Today's Telegraph carries a feature interview with Charles the prince of Wales, a well known expert on all things to do with the environment, grower of expensive organic products and profiteer.
GM (genetically modified) food is a hot potato these days, pardon the pun. It deserves better than to have ill-educated royalty making generalized criticisms based upon certain visual experiences (see the article).
I do not claim to be a GM expert so I cannot enter the debate. Which is the same position Charles should take. His emotional rantings are doing no-one a favor as the debate sinks to a lower, non-scientific level.
But remember, he has a strong vested interest in being anti-GM. He is making good profits from his organic farms. There is nothing wrong with that, of course, and the whole point about food production is that ultimately people buy what they want and many in the wealthier countries can afford to choose the organic alternative.
Like Charles I travel a lot but I obviously go to different places. Because I see starving people in urban slums eking out a living on refuse dumps (a basic form of re-cycling that should make people like Charles ashamed to belong to the same species).
My point is that there are two sides to every worthwhile debate but my emotional feelings about slums in Kinshasa are no more useful than Charles' emotional feelings about salt-destroyed soil. Both are essentially superficial and are not worthy of being broadcast to a nation in a major newspaper. Of course, mine isn't!