GM Food Crops Debate at Queen's University Belfast Event

Author: Queen's University Belfast
Published: 9 Apr 2014 - Updated: 19 Sep 2026
Publication Type: Informative

Table of Contents:
Synopsis - Definition - Overview - FAQs - Insights, Updates - Related Content

Synopsis

This report describes a public debate on genetically modified (GM) crops held at Queen's University Belfast during the Food Integrity and Traceability Conference. More than 350 scientists, regulators, and agri-food producers from over 25 countries attended. The Institute for Global Food Security and safefood organized the event, where international experts argued for and against the motion that GM crops are a safe and important way to improve food security in Europe. Professor Chris Elliott, Director of the Institute for Global Food Security, explains that genetic modification means adding or removing genes in a plant's DNA to boost yields, resist disease, or cope with harsh growing conditions. He also sets out the main concerns about the effects on people, farm animals, and wildlife. The report includes a safefood consumer survey of 301 adults in Northern Ireland, which found that 11% check food labels for GM information, compared with just 3% who look for organic content. That result shows how many shoppers care about how their food is produced. The information is useful for seniors, people with disabilities, and anyone on a restricted or medically guided diet who wants a balanced, expert-led look at both sides of the GM food question.*

At a Glance

• 1 - The public could follow the debate on X and share opinions using #ASSETGM.
• 2 - The debate was chaired by Ella McSweeney, presenter of the RTE farming program Ear to the Ground.
• 3 - Owen Brennan of Devenish Group and Professor Klaus Ammann of the University of Bern argued in favor of GM crops.
• 4 - Dr. John Fagan of Annapurna Global Inc. and Dr. Michael Antoniou, a genetic engineering expert at King's College London, opposed the motion.

Topic Definition

Genetically Modified Food Crops

Genetically modified food crops are plants whose DNA has been changed in a laboratory using genetic engineering, usually by adding, removing, or altering specific genes to give the plant a new trait. Common goals include higher yields, resistance to pests or disease, tolerance to drought or poor soil, and better nutritional value. This differs from traditional plant breeding, which relies on crossing related plants over many generations. When genes from different organisms are combined, the process is called recombinant DNA technology, and the resulting plants are also described as genetically engineered or transgenic. GM crops are widely grown in some parts of the world but remain tightly regulated and debated in Europe and elsewhere

Overview

One of the world's most contentious food issues - Genetically Modified (GM) crops - will be debated by some of the world's leading authorities on the subject at Queen's University Belfast.

Genetically Modified (MO) is defined as food items that has had their DNA changed through genetic engineering. Unlike conventional genetic modification that is carried out through time-tested conventional breeding of plants and animals. Combining genes from different organisms is known as recombinant DNA technology, and the resulting organism is said to be "genetically modified," "genetically engineered," or "transgenic." GM products include medicines and vaccines, foods and food ingredients, feeds, and fibers.

A panel of international food experts will argue the pros and cons or GM crops at a special debate as part of the Food Integrity and Traceability Conference. The conference, which highlights current and emerging threats to the integrity of the food chain, is being attended by over 350 scientists, regulators and agri-food producers from over 25 countries. The conference and debate are organized by Queen's Institute for Global Food Security and safefood.

The GM debate will feature four experts, who will speak for and against the motion that 'GM crops are a safe and important means of improving food security in Europe'. Anyone with an interest in GM can follow the debate on X and tweet their own opinions on the issue @ASSET2014 using #ASSETGM.

The panelists speaking in favor of GM crops are Owen Brennan, Chief Executive of Devenish Group, the Belfast-based global agri-technology company; and Professor Klaus Ammann from the University of Bern.

Those opposing the motion are Dr John Fagan, Chief Executive of Annapurna Global Inc, a leading authority on sustainability in the food system; and Dr Michael Antoniou, an expert in genetic engineering at King's College London. The debate will be chaired by Ella McSweeney, presenter of RTE's Ear to the Ground.

Recent research by safefood with consumers in Northern Ireland revealed that 11% check food labels for information on GM, compared with 3% who check for organic content and 2% who check for allergy advice.

Looking forward to the debate, Professor Chris Elliott, Director of the Institute for Global Food Security at Queen's, said:

"The debate around Genetically Modified food is one of the most hotly contested food issues in the world today. Today's discussion will explore the issues around the introduction of GM feeds, crops and foods into Europe - a topic that is becoming increasingly important in an attempt to deal with new challenges and threats to global food security."

Explaining what GM food is, Professor Elliott continued:

"Genetically Modified essentially means altering the genetic make-up of plants and crop in the laboratory, by removing or adding genes to the plant's DNA to give it a new characteristic. It can be used to increase productivity, to make crops more resistant to disease, or to enable plants to survive in hostile environments. While some people argue it opens the door to a more plentiful, sustainable and cheaper food supply, others contest that nature should not be interfered with and that we can't be sure of its effects on farm animals, humans and other plant and wildlife."

"As pressure continues to grow on governments, food producers and scientists to provide the world's growing population with a sustainable, safe and secure supply of high quality food, the GM debate looks set to continue well into the 21st century. Today, Queen's will be at the center of that debate and I look forward to what promises to be a lively, robust and highly interactive discussion."

*The statistics quoted are from Safetrak - safefood/ Millward Brown Lansdowne (November 2013) Survey of 301 adults in Northern Ireland

Frequently Asked Questions

NOTE: Researched FAQs by Disabled World (DW)

Who regulates genetically modified crops in Europe?

In the European Union, the European Food Safety Authority assesses the safety of each GM crop, food, or feed. The European Commission and member states then vote on authorization, and individual countries can choose to restrict or ban GM cultivation on their own territory.

Why are GM crops more common in North America than in Europe?

The United States and Canada regulate GM crops mainly on the traits of the final product, which has led to faster approvals and wide adoption by farmers. Europe uses a more precautionary, process-based approach, and public skepticism has kept commercial GM cultivation very limited.

Do animals raised on GM feed produce GM meat, milk, or eggs?

No, meat, milk, and eggs from animals fed GM feed are not considered genetically modified, because the DNA in feed is broken down during digestion. In the European Union these animal products do not require GM labeling.

Can GM crops help address world hunger?

Supporters say traits such as drought tolerance, pest resistance, and higher yields could help farmers grow more food on less land. Critics argue that hunger is driven more by poverty, food waste, and unequal distribution than by crop production alone.

What are the environmental concerns about GM crops?

Concerns include herbicide resistant weeds, the spread of modified genes to wild relatives or non-GM crops, and possible effects on insects and biodiversity. Supporters point to reduced insecticide use and less soil tillage as environmental benefits of some GM varieties.

Is food integrity the same as food safety?

Not quite. Food safety focuses on preventing illness from contamination, while food integrity is broader and covers whether food is authentic, honestly labeled, traceable, and produced the way its label claims, including protection against food fraud.

Should people with chronic health conditions avoid GM foods?

There is no medical guidance advising people with chronic illnesses or disabilities to avoid approved GM foods. Anyone following a special diet or managing allergies should read labels closely and talk with a doctor or registered dietitian about their individual needs.

Insights, Analysis, and Developments

Editorial Note: The GM question has never been only about science. It also involves trust, labeling, and who gets a say in what ends up on our plates. Few things show that better than a university debate that also invited the public to join in online. The same survey found that only 2% of Northern Ireland adults check labels for allergy advice, fewer than those looking for GM information. That gap is worth noting for people with food allergies, chronic conditions, or dietary needs linked to a disability, because careful label reading is often their first line of protection. With the global population growing and pressure on the food supply rising, the arguments made in Belfast about productivity, disease resistance, and long-term safety still apply today. An informed consumer who understands both sides is better placed to make food choices that fit their health, their values, and their budget.*

Attribution/Source(s): This quality-reviewed publication was selected for publishing by the editors of Disabled World (DW) due to its relevance to the disability community. Originally authored by Queen's University Belfast and published on 9 Apr 2014, this content may have been edited for style, clarity, or brevity.

* Editorial additions by Ian C. Langtree.