A very common criticism against genetically modified (GM) crops, whenever they are mentioned, is to automatically associate them with a certain group of big companies, and also to say that virtually every study of biosecurity about GM crops “has been funded and/or carried out by any of these companies.”
While it is true that a couple of companies dominated the early commercialization of GM crops in the mid-1990s, investing heavily in research and development, these crops subsequently have been developed by many other entities, such as universities, independent research centers, small companies and state-government agencies, among others, on all continents.
It is interesting that large developing countries, like China, India, Brazil and Argentina, and others of less magnitude, like Bangladesh, Philippines and socialist Cuba, as well as 14 African countries, are investing heavily in the development of GM crops with public funds through public agencies or state-companies to solve the various problems of their own farmers. Each of these nations conducts studies of biosafety, in terms of health and environment. So why say that all biosafety studies are funded by companies?
It is worth mentioning that there are more than 2000 current studies supporting the safety of GM crops…[and a]bout half of the global research came from independent financing—without money from private companies.
As a final message, I would like to make it clear that we should not confuse genetic engineering… with a particular company…[and] we should not fall into the sensationalism of some media that only help spread myths and misguided information on the subject.
The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion, and analysis. Read full, original post: Genetically modified crops and the exaggeration of “interest conflict”