Contrary to the scaremongering of the anti-GM lobby, genetic engineering is less science-run-mad than a much-needed means to better health in some of the poorest parts of the world.
In its early years, GM was used by the likes of Monsanto to develop crops that could withstand own-brand pesticides that laid waste to other plants. The emphasis now is on enhancement rather than resistance. Equally, with the global population set to top 9.5 billion by 2050, and food production needing to double to sustain it, there is no room for purism, least of all one based on a constructed notion of a “natural” past.
Too much of the mainstream green movement has been left behind, however, with activists sabotaging the development of any number of GM crops, including golden rice, that could make a real difference. Such splits are evidence of a movement at a crossroads. What began as a forward-thinking campaign for a better future, is becoming a narrow-minded crusade against progress. Rather than considering each issue on its merits, the green movement is becoming increasingly ideological and misanthropic. If environmentalism is to remain relevant, it must grow up.
Read the full, original article: If the environmentalist movement is to stay relevant, it must embrace world-changing technologies like GM