1. GM Crops (in Europe): The case for and against….

2. The Telegraph: ‘Children are dying because of failure to use GM crops’, says Environment Secretary/ ‘Britain should reap the rewards of GM crops’

3. Key points from the Telegraph Headline misleading but demonstrates bias in favour of GM Using the argument of children dying in Asia due to Vitamin A deficieny to forward argument of planting GM in Britain…?playing on emotions…not relevant If you plant GM you can free up more land because you increase yield with less plants GM would lead to less spraying with pesticides and less intensive farming????really?? Europe is being left behind by the rest of the world with regard to agricultural production and advances

4. Key points from the Telegraph More GM frees up space for more biodiversity UK average food yield hasn’t increased since 1996 but population has increased 21% of population support GM technology; but 61% of farmers would grow GM

5. New York Times: Golden Rice: Lifesaver? ?Bias? Neutral Positive aspects of golden rice: well proven health benefits, can prevent Vitamin A deficiency – involved in vision, immunocompetency and cancer prevention Carotenoids can combat adult degenerative diseases and reduce high blood pressure and cholesterol?but vitamin A is not the only contributor to these diseases… No environmental risks involved at all ? Are they sure? It would improve the economy ? ? Are they sure?

6. New York Times: Golden Rice: Lifesaver Why no golden rice as yet?? Concerns for the farmers: risks for farmers – they will ALL need to switch to golden rice Non golden rice will soon be cross- contaminanted Missing the point – we should tackle to solutions to malnutrition –food supplements, home gardening Risks of unexpected effects ? As yet unproven? One generation in the underdeveloped world will be the guinea pigs

7. Daily Mail: The great GM food hysteria: Do you believe eating genetically modified foods is like dining with the devil?

8. Key points from the Daily Mail article ?Bias? PRO GM Deny ANY negative outcomes of GM GM modified crops bring good things – increasing food supply all over the world Facts about pollination and bees are frankly untrue Attacks anti-GM: tell you about safety of GM food, background of risks of GM food and cancer are not well represented

9. Represented in a much more emotional and aggressive way Reports threats to pro-GM by anti-GM groups including flame throwers !

10. Guardian:Owen Patersons’s Cheerleading for GM crops to tackle hunger rings hollow/ UK should provide GM crop technology to poor countries, says environment secretary…

11. Key points from the Guardian First article is neutral: states facts and quotes:Poor countries SHOULD receive GM crop technology in order: 1. to provide food to the developing world 2. To treat chronic malnutrition 3. to release an area 2.5 time the size of France for ‘nature’ BUT other organisations say that his arguments are far too simplistic: only research supported by industry shows any benefits for GM crops

12. Second article is anti-GM bias: GM is yesterdays technology…he suggests alternative techniques including: Crop rotation s Permaculture including use of sacrificial pkant