England\u2019s chief medical officer Chris Whitty<\/p>\n
Ministers are set to give the go-ahead to the use of gene editing in agriculture which could see altered produce on the supermarket shelves in five years time, inews can reveal.<\/p>\n
The Government is expected to issue its response to its own consultation on the technology at the end of the month that will give the green light to the \u201ccautious exploration\u201d of genetic engineering in farming.<\/p>\n
The move will mark the biggest divergence by the UK away from existing European laws since leaving the EU, which has banned the technique for years amid fears it is unsafe.<\/p>\n
Brexit minister Lord Frost announced yesterday the Government\u2019s intention to repeal EU laws governing the use of genetic editing in the UK as part of a statement on \u201cBrexit opportunities\u201d in the coming years.<\/p>\n
He told peers that Environment Secretary George Eustice would \u201cshortly set out plans to reform the regulation of gene edited organisms\u201d.<\/p>\n
The lifting of the ban would \u201cenable more sustainable and efficient farming and help produce healthier and more nutritious food\u201d, he added.<\/p>\n
Gene editing involves the technique of replacing genes that govern certain traits, such as water dependency, disease resistance and nutrition with better-functioning ones from the same species.<\/p>\n
It has the potential to make crops much more nutritious and resistant to storms or pests \u2013 and to considerably boost the resilience and yields of livestock, advocates say.<\/p>\n
Continues<\/a> \u2026<\/p>\n The inews article above goes on to list the benefits of gene editing but it pointedly glosses over the fact that \u201cgene editing” is just another term for genetic modification.<\/p>\n In 2018, the European Court of Justice ruled that gene-edited crops should be considered the same as other genetically modified crops<\/a> under EU law. However, Brexit means that the European Court ruling no longer binds the UK.<\/p>\n There is still much debate about the pros and cons of gene-editing\/genetic modification and I will leave that for others to argue. Nonetheless, there is strong evidence that the harm from another potential health hazard, water fluoridation, far outweighs the supposed benefits.<\/p>\n Fluoride is expected to be added to drinking water across the country after Britain\u2019s chief medical officers concluded that the mineral would cut tooth decay.<\/p>\n Chris Whitty<\/a>, the chief medical officer for England, and his counterparts in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland cited estimates by Public Health England that adding more fluoride to water supplies would reduce cavities by 17% among the richest children and 28% among the poorest.<\/p>\n They also dismissed safety concerns saying there is no evidence that the ionised form of the element fluorine causes cancer and condemned \u201cexaggerated and unevidenced\u201d suggestions about health risks.<\/p>\nComment \u2013 Sept 29, 2021<\/strong><\/h1>\n
Fluoride will be added to UK drinking water to cut tooth decay<\/strong><\/h2>\n
Nadeem Badshah \u2013 The Guardian Sept 23, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n