Viewpoint: How Canadian farmers beat anti-GMO Greenpeace at its own game

green
Greenpeace activist during a 2008 protest in front of the European Union headquarters. Image: REUTERS/Thierry Roge

I confess I don’t read that many books in a year – preferring shorter Internet features instead – but I’m sure glad I found time in 2018 to read Mark Lynas’ Seeds of Science …. [T]he part of the book which affected me most was the initial chapter ….

While Mark Lynas was ripping out crop biotech trials in the UK, I was the executive vice-president (chief of staff) of the Ontario Corn Producers’ Association (OCPA)  …. Corn farmers had watched as corn breeders ….  searched for improved genetic resistance to the European Corn Borer (ECB) using conventional breeding techniques.

Then in the early 1990s we learned how biotech Bt technology …. could provide near total control. OCPA lobbied aggressively for Canadian approval …. Bt corn was an instant success in Ontario ….  entire cornfields with scarcely a fallen plant at harvest time was something new …. But [in 1997] Greenpeace Canada picked this as a priority issue and the game changed.

Greenpeace …. [argued] that the ‘big arrogant American chemical company was trying to dominate world agriculture using biotech.’  Monsanto was bad and, hence, biotech was bad ….

[Our] pitch against Greenpeace was simple – a huge multinational bully trying to squash small farmers trying to make a better world …. Greenpeace did not know how to respond when it was the one being portrayed as a multinational heavy attacking small farmers.

Read full, original article: Why Lynas’ Book, Seeds of Science, Made Me Angry! Fortunately, the Greenpeace Strategy Fizzled in Canada. Here’s Why

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

Screenshot-2026-04-22-at-12.21.32-PM
Viewpoint: Why the retracted Monsanto glyphosate study doesn’t change the science—the world’s most popular herbicide is safe 
Picture1
The FDA couldn’t find a vaccine safety crisis, so it buried its own research
ChatGPT-Image-May-1-2026-11_42_59-AM-2
Viewpoint: NAD is the wellness grifters latest evidence-lite longevity fad. At least the mice are impressed.
global warming
‘Implausible’: Top climate scientists reject worst-case scenario—soaring temperatures and fast-rising sea levels
vax-misinformation-main
Facts & Fallacies Podcast: Limit free speech to blunt social media misinfo?
ChatGPT-Image-Apr-16-2026-02_56_53-PM
Financial incentives, over diagnosis, and weak oversight: Autism claims are driving up Medicare costs
Screenshot-2026-05-21-at-12.15.17-PM
UK gene-editing milestone: Livestock barley that increases ruminant value and reduces methane emissions is first-approved CRISPR crop
Screenshot-2026-05-21-at-3.15.53-PM
Chiropractors may no longer be modern-day snake oil salesmen, but the benefits of their therapy are limited–at best
ChatGPT-Image-May-12-2026-11_27_01-AM-2
AI likely to improve health care, research shows—but not for blacks and ethnic minorities
Screenshot-2026-05-20-at-5.11.17-PM
Viewpoint: No, sugar doesn’t ‘feed’ cancer — common cancer myths, debunked
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.