|
Potential
pitfalls of utilizing genetic engineering in promoting food security and
evidence of problems associated with gmos
Some of the advantages to
using GM foods include higher yields, resistance to disease and insect
infestation, longer shelf life, superior flavour and colour, apparent
improved nutrition and lower prices. GM foods may mean the end of famine
and world hunger. It is easy to be enthusiastic about the immense potential of the genetic
modification of crops. GM technology has produced fishes that are
insensitive to cold and this is good for breeding. GM tomatoes ripen
faster, there is less tendency to rot and become soft while cheeses
ripen faster.
However, those who are
mindful of contemporary challenges to the authority of science and
scientists will find many reasons to be less enthusiastic. The possible dangers involved in GM foods can be divided into
the technical and the social.
Technical Problem
Most traits in both plants and animals are the products of polygenes
rather than single-gene effects.It is a group of these genes that are responsible for any
particular trait and hence the probability of shifting a DNA from a
single location to another is extremely low. Genes also tend to be
pleiotropic, that is, to have more than one effect, so that transferring
genes from one species to another may have unpredictable effects.
The effect of genes depends on the interaction with the environment. Effects therefore can vary from individual to individual.
There is increased pollution of food and water supplies while GM
organisms can cause damage to the ecosystem by upsetting the delicate
balance. It can result in sick and suffering livestock. For example, in the early stages of experimentation, human growth
hormones were spliced into pigs and this caused crippling, blindness and
animals that were immuno-compromised. It portrays freshness that may not
go hand in hand with nutritional value. Genetic Engineers may
intentionally remove or inactivate a substance that they think
undesirable but which may have unknown essential qualities.
Monsanto,
one of the large agricultural/biotechnology firms, produces seeds that
are resistant to Round-up, a herbicide produced by the same firm. Farmers can then use larger quantities of this chemical without
harming the crop. While this is quite a lucrative market for Monsanto and other
similar organizations, it results in increased exposure of farmers and
the environment to a chemical that is dangerous to both.
SOCIAL PROBLEMS
Social problems associated with GM foods include inter alia, large
producers of both seeds and agricultural chemicals producing
input-hungry seeds as a means of gaining more control over agriculture
and thus forcing dependency on
their seeds and chemical; and an increase in the prevalence of "monocropping"
with heavy reliance on a single crop. This
creates two serious problems: (a) if there is a disease outbreak or
insect infestation this could damage the entire crop amounting to
tremendous farm losses; (b) market fluctuations as well as political and
meteorological events may have devastating results.
|
|
The
Potential Threat to Food Security Posed by Genetic Erosion and
Intellectual Property Rights
Industry states that biotechnology will solve the world hunger crisis. One might wonder where the starving nations will find the money to
pay the shareholders of the biotech industry. Biotechnology allows corporations to patent crops as well as
pesticides, fertilizers and other chemicals involved in production, which
allows these corporations to amass huge amounts of money.
There
is present controversy over the "terminator gene" seeds which Monsanto
produces. It clearly illustrates that there are differing interests between
farmers and ag-biotechnology companies. In the terminator case, the goal is to produce a GM seed whose
offspring is sterile, so that the farmers would not be able to save their
own seed but would instead be forced to return each year to Monsanto. There was much opposition to this move from farmers as well as the
Rockefeller Foundation. This concept was put on hold but there are still other techniques
which can have the same effect on farmers.
Trade
Implications
Gene
modified foods are not permitted to be developed in countries such as
Germany but the foodstuffs can still enter the market because of trade
liberalization. GM foods have been at the forefront of attention in both the United
States and Europe. Surprisingly, however, these two super powers have approached the
problem quite differently. The issue of labelling illustrates this
problem. In 1992 the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of the
United
States decided that GM foods need not be labelled showing the process that
developed them as long as they do not prove more toxic or allergenic, or
any less Ôsubstantially equivalentÕ than their standard counterpart.
As a matter of fact, most Americans are already consuming GM products in
the form of candy, chocolate bars, ice cream, cookies and salad dressing.
This is inevitable since almost 60% of all the processed foods on the
market contain GM products. The Caribbean is a major importer of products from the US and hence
we are
also consuming GM foods. In
Europe, however, the situation is quite different. In 1997 the European Commission, banned all US GM corn that was not
labelled. In that same year the Swiss government learned that 500 tonnes of
local chocolate had been produced with GM soy lecithin and destroyed all
the chocolate. What can happen to the developing countries that are dependent on
the larger economies for inputs in the manufacturing sector is that their
products may be rejected if a GM product is unknowingly used in
processing. This can easily happen since there are no regulations for labelling
and to compound the matter, Europe is opposed to the use of GM products.
|
|
THE
ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS FOR THE FARMER AND BY EXTENSION CONSUMERS AND THE
NATION
Once
these GM foods infiltrate the economies there will be a dependence on
Biotech industries, a failure of small farmers to compete. This will
jeopardize the domestic agriculture. Those who remain will have to sell their produce at very high
prices to just break even. Consumers
may eventually bear the burden of the high costs. This would be exacerbated once labelling becomes mandatory and
certain consumers decide that they would remain with the traditional
products. They would have
to pay very high prices for food that is short supply. This could place farmers in a serious state of want
and the vicious cycle of nutritional inadequacy begins. The consumers
may have to pay a higher price anyway due to the high costs of the GM
seeds for production.
It is said that the nutrient content may be higher, but these foods have a
longer shelf life and this could contribute to a loss of nutrients over
time. If one applies the
nutrient cost concept, which basically shows nutrient value per dollar,
then the consumer ultimately gets less value for money.
The introduction of genetically engineered/modified foods amounts to a
dangerous global experiment by giant transnational biotechnology companies
who control large segments of the worldÕs food. Short-term commercial gain is being placed before the health and
safety of the whole population.
The impact of genetic modification/engineering on the environment can lead
to massive disturbances of the environment, due to cross pollination
between genetically engineered crops and wild species. Through this process, genetically altered genes are carried into
the wild plant population. Once
these genes are released in the wild, there is no way to recall them. This resultant gene pollution can lead to significant environmental
problems and hardships for farmers.
Tampering with the genetic code of food is reckless and poses a serious
threat to life. Some of the effects we can expect are: new toxins and allergens,
new diseases, which spread across species barriers (like mad cow disease),
increased use of pesticides.
Furthermore, the process of inserting DNA into cells of organisms
can actually damage the DNA of the host. This damage can lead to foods that contain toxins or allergens, or
have reduced nutritional value.
No one knows what long-term effects gene modified foods have on the human
body or the environment. Unlike chemical or nuclear contamination, gene pollution can never
be cleaned up. The effects of genetic mistakes will be passed on to all future
generations. Even though GM technology has proven to date to be potentially
feasible for enhancing food production, much more research is needed to
determine the balance between the possible benefits and the possible
threats to national and regional food security.
-Paper
presented at the Symposium on Genetically Modified Organisms-Implications
for Sustainability.
March 15,200, Trinidad
|
