When is a tomato not a tomato?

Genetically modified crops, cloning of animals, it all sounds so 21st century. Fantastic and supernatural.

Traumatised by the botched handling of the B.S.E crisis the U.K. is now awash with an information surfeit regarding the latest possible attack on our eating habits.

The tomato in question has had a non-tomato gene implant.

Apparently the idea is to improve farming efficiency enabling the reduction of harmful chemicals on the land. Crops are modified to produce their own toxins, rather like humans are vaccinated against diseases. This seems reasonable, surely to stop poisoning the earth has to be considered a good thing, and is not a proportion of the still world hungry?

False arguments.

The world produces enough food, but not in the right places. Organic farming has already made its mark as the alternative to intensive farming, producing a premium priced product for the food market. The main beneficiaries of genetic modification of crops are big business, not the consumer.

Intensive and organic farms flourish side by side in the UK. Chemicals can be restricted in their application, the floating wind blow pollen of genetically modified crops cannot. This may inadvertently spell the end of organic farming in this country, not to mention insect species, natural cohabitants of specific crops.

Nature is a delicate balance, and far too often, through ignorance or greed, tampering with the natural order has brought more harm than good.

I am quite happy to for go the pleasure of the designer strawberry, the fleshier tomato or the cheaper Soya in my convenience meals, for the sake of conservation if nothing else.