Quotessence
Home / Authors / Ian Stewart
Ian Stewart

Ian Stewart Quotes

Professor

Filter quotes by topic

Famous Ian Stewart Quotes

“Continuing to do research on genetic modification, and occasionally using successfully modified organisms for specific purposes such as the production of expensive drugs, make good sense. Helping developing countries to produce more food is a worthy aim, but it is sometimes used as an excuse for an alternative agenda, or as a convenient way to demonise opponents. There is little doubt that the technology needs better regulation: I find it bizarre that standard food safety tests are not required, on the grounds that the plants have not been changed in any significant way, but that the innovations are so great that they deserve patent protection, contrary to the long-standing view that naturally occurring objects and substances cannot be patented. Either it’s new, and needs testing like anything else, or it’s not, and should not be patentable. It is also disturbing, in an age when commercial sponsors blazon their logos across athletes’ shirts and television screens, that the biotechnology industry has fought a lengthy political campaign to prevent any mention of their product being placed on food. The reason is clear enough: to avoid any danger of a consumer boycott. But consumers are effectively being force-fed products that they may not want, and whose presence is being concealed. Our current understanding of genetics and ecology is inadequate when it comes to the widespread use of genetically modified organisms in the natural environment or agriculture. Why take the risk of distributing the material, when the likely gains for most of us – as opposed to short-term profits for biotechnology companies – are tiny or non-existent?”

“In the rush to market, experiments have been carried out on a large scale in the natural environment, when controlled laboratory testing would have been far more effective and informative. The British Government sanctioned large-scale planting of genetically modified plants in order to test whether their pollen spread only a few meters (as expected) and to make sure that the new gene would not be spontaneously incorporated into other species of plants (ditto). It turned out that the pollen spread for miles, and the new genes could transfer without difficulty to other plants. Effects like this could, for example, create pesticide-resistant strains of weeds. By the time the experiment had revealed that the conventional wisdom was wrong, there was no way to get the pollen, or its genes, back. Simple laboratory tests – such as painting pollen onto plants directly – could have established the same facts more cheaply, without releasing anything into the environment. It was a bit like fireproofing chemical by spraying it on a city and setting the place alight, with the added twist that the ‘fire’ might spread indefinitely if, contrary to expectations, it took hold.”