In response to Russell Brown’s assertions in support of gene editing (Diary, July 1), scientists have recently confirmed that CRISPR can cause chromothripsis – unexpected and chaotic change in the genome – which supports the need for regulation of genetically modified foods.
The ongoing push for reform in Europe is coming from industry but is strongly opposed by EU environment ministers who are calling to keep the precautionary principle and regulation of new genomic techniques. The majority of consumers also support traceability and labelling of gene-edited products.
National’s proposal, to ease the path of GM technologies, denies consumers the right to choose and rejects the precautionary principle. Regulation is not a dirty word.
Our exporters say they have an advantage being GE-free to meet the global consumer demand for natural, ethical and safe food.
Michael Trott (Auckland)
Michele Hewitson (Politics, June 24) is on to it. Something really funny (of both sorts) is happening with the Greens wanting to fight an election on tax policy, not genetic engineering, and National wanting to fight an election on genetic engineering, not tax policy.
Hewitson may also well be correct in her assessment that “nobody really wants
