ONE of the common themes in a study on GM was that all of the women preferred nutritious, healthy, homegrown food – values that needed to be incorporated into any future GM discussions, according to research associate Heather Bray.
“This included locally-produced food, which is a big tick for SA producers,” she said. “Their focus was on natural foods with no processing, pesticides and minimal additives.
“The women working in GM science felt GM foods fit into all of those categories. But those not into eating GM foods felt GM couldn’t fit into any of those categories.
“So how do we (as a state) produce enough safe, affordable, nutritious and healthy food in a sustainable way that is also ethical in terms of being humane and meeting community expectations, while also being culturally appropriate?
“This highlighted that we need to have better conversations about what all those food terms mean to us and what we are we prepared to say is ‘good’ food.
“And it’s important scientists realise that if people are presented with ‘just the science’, the discussion leaves out critical topics and values regardless of education.”
The SA government declined to comment on the study.
Grain Producers SA chairman Wade Dabinett said the study highlighted consumer choice.
“It’s great there is a study out there that talks about different perceptions on different products but GPSA’s focus is about giving people and farmers the choice if they want to grow or eat GM foods,” he said.
“Fair enough people want to consume non-GM foods, but there is also a market for GM foods and we (graingrowers) want to grow them.
“GM foods, such as canola oil, are available to consume in SA, and GM livestock feed is being imported into this state, yet our farmers aren’t allowed to grow GM crops because of the moratorium in place.”
Alisha Fogden
Journalist at Australian Community Media newspapers since 2007.
Journalist at Australian Community Media newspapers since 2007.
