The news that researchers have produced a GM chicken that stops them transmitting avian flu raises interesting questions about our attitudes to the use of technology to produce the food we eat. Some scepticism and concern about new technology seems to be the normal and understandable response.
Opposition to the introduction of pasteurisation of milk, for example, delayed its introduction in the UK at the cost of many lives. But we now recognise the benefits of pasteurisation – in killing harmful bacteria – far outweigh any risks and few of us would want to risk giving unpasteurised milk to our children.
I think the key issue is whether the new technology will bring about benefits for consumers. Microwave ovens were once exotic items in kitchens, but ubiquitous now. Why? Because they are really useful.
So where does that leave GM? Still struggling to produce food that brings real benefits to consumers in my opinion. But if and when GM food is produced that is much safer, more nutritious and cheaper than conventional food (perhaps a GM chicken that is resistant to Campylobacter which is currently causing more than 300,000 people to get sick each year in the UK) then we can start to have a much more balanced debate about benefits as well as risks.