It saddens me to see gene editing in this country.

I am a firm believer in epigenetics, which is why I keep my own farm-saved seed, so I can return it to the very environment from which it evolved.

These seeds are full of information to allow it to flourish when re-planted, always hoping to improve on the previous year.

See also: How crop nutrition can avoid insect and disease

About the author

Tim Parton

Tim Parton manages 300ha in South Staffordshire growing winter wheat, OSR, spring barley, beans, oats, lupins and wild flowers as part of a biological farming system. He grows cover crops and grass for haylage across sandy clay loam soils.

Read more articles by Tim Parton

I was never a fan of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) when they were introduced in the 1980s, because even back then it did not sit right in my head to be meddling with what we do not properly understand.

This has all been confirmed for me since reading Altered Genes Twisted Truth, by Steven M Drucker – a book I would urge everyone to read.

I am certainly not against science progressing learning, as we certainly have a lot to learn, but I am hearing claims around gene editing, that were voiced when GMOs were being bigged-up last time.

Nature quickly evolved beyond the “manufactured” GMO additions. Remember also that there have been many connections between health problems and the consumption of GMOs.

I am sure enthusiasts and supporters of gene editing will reply: “Yes, but they are only using genes that exist naturally.”  Well, if this is the case, why hasn’t Mother Nature included them in these combinations first?

I have seen no benefits that I cannot achieve from nutrition and biology; one which I am happy to debate with anybody.

As science would agree – a healthy debate is always good for the progression of mankind.

One argument continually raised is of gene editing producing higher yields, but as producers, do you really think that would equal extra profit?

I believe not, since the “cheap food” mantra would persist; providing no benefit to either consumer or producer.

Plus, it would promote the plant’s dependence on synthetic applications, rather than innate connections via fungi and bacteria.

Isn’t it time for farmers to be rewarded for growing nutritious food that benefits the consumer and allows us (farmers) to educate people of the benefits of said food?

Not to mention, we could then be applauded for reducing costs in the overburdened NHS, overstretched with numerous, preventable, dietary-based health complications. Farmers are heroes of the world, not villains.