil
and our health,
we would discontinue to use them.
We are committed to passing
our farms onto our next generation
and have them passing it on
to the next generation.
We're not ruining our soils.
So what would you say to someone
who'd say that, you know,
the use of GMO crops is wrong,
it's going to lead
to an environmental disaster?
I would probably say they're
misinformed, they don't know
what they're talking about.
That's short and blunt.
The GM revolution
has already happened here.
It's not just the Amish.
They're really a tiny cog
in the grand scheme of things.
American farmers plant more GM crops
than anywhere else in the world.
One thing I've got
from coming to the US
is just realising the sheer scale
of the farming here, in terms of GM,
because 80% of the soya,
the cotton and the corn is GM crops.
That's 55 million hectares
turned over to GM plants
and that tells me that,
for the farmers, it's working.
They wouldn't be growing it if it
didn't make economic sense for them.
And because the GM plants have
been growing here for ten years,
if there are any downsides to it,
this is the place to find them.
One of the big fears about GM crops
is the long-term effect they can
have on the rest of the environment.
It's what spurred on
the protesters in Germany,
and to be frank, it worries me too.
So I've come to the deserts
of Arizona.
In this one state, they plant nearly
60,000 hectares with GM cotton.
Like the maize the Amish grow, it
has been modified with a BT protein
to protect it from insect damage.
Bruce Tabashnik, an entomologist
at the University of Arizona,
has spent the last decade
studying the impact of GM cotton
on the local insect populations.
Hi, you must be Bruce?
Hey, nice to meet you.
I see you're trapping out here.
What are you collecting?
We're collecting adult moths
of the pink bollworm.
The name is from the caterpillars,
and the caterpillars are pests
of cotton that you see over here.
So what actual damage do these
moths do to the crop?
Well, it's not the moths that do
the actual damage, but the females
lay eggs on the cotton plants.
When the eggs hatch,
caterpillars crawl out.
They bore into the bolls of cotton
and they can completely destroy
the yield of the cotton plants.
Wow, what a difference.
So, I mean, the key to controlling
them, for you, is what?
Now we have
genetically modified cotton
that produces a protein
that kills the caterpillars,
and before we had this,
the farmers were spraying
as many as six, eight, ten times a
year with conventional insecticides
to try to control this insect. But
now, with the genetically modified
cotton, they hardly spray at all.
That's got to be good for
the environment, surely? Absolutely.
It's good for the environment,
good for farmer workers' health
and it's good for their bottom line.
They save money.
Every year the farmers in Arizona
are saving millions of dollars
from the insecticide
that they're not spraying on cotton
that they used to. Wow.
It surprised me to find
that GM crops can be better
for the environment,
but using so much less insecticide
has got to be a good thing.
But there are also other concerns
about GM crops' impact on nature.
One of the biggest is gene flow.
Pollen from GM plants
can cross-fertilise
other closely related species
and can spread the modified genes
into the environment.
Gene flow is a real concern, and
there have been documented cases
of it around the world.
So far, the insecticidal
BT genes from GM cotton haven't
crossed into wild plants,
but the scientists have to consider
the consequences if it does happen.
One possibility is that the wild
plants would now be protected
against certain insects,
by the BT protein.
Now, depending on the nature of that
wild plant, that could be a problem.
So this unbalancing
the natural state of things -
is this something
that you'd worry about?
It wouldn't be of primary concern.
I think that the way to think
about it is to weigh the benefits
against the risks,
and so we have a known gain
in reducing insecticide use,
and we have a hypothetical problem,
something that hasn't been seen yet.
I think,
because it's a new technology,
it's great to be vigilant
and keep in mind
potential negative consequences,
but essentially there have been
no health or ecological problems
associated with growing GM crops,
despite the fact they've been grown
in dozens of countries now
for more than a decade.
So do you think that GM crops
could feed the world?
I think GM crops can HELP to solve
the problem of feeding the world,
but certainly not alone.
I think we should think about
producing food in a sustainable
and environmentally friendly way,
and if GM crops can help us do that,
then I see that as a benefit.
But the question that concerns me
most about GM crops is,
are they safe to eat?
There are 300 million Americans
who had better hope they're safe
because they've been eating them
for more than ten years,
even though some worry they might
cause allergies, or even cancer.
Doug Gurian-Sherman
is a biologist from the
Union of Concerned Scientists,
an organisation that campaigns
for greater regulation of GM crops.
So we can do that with no problem.
Thank you.
Wow. Thank you.
In terms of GM, do you think
the average American realises
how much GM is in their food?
Well, no, because for one thing,
it's not labelled,
so there's nothing to tell them
that they're eating a GM food,
so most Americans really don't know.
Well, in that case then... I've got
my lunch here, burger and chips.
Now, take me through this,
and what has GM?
Well, the fries
will have been fried in oil
that has a good chance of being
genetically engineered
from genetically engineered
oil crops, like soya bean or corn.
The cheese, dairy cows
are often injected with
genetically modified growth hormone
to increase their production,
so that's likely modified.
The burger, if there's filler,
soya extender, that would be
genetically modified.
And these things? Well, those are
corn fritters, so you're getting
a high dose of it.
That's pretty much probably
pure genetically modified corn.
And then, other things that
we hope are not, like tomatoes,
we grow in field trials where
contamination is not monitored,
but we have seen incidence of it,
so it's even possible that through
contamination, there could be some.
And what about the bread? The bread
has got things probably like
dairy products and soya lecithin
and other things that come
from genetically modified crops.
And what about if I was to put...
You're stuck there, too, because
the sweetener in it is likely
to be high-fructose corn syrup.
It's pretty much replaced sugar
as our sweetening agent of choice
because of low cost.
And what about the soda?
Stuck there too,
because you've got high-fructose
corn syrup is the sweetener.
So there is no, really, escaping.
It's pretty tough. And you're not...
If you don't know and if you're not
paying close attention to it,
you're inevitably going to be eating
genetically modified ingredients.
So in terms of eating GM food,
the sort of big burning question
I've got, is it safe to eat it?
Are there any dangers?
Well, I try to avoid eating
genetically modified crops,
not because I think these crops
are necessarily harmful,
but because I'm not confident
in their food testing enough
to know and to be confident as to
whether they are or not.
For example, in our Food And Drug
Administration, there's no set
tests, there's no long-term testing.
There's no required testing in
animals to see if the animal
is going to be harmed, which we can
extrapolate potentially to humans.
And some people would say, "Well,
we Americans have been eating this
"for ten years and nobody's
gotten sick. "
Well, for one thing,
we clearly don't know that.
You cannot determine whether or not
these crops are causing any harm
unless you're going out and
actively surveying the population
and doing the right kind of studies.
Do you think we should turn
our back on GM technology? Do you
think it's too much to worry about?
I think, until we have a safety
testing regime in place for food
safety, we should really slow down
and think twice
about commercialising these crops.
Despite Doug's fears,
50 scientific reviews
have reached consensus that the
GM crops currently on the market
are safe.
But some GM varieties
grown in the laboratory
have caused allergic reactions
in animals,
and while any doubts remain,
I wonder if it's worth
taking the risk.
So far, when you look at the risks
and who's taking the risks,
compared to the benefits
and who's getting the benefits,
well obviously,
straightaway the benefits are
the large-scale farmers
and the companies
that are developing it.
They're getting the benefits.
The risks are taken by...
everyone that lives around
the crops and eats the crops.
You know that's,
that's an imbalance to me
and if this technology is here,
we're arguing and talking and
discussing about this technology,
and is it right, is it wrong,
should it be here?
It's here and I think
the benefits need to be
for the people who really need it.
If I could see people saying,
"Do you know what?
GM has changed my life.
"My children are fed,
it's saved us. "
If I could see that,
or the potential for that,
then I don't know,
you'd have to really question
the downsides of it then.
I'm still not sure we need GM crops
in the developed world.
Our farms are incredibly productive
and no-one here is
in danger of starvation.
But that's not true everywhere.
There are parts of the world
where food production needs to
increase dramatically.
I've come to Uganda,
which is one of the wealthiest
countries in the whole of Africa,
but they still have it pretty tough
compared to European standards.
But if you think about it,
1% of the UK's population
is connected with primary
food production, i. e., agriculture.
We have plenty of food in the shops
and we never go starving.
Here in Uganda,
80% of the population are connected
with farming and agriculture,
yet they still go hungry.
African agriculture has been
a disaster in the last 40 years.
While in the rest of the world,
food production
has increased by over 50%,
in Africa, productivity
has been steadily falling
with the result that 30%
of the African population
is permanently undernourished.
No-one is suggesting that GM is the
only solution to Africa's problems,
but if GM technology is to be
of benefit anywhere, it's here.
But what they need are improved
varieties of local crops
and in Uganda,
the main source of food
is the East African
highland banana.
That's a great sound, isn't it?
'Many Ugandans, like Margaret
Sejenda, are subsistence farmers.
'The bananas from her small
plantation provide her food
'and most of her income. '
Look at that, you don't often see
bananas in such big bunches,
but this is such an important crop
to Uganda.
I think the average Ugandan
eats about 450 kilos a year,
which is about 2,000 bananas
per person,
and they're completely different
to the bananas we get at home.
We're used to bananas being soft
and sweet,
they're pretty tough, quite hard...
It's quite clayey.
That isn't very nice at all.
Yeah, you wouldn't want that
in your packed lunch, really.
To make the bananas palatable,
they need to be cooked,
and preparing banana porridge,
or matoke, is a daily ritual.
Would I make a good banana peeler?
It's just... You peel them
just like a potato.
'The bananas are peeled and then
steamed in their own leaves
'until they dissolve
into a starchy mash. '
Excellent, so now that'll just cook,
leave it.
'It's what most Ugandans
eat for every meal. '
Now it's ready to eat, isn't it?
It is ready for serving.
Wow, thank you.
OK, first, first matoke.
That's quite fibrous, isn't it?
Lots of starch.
Can you put this in with the sauce?
Yes. I see, so it sponges up
a lot of the flavour.
Oh, that's better.
Wonderful.
But there is a problem
with Uganda's bananas.
They're falling victim to disease.
Now this is a banana tree
that's suffering from a disease
called black sigatoka,
and I can tell that, one, because
it's got a tiny bunch of bananas
compared to all the other trees
around here,
literally I'd say 50% less,
which is incredible,
and the way I can tell
it's got black sigatoka
is that this dry leaf here,
I mean, look at that...
This leaf is completely dried out
before the fruit is ripe.
So what that's doing
is it's removing the only source
of energy this plant has got.
It captures the sunlight
in its leaves,
converts it to starches and sugars
that then go into the fruit.
Obviously if that's disabled,
it can't produce enough fruit
which is bad news for the farmer.
'Black sigatoka is threatening
all Uganda's banana crop,
'with particularly
serious implications
for small farmers like Margaret. '
Sigatoka has infected
all of these trees here,
so it means this side
of your plantation, the bananas...
you're not going to have many,
are you?
If you don't fight this disease,
by... within...
by three years in time,
you will get no,
we will be having no banana.
Really? Because they will go, then
the harvest will be like this size
and you see if you start getting
this size from the farm,
you'd be going...
Out of business.
The business will be going.
A strain of banana
resistant to black sigatoka
is desperately needed.
But because bananas are seedless and
sterile, you can't cross-breed them
and that makes developing
new varieties very difficult.
One potential solution
is to use GM techniques
to insert the necessary genes
into the bananas.
That's exactly what they're trying
to do in the hills outside Kampala.
Here at the National Agricultural
Biotechnology Centre,
Dr Wilberforce Tushemereirwe
is running one of Africa's
first GM trials.
Yes. I'm Jim. Oh, good to meet you.
I've come to see your bananas.
You're welcome.
So tell me, when I look round here,
coming through the facility,
there's lots of gates and fences
and you've got barbed wire.
Why have you got such security?
We have a problem of people
in the neighbourhood,
farmers, sometimes the workers,
wanting to steal the plants.
They come and pinch the plants?
To smash them up because
they don't want GM crops?
No, no, no, they want to steal
them to go and plant them.
Yes, they think the plants from
the station are very good
because we have picked
good varieties from here.
So instead of coming to smash
the plants up,
they want to steal them to actually
grow them? Yes, yes.
Farmers know that the solutions
will come from the station
and their problems
are really immense.
Well, let's see them, then.
You are welcome to the trial.
Let's see these top bananas.
In the trial plot, GM and ordinary
bananas are grown side by side
to see how they compare.
It's hoped that the GM plants
will remain uninfected,
as they have been enhanced
with a fungal-resistance gene
from a surprising source.
We have picked a gene
that confirms resistance in rice.
So you've taken a gene from the rice
plants and put it into the banana?
Yes.
And that gives it the resistance?
That gives it the resistance
because rice itself
resists this disease.
Sure. But isn't there conventional
ways of controlling black sigatoka
so you don't have to use GM?
Like fungicides?
Yes, you could use the fungicide
but in our circumstances,
like in Uganda, fungicides would be
too expensive for farmers to afford.
Let me say, maybe in Uganda
there might be some crops
where genetic engineering is not
necessary, but there are some crops
where genetic engineering is a must,
and banana is one of them.
The first results are
expected in May.
But even if the trials
are successful,
it will be at least ten years
before the first GM bananas
can be grown by Ugandan farmers.
They could be a real shot in the arm
for African agriculture
but they also need to be approved
by their policy-makers
who have shown signs of adopting
European attitudes towards GM.
The attitude in Europe has
negatively influenced our planners,
some of our policy-makers,
to believe that maybe
there is something wrong
with genetic engineering, and
we feel that is very unfortunate,
because the needs of Africa
are different from the needs
of Europeans.
In Europe, you have too much
food, you have plenty of food
and many options, but in Africa
we have a shortage of food.
We need to increase food.
The population is going up,
productivity is going down.
It's a very serious situation
we face in the future.
The effects of European attitudes
on African policy
The effects of European attitudes
on African policy
was seen most starkly during
the southern African famine of 2002.
With millions at risk of starvation,
thousands of tons of GM maize
sent from the US sat unused,
rejected by four governments
who believed the GM seed
would contaminate their fields.
The president of Zambia even
suggested it might be poisonous.
We would rather starve
than get something
which is going to be toxic.
But this was the same grain
that the Americans had been
happily eating for years.
It was a reminder of the global
nature of the world food trade,
and how the decisions we make
about what we grow
can have life-or-death impacts
elsewhere.
My trip round Uganda
has been fascinating
because for the first time I've seen
the application of GM technology,
where it's potentially put more food
on the table, which is fantastic.
In terms of GM bananas, it could
increase their production by 60%,
so imagine what this technology
could do in the future
for the whole of Africa?
I mean it could put a lot more food
in people's bellies.
But if this technology
is all it's meant to be
and delivers
all it's promised to do,
it's a bit sad that Europeans' views
of it could stunt the development
of where it's most needed,
in countries in Africa.
Come on!
My journey into the world of GM
has been a real eye-opener,
and the one thing that stands out
for me is how it's an issue
that's divided the world.
In Europe, people are prepared to
take the law into their own hands
to protest against the technology.
But in much of the rest
of the world,
they're planting it
on more and more land each year.
But which is the right way to go?
I don't think the crops that
are being grown at the moment
are going to save the world.
They're good for farmers
and they're good for profits,
but while there are lingering doubts
about GM,
we need to proceed very carefully.
But we do need to proceed.
The prospects of food that
could help prevent cancer,
or resist drought or even disease,
show the potential
that GM technology could have.
I think it's madness that
we turn away from this technology.
It's maybe not here at the moment
but 10, 15, 20, 50 years' time,
I mean that technology
could be so useful.
I mean, it has great potential
to feed the hungry
but that will only ever happen
if we carry out some experiments
and I think if you're for GM
or against it,
surely you've got to be
FOR understanding.
Whatever your argument is,
you've got to be into finding out,
knowledge, and without testing,
we'll never know.
We'll live in the darkness.
Subtitles by Red Bee Media Ltd
E- mail subtitling@bbc. co. uk
and this is my farm. '
Morning, ladies!
'120 acres of rural Suffolk...
'.. where we raise our livestock
the old fashioned way.
Traditional farming, rare breeds,
free range.
I suppose I've sort of
turned the clock back
on farming, in some ways,
and it's working with nature,
really. That's how I see it.
'But elsewhere,
food production is in crisis.
'We need to double the amount
we grow in the next 50 years. '
I've never seen anything
quite like that in my life.
'And I'm going on
a worldwide journey
'to investigate one of the most
controversial potential solutions. '
Let's see these top bananas!
'It's a journey that will
take me from the most traditional
farming systems... '
It's unreal.
It's like going back in time.
'.. to the cutting edge of genetic
science. ' That's unbelievable.
Cathie, what have you done to these?
Now, I love the way that I farm,
but I am...
I am a realist and I realise
that the way I produce food
won't feed the world,
and a lot of people think
that the only way to do that
is to use biotechnology,
GM crops,
and I'm not sure about that.
I don't know if it's safe or not,
I don't know what the consequences
are, but what if...
what if the answer to feeding
the hungry is using biotechnology?
Can GM crops save the world?
So, I am actually now
in the process
of creating a genetically
modified plant? Yes, you are.
My journey begins on
the Argentinian pampas.
If you had to send me anywhere
in the world, it would be here.
It's like a scene out of Bonanza.
It's brilliant,
it's proper cowboy country.
This is my kind of farming -
free-range cattle ranching
on a massive scale.
It's got to be
every boy's dream to do this.
The dust, the smell of the horses,
these guys,
and you really start to get...
I'm in Argentina.
This may seem a million miles
from your local supermarket
but the reason I've come to
Argentina is to see a revolution
that's happened to farming here.
It's a revolution
that affects what we all eat.
And it's all down to these -
genetically modified soya beans.
This single crop has made Argentina
the GM capital of the world.
This doesn't look much at the moment
because all the soya beans
have been harvested,
but you can imagine
that this was just a huge field
full of soya bean crop
and, uniquely about
this particular strain,
is that it's been
genetically modified to be resistant
to a particular weedkiller,
so you could put the weedkiller
down, it kills
all the weeds but not the crop.
And it's that fact that has led
to a huge revolution in
Argentina's agricultural output.
If you grow GM and ordinary soya
side by side, it's impossible to
tell the difference between them...
until you spray them
with weedkiller.
This one small change means
it's possible to grow the crop
using less herbicide.
It's made soya farming
much more profitable
and I'm wondering if it's a
technology that we should all adopt.
A lot of people, if they hear that,
would think it's a bit strange
because the way I farm.
You know, I'm all about
traditional breeds, free range,
that sort of whole wholesome thing,
but in terms of science, and
coming from a science background,
I think the technology
is fascinating
and there needs to be lots of
science done on GM so
we've got a better understanding
but I don't think it's right
to straight away brush it aside
as the devil's work
because you can't have an opinion
on something until you see all the
facts, so I'm here to see the facts.
The first thing I want to see
is the scale of the soya industry.
Oh, no!
And to do that,
I have to take to the air.
Oh, whoa!
A dozen years ago,
Argentina grew virtually no soya.
This year, over half their arable
land, an area the size of Britain,
will be planted with
genetically modified soya beans.
Just below me here, all these
huge fields are being prepared
to sow the GM soya in,
and the large-scale farmers
have really benefited
from the soya bean here
because they get the most profit out
of it when they grow it on this
scale, and it is absolutely huge.
It is super-size farming.
I've never seen anything like it.
But there is a down side
to the soya boom.
Huge areas of natural forest
are being burned down and cleared
to make way for more fields,
and it's all being done to put food
on our tables.
To see how the soya gets to us,
I've come to the
Vicentin processing plant...
Get out of the way!
.. a vast factory where, every day,
they take delivery
of 20,000 tons of soya beans.
And this is what it's all about,
the humble little soya bean,
and what's inside it -
the protein and the oil.
OK, this is...
Good lord, look at that.
The beans are ground up
to produce soya meal.
It's the world's biggest source
of vegetable protein and a
vital component of animal feed.
I've never seen anything
quite like that in my life.
It is just unbelievable.
It's like a volcano, it's
like a mountain. Yes, it's huge.
It's genetically modified soya like
this that feeds the world's animals.
It could well have fed your Sunday
roast and, without it, the world's
livestock industry would collapse.
And this is all GM?
It's all GM crops, yes.
Whether we like it or not, GM crops
are already part of what we eat.
Look at that.
Ships coming in, all along here,
they're loading up
and clearing off,
and they're going
all round the world.
For me, it's blown me away a bit
because I thought that GM
was a bit on the periphery,
but the globe
is a consumer of GM soya,
and it's funny because, you know,
the people that think that
GM doesn't affect the UK,
it's quite naive thinking, that, and
it's quite a revelation for myself
because GM soya is going
into animal feed, and I just wonder
how many consumers in the UK
have ever thought about
indirectly eating GM food.
In countries like Argentina,
the GM revolution is well underway
but in Europe, the approach
has been quite the opposite.
To shop in Britain, you'd
never guess that nearly 10% of
the world's crops are now GM
because Britain has become
a virtual GM-free zone.
I wouldn't normally
go to a supermarket -
this is the first time I've been in
one for four years - but I've come
here for a very special reason -
to try and find some products
which I can use to test British
people's attitudes towards GM.
Well, most supermarkets in Britain
are proudly GM free
and they advertise the fact.
There's stuff labelled all over the
place saying GM free
and you have to look pretty hard
to find anything
that is made out of GM crops.
There we go... sausages.
Wonder how many of the pigs
were fed on GM soya.
This is what I'm after,
tucked away in the world food aisle.
Vegetable cooking oil,
and it's made out of
genetically modified soya.
And this is probably one of the
very few products in this whole
supermarket that's got GM in it.
This is what I'm after.
The reason we don't have many GM
products in our shops is supposedly
because of public opposition,
but are people really that anti-GM?
I'm going to try and find out
by asking the citizens of Norwich.
So, what we're doing here is, we're
going to do a little comparison
and see what people think of GM.
So I've got some sausages here.
One batch is cooked in non-GM oil,
the other is cooked in GM soya oil,
and we'll see what people think.
Hello. ladies.
I've got a little experiment here.
I know that face.
I cooked this batch up
in vegetable oil that's GM-free,
the other one in GM cooking oil.
If I was to ask you which
sausage do you like,
GM or non-GM, what would it be?
GM free. GM free?
Given the option, I'd go non-GM.
OK, why would you go non-GM?
I don't think we should really
be messing with things
unless we absolutely have to.
I just don't like to think of things
being too fiddled with, really.
Bit Frankenstein science? Yeah.
It's a bit new. Maybe in 100 years,
we'll know for sure
it's safe or not safe.
Which one would you choose?
The normal one.
The normal one, why?
Because it's normal.
I don't like genetically modified
crops or messing with Mother Nature.
Life is love, and messing around
with love is not a good idea.
So, for you, messing around with
the genetics is wrong? Is wrong.
The first thing that became very
clear was that no-one wanted
their sausages cooked in GM oil.
Ordinarily, I'd go for the GM free.
You'd go for GM free?
Why would that be?
Just prejudice, really, there's not
a rational explanation for it.
But with a little information
about the possible benefits of GM,
most people were prepared
to be more open-minded.
What if I said that this one could,
potentially, the technology,
could feed a lot of people
round the world?
Then I'd go for GM, I guess. Yeah.
So this one could, potentially,
be better for the environment,
the GM one.
It could be better? Yes, because
they use less pesticides
on the land to grow this one,
less herbicides on the land
for this production system
than the conventional one.
Well, then I would change my mind.
I'll go for a GM
and eat it triumphantly. Brilliant.
It's perhaps not surprising
that many people don't
know what to think about GM.
There's been so many mixed
messages about the subject.
Frankenstein food.
Customers loved it, actually.
Confusion and hysterics
over genetically modified food...
The company Monsanto
has launched a campaign to promote
so-called GM foods.
It's time for us to say,
"No, we don't want it... "
Genetic engineering could bring us
healthier and cheaper foods...
For the past decade, a propaganda
war has been waged over the
advantages and dangers of GM.
Many people are using this research
to continue the propaganda
against genetically modified plants.
These crops offer us a safe, highly
nutritious, affordable food...
While the pro side see it
as a valuable tool
that may help feed the world,
the anti side see it
as an unnecessary and
potentially dangerous technology.
Clearly, the public are getting
increasingly concerned about GM food.
It's something that we simply
can't afford to take a risk about.
At times, the debate
has resulted in confrontation.
In the late 1990s,
a series of anti-GM protests
destroyed experimental crops that
were meant to test the technology.
It helped put an end to the
planting of GM crops in Britain.
MAN SPEAKS IN GERMAN
Elsewhere in Europe, the protest
movement is alive and well.
Today, I've come to Bavaria,
along with hundreds of activists
from all over Europe
who have come to protest
at the planting of just a few
small fields of GM maize.
Most, but not all of them,
have come to protest peacefully.
The demonstration's sort of
heating up at the moment
and I've just got the nod that
there's a small splinter group
that are just going to veer off,
and they are pretty determined
to basically get into a field
and physically remove the GM crop,
and I can just see a movement.
There's a couple of girls
and a guy in a white hat.
We've got to follow the guy in
the white hat, so we've got to go.
Many of the protesters are farmers
worried that the GM maize
will contaminate their own crops,
so they are determined to destroy
the fields before they can
flower and spread their pollen.
But to do that, they have to get
past the police who have turned
out in force to protect the crops.
As we make our way up,
there's more and more police.
You can see these squad vans
and there's more cop cars up there.
They all seem very peaceful,
except something's happening.
HORNS BEEP
All of a sudden,
it's all kicked off
and a whole group of people
have sprinted off,
and now they're going through
this oilseed rape,
heading towards the crop,
and the police are pretty fast
off the mark, so I think they're
going to try and catch them.
THEY SPEAK IN GERMAN
The police protect the GM field.
Why?
Who is the criminal?
We farmers and beekeepers,
or the guys who...
who harvest and plant GM crops?
I don't understand what
the police is protecting here.
But it turns out
the damage had already been done.
WOMAN SHOUTS IN GERMAN
In a dawn raid,
a separate group of saboteurs
had managed to get into the field
where they filmed themselves
destroying the crop.
I don't know who's right
and who's wrong,
but it's obvious that this is
the clash of two
different worlds here...
.. and this is the result.
This is the battlefield.
For now, it seems pretty clear
who's winning the battles.
Direct action like this, the
work of a tiny group of activists,
has had an enormous effect
on the take-up of GM.
The threat of sabotage means
that in many areas of Europe,
few people are prepared to grow it.
I know this isn't an experiment,
this is actually a cash crop,
but even the experimental plots
get pulled up, as well,
which... I don't know
if that's the right thing to do
because you can never understand
what the consequences of GM
are going to be
unless you do the experiments.
I do have some sympathy
with the anti-GM protesters
but while I'm not sure we need GM
crops, I'm also not convinced that
they are as scary as they believe.
One thing I do know is that
modifying plants is nothing new.
We have been doing it
for thousands of years.
None of the crops or vegetables
we grow are truly natural.
They're mutated forms of wild plants
that have been selectively bred
over thousands of years.
In some parts of the country,
like up here
on the white cliffs of Dover,
Look, amongst all this grass here...
Now, this scruffy little plant here
is, in fact,
wild carrot,
but to get at that,
we're going to have to dig it up,
and get this spade and dig in.
Now, you're not usually
allowed to dig up wild plants
but we have got special permission
from the National Trust.
And in there...
.. is... the wild carrot.
Now...
smells like carrot, and the leaves
certainly do as well,
but it's tiny, absolutely miniscule.
Imagine if you were
going to chop that up and have it
with your Sunday roast!
Let's have a little taste...
Carroty flavour...
.. stringy...
slightly bitter quality to it.
I think I'll put that back
in the ground!
You can clearly see how much
we've changed the carrots
we buy in our supermarkets,
but what I've really come here to
find is an inconspicuous wild plant
that has been bred
over the centuries to become
a huge part of our diet.
Here we go,
this is what I'm looking for.
Now, this is wild cabbage
and it grows all along here,
and it's amazing
that from this one plant,
over hundreds of years
of selective breeding,
we've got a whole array of
vegetables, and the first
was this loose-leaf cabbage.
It's not a huge leap of imagination
to see how that's changed
but then we go on.
Different varieties of cabbage, like
this crinkly leafed variety here,
and then this densely packed
cabbage,
and that's just like a big bud, the
But it's not just cabbage.
Broccoli...
cauliflower...
kohlrabi...
and Brussels sprouts have all
been bred from wild cabbage.
They're all classified
as the same species,
but none of them could
survive outside the protection
of a farmer's field.
In the wild, plants produce
bitter-tasting chemicals
or have spines to protect themselves
against predators,
but for us humans
to eat a plant like that,
we don't want all that,
so we've bred them over generations
to get rid of all that,
to produce vegetables like this,
but, of course,
we've rendered them defenceless
so they only really survive
if humans look after them
and grow them.
If you think about it, man has been
tinkering with plant breeding
for thousands of years
and all the crops that we grow
and eat are basically man-made,
so is GM just an extension
of that process?
Or is GM pushing
the boundaries of nature too far?
To find the answer, I've come to
the John Innes Centre,
one of the world's leading
independent plant research
institutes.
I trained as a scientist,
so I've been in plenty of labs
but it's my first time in one
where they do genetic modification.
Hi, Wendy, I'm Jim.
Nice to meet you. Nice to meet you.
'I've come to see Wendy Harwood,
who has promised to show me
how the GM process works. '
People are obviously concerned
about GM and is it good for you,
is it bad for you,
but there's a big gap in
people's knowledge of what is GM.
I mean, basically, what is GM?
GM is modifying a plant by
taking a gene from somewhere else,
so it could come from anywhere,
and introducing that gene,
that piece of DNA, into the plant.
We do that in order to change
a particular trait in the plant.
So, absolutely anything that,
that's living on the planet,
we could take the genes from?
In theory, yes, we could do,
but in practice, most of the genes
that we work with are plant genes
going into a plant.
So you're taking genes from
different species, different
organisms and putting them together.
I mean, isn't that unnatural?
It is a surprisingly natural
technique, the method we're using,
because we're actually using
a natural bacteria
called agrobacterium,
but the amazing thing about this is
that this bacteria has the ability
to transfer a bit of its own DNA,
its own genetic information,
into the plant, and of course
that's exactly what we want to do.
Agrobacterium is often referred
to as nature's genetic engineer
because that's what it does.
Normally, agrobacteria use
their ability to infect plants
to make them grow crown galls,
the perfect habitat
for the bacteria to live in.
Their secret lies in a ring of DNA
called a plasmid.
This extra chromosome carries
all the genes the bacteria need
to infect the plant cells
with a section of their own DNA.
In nature, the transferred genes
turn the plant cells into factories
for producing the bacteria's food.
What the scientists are able to do
is remove and replace
the bacterial genes.
Using this technique, it should
be possible to put
any gene into almost any plant.
The first step is to remove
the embryos from the barley seeds.
Now, let's just try and get hold of
this. This is really fiddly,
cos tiny, tiny little things
we're dealing with, tiny seeds,
and a little tiny embryo inside.
Swine!
No...
Ah, put it in here?
Yes, that's great.
'Then comes the vital stage
of applying the bacteria
with a drought-tolerant gene. '
OK, I need just a tiny drop? Yes.
On each one? Tiny drop on
top of each... each one of these.
So, I am actually now in the
process of creating
a genetically modified plant?
Yes, you are, yeah.
That's huge.
It's getting bigger and bigger.
And that's that.
Well, that wasn't that difficult.
No, it's fairly straightforward.
I thought it was going to be
a lot more complicated.
You imagine some sort of, you know,
some sort of massive machine
or highly technical...
It's actually quite simple.
Yeah, it's very simple.
As you said, it's using a natural
process, using this bacteria,
so it's very straightforward.
The process doesn't work on
every embryo,
but once they germinate, the
seedlings that have incorporated
the gene can be selected.
Right, OK, now we can see
some later stages of the process.
They look different, don't they?
There's green on that one.
The plants are developing,
they're beginning to form roots
and you've got strong little shoots.
This is it, this is the GM. That
is a little GM..... plant in here.
Yeah, GM barley plant.
A GM barley plant.
And so this barley plant in here
should have resistance
to certain plant stresses,
including drought?
Yes, that's right, yeah.
Wow!
'But as well as producing
plants that may grow better,
'scientists also hope that GM
can help produce food
with real health benefits.
'Professor Cathie Martin is another
scientist at the John Innes Centre.
'One of her latest creations
is a startling-looking tomato. '
Wow, Cathie,
what have you done to these?
Unbelievable! The difference
in colour! Normal tomatoes here,
and then you've got these,
that look like...
the most purple, deep-chocolate-y
Maltesers. What have you done?
We've been engineering them
to make them more nutritious,
so a lot of berries
contain high levels of pigments,
which are called anthocyanins,
which are very good for you,
but people don't eat a lot of
berries and they're quite seasonal,
so we've been able to engineer
high levels of the same compounds
in these fruit,
so that people can get
the levels that they need,
that they would otherwise get
from blackberries and blackcurrants
in tomatoes instead.
The whole idea is that we can
help to protect people against
certain major chronic diseases,
such as cardiovascular
disease and cancer,
by providing dietary antioxidants.
Can I cut one of these open?
Yeah, please do.
It's unbelievable.
Look at that colour!
Just for a thing of beauty, they're
amazing, aren't they? Well,
they'd make quite a nice salad!
I should prefer that colour.
I mean, when would people be able
to start buying this crop here?
When regulations allow us to do it,
and that means that we have to
go through a lot of tests
because it's
a genetically modified crop.
But conventionally, you don't need
testing? It can go straight to the
market and people can eat it? Yeah.
But yet you have to go through
rigorous testing? Yes.
How does that make you feel?
Because you've spent
a lot of time doing this.
Um... sanguine. I want
what I have produced to be useful
and beneficial to people,
but I want people to be reassured
that they are safe to eat,
and while there's concerns because
they're genetically modified,
then we should go through the
appropriate testing.
Despite Cathie's hopes for
her tomatoes, it's uncertain
if they'll ever make it to market.
In 12 years, the EU
have only licensed one GM crop
to be grown commercially,
and that's maize,
like the variety I saw in Germany.
For now, at least,
the scientists have lost the battle
over GM in Europe.
'It's been won by anti-GM
campaigners like
Lord Peter Melchett,
'policy director
of the Soil Association. '
Why don't you like GM crops?
What have you got against GM?
GM is a really uncertain, imprecise,
risky technology,
and you put it out into the
countryside, into soil
which we don't understand,
where we haven't even identified
everything that lives in it.
They don't know what they're doing,
and we shouldn't take that risk.
That's my fundamental objection.
So, for you, it's an unknown?
It's an uncertainty with
tremendous risks attached to it,
and it's something, you know,
like grey squirrels,
like the Romans releasing
rabbits, once they're out there,
you can't get it back.
And, for you,
what are the potential risks
for growing these crops
in the wider environment?
They reduce wildlife, there are real
risks to human health which haven't
been investigated,
and there are risks
to every other sort of farming
that doesn't want to use GM
because it's going to be
contaminated. It comes in and
blasts away - organic, for example.
So you couldn't have GM farming
in the village up the road, and then
have organic farming next door?
Not if they were growing the same
crops as we were. But if GM has the
potential to help produce more food,
shouldn't we investigate it further?
No, we're facing completely
different challenges now.
We're facing the challenge
of climate change, incredible
horrible problems we face,
and we've got to really change
the way we produce food radically.
GM has no part to play in that. It's
on the way out. Good thing, too.
But there is a place you can go
where attitudes to GM
are very different.
In America, genetically modified
crops have been widely planted
for more than ten years.
So far I've seen different stories,
in terms of GM.
I can see how it could offer
great potential in the future.
I've seen how it has
affected the country's economy.
You know I've seen a bit
of the bad side but, for me,
in theory at least,
the science is absolutely amazing
and it offers an element of hope,
but there's a couple of things
that really bug me.
One is the effect on human health
over a long period,
if we're eating the stuff,
and two,
the effect on the environment, which
we don't really know about yet.
So I've come to the US of A,
which is basically the homeland
of GM crops,
to find out a bit more, and I've
heard that you can find GM crops
growing in pretty unusual places.
In the heart of Pennsylvania,
on America's east coast, live the
Amish, a devout religious society
whose way of life has been
unchanged for decades.
It's unreal!
no machine whatsoever,
obviously no tractor or whatever.
It's like going back in time,
going back 60-odd years.
The Amish are the epitome
of sustainable farming.
Fugitives from religious persecution
in 17th-century Switzerland,
they settled in the US determined
to preserve their way of life.
The Amish avoid most mod-cons.
Few of their homes have electricity,
and they certainly don't
watch television.
But that doesn't mean they're
opposed to all new technology.
I'm here to see an Amish farmer
called Gideon,
and because of his religious
beliefs, he can't be filmed
directly in the face
so we have to film him
from behind, which is fine,
but the unusual thing is, despite
all that religious belief and not
being filmed, he grows GM crops.
The machines that you use
in the fields, they're
all horse-drawn aren't they?
There's no tractors used
in the fields? No.
But I think a lot of people would
find it surprising that you use GMOs
Why do you use genetically
modified organisms?
We have to keep farming
in a way that our farms
are both profitable and practical.
As a church group, you know,
we are not opposed to... to GMOs.
It's just a tool that we're using in
the same way that we use pesticides.
Pest control is important for all
farmers, but especially so if
you rely on horse-drawn machinery.
So some Amish farmers like Gideon
grow a variety of corn known as BT,
that's modified
to resist insect attack,
specifically from a caterpillar
called the corn borer.
The corn borer is a major problem.
What's the consequence of it?
Well, a corn borer is a worm or a
caterpillar which will actually bore
up through the stalk of the corn
and weaken that stalk to the point
where the top of the corn stalk
is now dying.
So the heads of
the corn would just drop off?
They'll break off and hang there,
and if you have a whole field
like that,
and you're wanting to harvest that
with our harvesting methods,
it's very tough,
it's very hard work, so we will use
this BT corn to make our harvesting
methods more practical and easier.
And as you can see, we're getting
very high yields and we're getting
great returns per acre.
And for you, you know, working with
the land, maintaining the soil,
if you thought GMO crops were going
to harm your soil,
you wouldn't use them?
No, we wouldn't. If we would know
this is going to harm our soil
and our health,
we would discontinue to use them.
We are committed to passing
our farms onto our next generation
and have them passing it on
to the next generation.
We're not ruining our soils.
So what would you say to someone
who'd say that, you know,
the use of GMO crops is wrong,
it's going to lead
to an environmental disaster?
I would probably say they're
misinformed, they don't know
what they're talking about.
That's short and blunt.
The GM revolution
has already happened here.
It's not just the Amish.
They're really a tiny cog
in the grand scheme of things.
American farmers plant more GM crops
than anywhere else in the world.
One thing I've got
from coming to the US
is just realising the sheer scale
of the farming here, in terms of GM,
because 80% of the soya,
the cotton and the corn is GM crops.
That's 55 million hectares
turned over to GM plants
and that tells me that,
for the farmers, it's working.
They wouldn't be growing it if it
didn't make economic sense for them.
And because the GM plants have
been growing here for ten years,
if there are any downsides to it,
this is the place to find them.
One of the big fears about GM crops
is the long-term effect they can
have on the rest of the environment.
It's what spurred on
the protesters in Germany,
and to be frank, it worries me too.
So I've come to the deserts
of Arizona.
In this one state, they plant nearly
60,000 hectares with GM cotton.
Like the maize the Amish grow, it
has been modified with a BT protein
to protect it from insect damage.
Bruce Tabashnik, an entomologist
at the University of Arizona,
has spent the last decade
studying the impact of GM cotton
on the local insect populations.
Hi, you must be Bruce?
Hey, nice to meet you.
I see you're trapping out here.
What are you collecting?
We're collecting adult moths
of the pink bollworm.
The name is from the caterpillars,
and the caterpillars are pests
of cotton that you see over here.
So what actual damage do these
moths do to the crop?
Well, it's not the moths that do
the actual damage, but the females
lay eggs on the cotton plants.
When the eggs hatch,
caterpillars crawl out.
They bore into the bolls of cotton
and they can completely destroy
the yield of the cotton plants.
Wow, what a difference.
So, I mean, the key to controlling
them, for you, is what?
Now we have
genetically modified cotton
that produces a protein
that kills the caterpillars,
and before we had this,
the farmers were spraying
as many as six, eight, ten times a
year with conventional insecticides
to try to control this insect. But
now, with the genetically modified
cotton, they hardly spray at all.
That's got to be good for
the environment, surely? Absolutely.
It's good for the environment,
good for farmer workers' health
and it's good for their bottom line.
They save money.
Every year the farmers in Arizona
are saving millions of dollars
from the insecticide
that they're not spraying on cotton
that they used to. Wow.
It surprised me to find
that GM crops can be better
for the environment,
but using so much less insecticide
has got to be a good thing.
But there are also other concerns
about GM crops' impact on nature.
One of the biggest is gene flow.
Pollen from GM plants
can cross-fertilise
other closely related species
and can spread the modified genes
into the environment.
Gene flow is a real concern, and
there have been documented cases
of it around the world.
So far, the insecticidal
BT genes from GM cotton haven't
crossed into wild plants,
but the scientists have to consider
the consequences if it does happen.
One possibility is that the wild
plants would now be protected
against certain insects,
by the BT protein.
Now, depending on the nature of that
wild plant, that could be a problem.
So this unbalancing
the natural state of things -
is this something
that you'd worry about?
It wouldn't be of primary concern.
I think that the way to think
about it is to weigh the benefits
against the risks,
and so we have a known gain
in reducing insecticide use,
and we have a hypothetical problem,
something that hasn't been seen yet.
I think,
because it's a new technology,
it's great to be vigilant
and keep in mind
potential negative consequences,
but essentially there have been
no health or ecological problems
associated with growing GM crops,
despite the fact they've been grown
in dozens of countries now
for more than a decade.
So do you think that GM crops
could feed the world?
I think GM crops can HELP to solve
the problem of feeding the world,
but certainly not alone.
I think we should think about
producing food in a sustainable
and environmentally friendly way,
and if GM crops can help us do that,
then I see that as a benefit.
But the question that concerns me
most about GM crops is,
are they safe to eat?
There are 300 million Americans
who had better hope they're safe
because they've been eating them
for more than ten years,
even though some worry they might
cause allergies, or even cancer.
Doug Gurian-Sherman
is a biologist from the
Union of Concerned Scientists,
an organisation that campaigns
for greater regulation of GM crops.
So we can do that with no problem.
Thank you.
Wow. Thank you.
In terms of GM, do you think
the average American realises
how much GM is in their food?
Well, no, because for one thing,
it's not labelled,
so there's nothing to tell them
that they're eating a GM food,
so most Americans really don't know.
Well, in that case then... I've got
my lunch here, burger and chips.
Now, take me through this,
and what has GM?
Well, the fries
will have been fried in oil
that has a good chance of being
genetically engineered
from genetically engineered
oil crops, like soya bean or corn.
The cheese, dairy cows
are often injected with
genetically modified growth hormone
to increase their production,
so that's likely modified.
The burger, if there's filler,
soya extender, that would be
genetically modified.
And these things? Well, those are
corn fritters, so you're getting
a high dose of it.
That's pretty much probably
pure genetically modified corn.
And then, other things that
we hope are not, like tomatoes,
we grow in field trials where
contamination is not monitored,
but we have seen incidence of it,
so it's even possible that through
contamination, there could be some.
And what about the bread? The bread
has got things probably like
dairy products and soya lecithin
and other things that come
from genetically modified crops.
And what about if I was to put...
You're stuck there, too, because
the sweetener in it is likely
to be high-fructose corn syrup.
It's pretty much replaced sugar
as our sweetening agent of choice
because of low cost.
And what about the soda?
Stuck there too,
because you've got high-fructose
corn syrup is the sweetener.
So there is no, really, escaping.
It's pretty tough. And you're not...
If you don't know and if you're not
paying close attention to it,
you're inevitably going to be eating
genetically modified ingredients.
So in terms of eating GM food,
the sort of big burning question
I've got, is it safe to eat it?
Are there any dangers?
Well, I try to avoid eating
genetically modified crops,
not because I think these crops
are necessarily harmful,
but because I'm not confident
in their food testing enough
to know and to be confident as to
whether they are or not.
For example, in our Food And Drug
Administration, there's no set
tests, there's no long-term testing.
There's no required testing in
animals to see if the animal
is going to be harmed, which we can
extrapolate potentially to humans.
And some people would say, "Well,
we Americans have been eating this
"for ten years and nobody's
gotten sick. "
Well, for one thing,
we clearly don't know that.
You cannot determine whether or not
these crops are causing any harm
unless you're going out and
actively surveying the population
and doing the right kind of studies.
Do you think we should turn
our back on GM technology? Do you
think it's too much to worry about?
I think, until we have a safety
testing regime in place for food
safety, we should really slow down
and think twice
about commercialising these crops.
Despite Doug's fears,
50 scientific reviews
have reached consensus that the
GM crops currently on the market
are safe.
But some GM varieties
grown in the laboratory
have caused allergic reactions
in animals,
and while any doubts remain,
I wonder if it's worth
taking the risk.
So far, when you look at the risks
and who's taking the risks,
compared to the benefits
and who's getting the benefits,
well obviously,
straightaway the benefits are
the large-scale farmers
and the companies
that are developing it.
They're getting the benefits.
The risks are taken by...
everyone that lives around
the crops and eats the crops.
You know that's,
that's an imbalance to me
and if this technology is here,
we're arguing and talking and
discussing about this technology,
and is it right, is it wrong,
should it be here?
It's here and I think
the benefits need to be
for the people who really need it.
If I could see people saying,
"Do you know what?
GM has changed my life.
"My children are fed,
it's saved us. "
If I could see that,
or the potential for that,
then I don't know,
you'd have to really question
the downsides of it then.
I'm still not sure we need GM crops
in the developed world.
Our farms are incredibly productive
and no-one here is
in danger of starvation.
But that's not true everywhere.
There are parts of the world
where food production needs to
increase dramatically.
I've come to Uganda,
which is one of the wealthiest
countries in the whole of Africa,
but they still have it pretty tough
compared to European standards.
But if you think about it,
1% of the UK's population
is connected with primary
food production, i. e., agriculture.
We have plenty of food in the shops
and we never go starving.
Here in Uganda,
80% of the population are connected
with farming and agriculture,
yet they still go hungry.
African agriculture has been
a disaster in the last 40 years.
While in the rest of the world,
food production
has increased by over 50%,
in Africa, productivity
has been steadily falling
with the result that 30%
of the African population
is permanently undernourished.
No-one is suggesting that GM is the
only solution to Africa's problems,
but if GM technology is to be
of benefit anywhere, it's here.
But what they need are improved
varieties of local crops
and in Uganda,
the main source of food
is the East African
highland banana.
That's a great sound, isn't it?
'Many Ugandans, like Margaret
Sejenda, are subsistence farmers.
'The bananas from her small
plantation provide her food
'and most of her income. '
Look at that, you don't often see
bananas in such big bunches,
but this is such an important crop
to Uganda.
I think the average Ugandan
eats about 450 kilos a year,
which is about 2,000 bananas
per person,
and they're completely different
to the bananas we get at home.
We're used to bananas being soft
and sweet,
they're pretty tough, quite hard...
It's quite clayey.
That isn't very nice at all.
Yeah, you wouldn't want that
in your packed lunch, really.
To make the bananas palatable,
they need to be cooked,
and preparing banana porridge,
or matoke, is a daily ritual.
Would I make a good banana peeler?
It's just... You peel them
just like a potato.
'The bananas are peeled and then
steamed in their own leaves
'until they dissolve
into a starchy mash. '
Excellent, so now that'll just cook,
leave it.
'It's what most Ugandans
eat for every meal. '
Now it's ready to eat, isn't it?
It is ready for serving.
Wow, thank you.
OK, first, first matoke.
That's quite fibrous, isn't it?
Lots of starch.
Can you put this in with the sauce?
Yes. I see, so it sponges up
a lot of the flavour.
Oh, that's better.
Wonderful.
But there is a problem
with Uganda's bananas.
They're falling victim to disease.
Now this is a banana tree
that's suffering from a disease
called black sigatoka,
and I can tell that, one, because
it's got a tiny bunch of bananas
compared to all the other trees
around here,
literally I'd say 50% less,
which is incredible,
and the way I can tell
it's got black sigatoka
is that this dry leaf here,
I mean, look at that...
This leaf is completely dried out
before the fruit is ripe.
So what that's doing
is it's removing the only source
of energy this plant has got.
It captures the sunlight
in its leaves,
converts it to starches and sugars
that then go into the fruit.
Obviously if that's disabled,
it can't produce enough fruit
which is bad news for the farmer.
'Black sigatoka is threatening
all Uganda's banana crop,
'with particularly
serious implications
for small farmers like Margaret. '
Sigatoka has infected
all of these trees here,
so it means this side
of your plantation, the bananas...
you're not going to have many,
are you?
If you don't fight this disease,
by... within...
by three years in time,
you will get no,
we will be having no banana.
Really? Because they will go, then
the harvest will be like this size
and you see if you start getting
this size from the farm,
you'd be going...
Out of business.
The business will be going.
A strain of banana
resistant to black sigatoka
is desperately needed.
But because bananas are seedless and
sterile, you can't cross-breed them
and that makes developing
new varieties very difficult.
One potential solution
is to use GM techniques
to insert the necessary genes
into the bananas.
That's exactly what they're trying
to do in the hills outside Kampala.
Here at the National Agricultural
Biotechnology Centre,
Dr Wilberforce Tushemereirwe
is running one of Africa's
first GM trials.
Yes. I'm Jim. Oh, good to meet you.
I've come to see your bananas.
You're welcome.
So tell me, when I look round here,
coming through the facility,
there's lots of gates and fences
and you've got barbed wire.
Why have you got such security?
We have a problem of people
in the neighbourhood,
farmers, sometimes the workers,
wanting to steal the plants.
They come and pinch the plants?
To smash them up because
they don't want GM crops?
No, no, no, they want to steal
them to go and plant them.
Yes, they think the plants from
the station are very good
because we have picked
good varieties from here.
So instead of coming to smash
the plants up,
they want to steal them to actually
grow them? Yes, yes.
Farmers know that the solutions
will come from the station
and their problems
are really immense.
Well, let's see them, then.
You are welcome to the trial.
Let's see these top bananas.
In the trial plot, GM and ordinary
bananas are grown side by side
to see how they compare.
It's hoped that the GM plants
will remain uninfected,
as they have been enhanced
with a fungal-resistance gene
from a surprising source.
We have picked a gene
that confirms resistance in rice.
So you've taken a gene from the rice
plants and put it into the banana?
Yes.
And that gives it the resistance?
That gives it the resistance
because rice itself
resists this disease.
Sure. But isn't there conventional
ways of controlling black sigatoka
so you don't have to use GM?
Like fungicides?
Yes, you could use the fungicide
but in our circumstances,
like in Uganda, fungicides would be
too expensive for farmers to afford.
Let me say, maybe in Uganda
there might be some crops
where genetic engineering is not
necessary, but there are some crops
where genetic engineering is a must,
and banana is one of them.
The first results are
expected in May.
But even if the trials
are successful,
it will be at least ten years
before the first GM bananas
can be grown by Ugandan farmers.
They could be a real shot in the arm
for African agriculture
but they also need to be approved
by their policy-makers
who have shown signs of adopting
European attitudes towards GM.
The attitude in Europe has
negatively influenced our planners,
some of our policy-makers,
to believe that maybe
there is something wrong
with genetic engineering, and
we feel that is very unfortunate,
because the needs of Africa
are different from the needs
of Europeans.
In Europe, you have too much
food, you have plenty of food
and many options, but in Africa
we have a shortage of food.
We need to increase food.
The population is going up,
productivity is going down.
It's a very serious situation
we face in the future.
The effects of European attitudes
on African policy
The effects of European attitudes
on African policy
was seen most starkly during
the southern African famine of 2002.
With millions at risk of starvation,
thousands of tons of GM maize
sent from the US sat unused,
rejected by four governments
who believed the GM seed
would contaminate their fields.
The president of Zambia even
suggested it might be poisonous.
We would rather starve
than get something
which is going to be toxic.
But this was the same grain
that the Americans had been
happily eating for years.
It was a reminder of the global
nature of the world food trade,
and how the decisions we make
about what we grow
can have life-or-death impacts
elsewhere.
My trip round Uganda
has been fascinating
because for the first time I've seen
the application of GM technology,
where it's potentially put more food
on the table, which is fantastic.
In terms of GM bananas, it could
increase their production by 60%,
so imagine what this technology
could do in the future
for the whole of Africa?
I mean it could put a lot more food
in people's bellies.
But if this technology
is all it's meant to be
and delivers
all it's promised to do,
it's a bit sad that Europeans' views
of it could stunt the development
of where it's most needed,
in countries in Africa.
Come on!
My journey into the world of GM
has been a real eye-opener,
and the one thing that stands out
for me is how it's an issue
that's divided the world.
In Europe, people are prepared to
take the law into their own hands
to protest against the technology.
But in much of the rest
of the world,
they're planting it
on more and more land each year.
But which is the right way to go?
I don't think the crops that
are being grown at the moment
are going to save the world.
They're good for farmers
and they're good for profits,
but while there are lingering doubts
about GM,
we need to proceed very carefully.
But we do need to proceed.
The prospects of food that
could help prevent cancer,
or resist drought or even disease,
show the potential
that GM technology could have.
I think it's madness that
we turn away from this technology.
It's maybe not here at the moment
but 10, 15, 20, 50 years' time,
I mean that technology
could be so useful.
I mean, it has great potential
to feed the hungry
but that will only ever happen
if we carry out some experiments
and I think if you're for GM
or against it,
surely you've got to be
FOR understanding.
Whatever your argument is,
you've got to be into finding out,
knowledge, and without testing,
we'll never know.
We'll live in the darkness.
Subtitles by Red Bee Media Ltd
E- mail subtitling@bbc. co. uk