Scientists on the dangers of GM

May 19, 2007 at 8:58 am Leave a comment

“Any scientist or politician who assures you that these products are safe is either very stupid or lying.”
—World-renowned geneticist Dr David Suzuki, speaking about GM.


“Genes exist in networks, interactive networks which have a logic of their own. And the fact that the industry folks don’t deal with these networks is what makes their science incomplete and dangerous. If you send these new genetic structures out into the world, into hundreds of thousands of acres, you’re going into the world with a premature application of a scientific principle. We’re in a crisis position…”—Emeritus Professor Richard Strohman, Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California at Berkeley


“The real threat to the future is the irresponsible and premature releases of the first generation of GMOs that are full of unsound scientific assumptions, rife with careless science, and arrogantly dismissive of valid concerns. The technology is inadequately developed to ensure its safety.”
—Professor Patrick Brown, College of Agriculture & Environmental Science, University of California


“The number of scientists who are not convinced about the safety of genetically engineered foods is substantial enough to prevent the existence of a general recognition of safety. I am not aware of any study in the peer-reviewed scientific literature that establishes the safety of even one specific genetically engineered food let alone the safety of these foods as a general class. Those who claim that genetically engineered foods are as safe as naturally produced ones are clearly not basing their claims on scientific procedures that demonstrate safety to a reasonable degree of certainty.”
— Geneticist and Emeritus Professor Richard Lacey, M.D., Ph.D.


“Many scientifically valid concerns are raised by independent scientists worldwide about the safety of these foods. GM foods were initially approved as safe as a result of political directive which overrode the warnings of the US Food and Drug Administration’s own experts.”
—Australian epidemiologist Dr Judy Carman


This technology is being promoted, in the face of concerns by respectable scientists and in the face of data to the contrary, by the very agencies which are supposed to be protecting human health and the environment. The bottom line in my view is that we are confronted with the most powerful technology the world has ever known, and it is being rapidly deployed with almost no thought whatsoever to its consequences.

Dr Suzanne Wuerthele, US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) toxicologist,


“Genetic engineering, at least in its current form, can never succeed. It is based on misconceptions that organisms are machines, and on a denial of the complexity and flexibility of the organic whole.”
—Dr Mae Wan-Ho, Geneticist, head of Institute of Science in Society.


“I view the FDA’s policy and practices regarding genetically engineered food to be irresponsible [and] the consequent risk posed for public health to be substantial.”
—Professor Philip J. Regal, College of Biological Sciences, University of Minnesota (St. Paul)


“We have such a miserably poor understanding of how an organism develops from its DNA that I would be surprised if we don’t get one rude shock after another.”
—Professor Richard Lewontin, Professor of Genetics, Harvard University


“A product derived from a GE organism can be devoid of genetic material, but can still unexpectedly contain potentially harmful alterations to a GE product, a novel toxin or elevated levels of a known hazardous substance.”

“We should not lull ourselves into a false sense of security: we should not think that by regulating something that is inherently unpredictable and uncontainable it automatically becomes safe.” —Dr Michael Antoniou, Senior Lecturer in Molecular Pathology, Guy’s Hospital, London.


“In moving DNA from one species to another, biotechnology has broken into the harmony that evolution produces, within and among species, over many years of experimentation. Genetic modification is a process of very unnatural selection, a way to perversely reinvent the inharmonious arrangements that evolution has long ago discarded… not for the purpose of enhancing scientific understanding, but in the hope of competitive financial return.”
—Professor Barry Commoner, Senior Scientist, Center for the Biology of Natural Systems, Queens College, City of New York.


Where are the spectacular benefits of genetic modification we were promised? …the biotech crops that might really help feed the world’s hungry remain but a hazy future promise. Meanwhile, bold advances in conventional breeding mean that transgenic plants offer fewer advantages than we once thought.
— New Scientist editorial


Many eminent senior geneticists, agricultural scientists, environmental scientists, molecular biologists, epidemiologists, nutritionists and science sociologists have refuted claims that GM food is safe to eat, grow, or feed to livestock. These experts include:


Entry filed under: Science articles about the dangers of GM food, Scientists who oppose GM food, Scientists' quotes.

Why the market rejects GM: science studies and news reports about the dangers of GM

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Recent Posts

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

%d bloggers like this: