Agricultural GMOs and their associated pesticides: misinformation, science, and evidence

Environmental Sciences Europe

Review

Irina Castro¹  Claire Robinson²  Michael N. Antoniou³  Angelika Hilbeck⁴ 

[1] Centre for Social Studies, University of Coimbra, Colégio de S. Jerónimo, Apartado 3087, 3000-995, Coimbra, Portugal;GMWatch, 99 Brentwood Road, BN1 7ET, Brighton East Sussex, UK;Gene Expression and Therapy Group, King’s College London, Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine, Department of Medical and Molecular Genetics, Guy’s Hospital, 8th Floor, Tower Wing, Great Maze Pond, SE1 9RT, London, UK;Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) Zurich, Universitätstrasse 16, 8092, Zurich, Switzerland;

关键词: Biotechnology;    Agricultural biotechnology;    Genetic engineering;    Genetic modification;    Genetically modified organism;    GMO;    Pesticides;    Glyphosate;    Media analysis;    Media coverage;    Misinformation;    COVID-19;    Climate change;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s12302-023-00787-4

 received in 2023-03-24, accepted in 2023-09-02,  发布年份 2023

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

Misinformation has always existed, but it became a major preoccupation during the COVID-19 pandemic due to its ability to affect public health choices, decisions, and policy. In their article, “Misinformation in the media: Global coverage of GMOs 2019–2021” (GM Crops & Food, 17 Nov 2022), Mark Lynas et al. characterise critics of agricultural genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and their associated pesticides as purveyors of “misinformation”. They draw an equivalence between critics of agricultural GMOs and people who make false claims about climate change, COVID-19, and vaccines. We examined their main claims on these GMOs—for example, that there is a scientific consensus that they are safe for health and the environment—in the light of the scientific evidence and public discussion on this topic. We found that their claims are biased and misleading and ignore or omit crucial evidence. We conclude that based on the evidence provided, Lynas et al. article can itself be classed as misinformation and could therefore mislead the general public as well as the scientific community.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2023