The image of our sorrow; Food shortages; The risks of modified foods

Though Chen Shui-bian may be an unpopular president of Taiwan, he has done the right thing by demolishing statues of Chang Kai-shek. There is no place for worshiping tyrants in any democratic country.

Unfortunately, China is not ready to demolish statues of Mao Zedong. Although Mao caused the death of millions of people, many Chinese still regard him as a hero and a god.

Unless they push for demolition of Mao's statues and condemn him for the disastrous Cultural Revolution, the Chinese will have no future. A country that lives under the shadow of such a tyrant will never progress. Without real democracy, another Mao may come to the stage and destroy the whole nation.

Ling Toh Woon, Kuala Lumpur

Food shortages

With reference to your page one article "World food stocks dwindling rapidly, UN warns," (Dec. 18): People are right to be concerned about the rapid food price inflation. Populations are increasing, Indian and Chinese consumers are demanding more meat, and environmental pressures from climate change are starting to harm production around the world.

We are - for the first time in many decades - forced to think about a possibility of food shortages on a global scale, and the pressures on prices are expected to increase even further.

But there are some solutions available to help improve the situation. Plant science technologies, including fertilizers, crop protection and biotech seeds are helping farmers increase yields while also protecting biodiversity and natural resources. Crop seeds that are drought and heat resistant and can deal with greater levels of salinity are being produced in research laboratories at the moment - giving new hope to farmers around the world. Technology is not the only solution to our current and future problems, but it is a proven one.

Howard Minigh, Brussels Chief executive, CropLife International

The risks of modified foods

Mark Schwartz's article "Fear versus Science," (Views, Dec. 15) gives the impression that only the EU is opposed to genetically modified foods. In reality, numerous official and nongovernmental organizations worldwide are strongly opposed to engineered foods and how they are being introduced into the food chain with little or no supervision.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Schwartz's employer, the Department of Agriculture and the Environmental Agency are responsible for protecting American citizens from the real and potential harms of engineered foods. Each has failed to carry out its responsibilities - to the benefit of the biotech industries they are supposed to oversee.

The largest producers of such foods, based in the United States, are minimally regulated and not required to demonstrate the safety of their products.

Schwartz puts the onus on the public to produce "scientific evidence" showing the risk of GM foods.

Space constraints limit the length and depth of this rebuttal, but the Internet contains over 11 pages of links to articles and NGOs pointing out the problems associated with GM technology. Of particular interest is the Union of Concerned Scientists and, for example, one of its scientific papers by Margaret Mellon and Jane Rissler on "The U.S. approach to the regulation of biotechnology products."

It may take a while to prove that foods altered for profit are not healthy or sustainable, or it may not. Right now, no one is absolutely certain what the risks are because there is no adequate research by reliable public or private institutions.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/12/21/opinion/edlet.php