|
|
Another danger of GM crops as put forward by opponents is genetic pollution. They say that transgenes like the herbicide resistant genes introduced into GM crops might spread to other wild organisms like weeds, resulting in the proliferation of super-pests which show high resistance to herbicides and pesticides. But herbicide resistant crops developed through traditional breeding techniques and the heavy use of herbicides and pesticides also pose the same risk. Opponents also fear that the introduction of genetically modified organisms into the environment may cause extinction of other species.
In contrast, biotech actually offers the solution to such problems. Researchers have developed different techniques to prevent transgenes from getting into other organisms. One clever method used is to introduce transgenes into chloroplast (the little factories in plant cells that produce energy by using sunlight) instead of the cell nuclei where majority of plant’s genes reside. The trick is that pollen of most crop plants do not have chloroplasts, which makes it impossible for a transgene in that crop to get into any other plant through crossbreeding.
The development of Technology Protection System (TPS) by the U.S. department of agriculture and Delta Pine Land Co. was aimed at addressing the issue of spread of transgenes. TPS involves a complex of three genes that makes seeds sterile by interfering with the development of plant embryos. Any biotech company producing GM crops would like to implement TPS as it would help it protect its intellectual property rights.
As for the extinction of species due to the introduction GMOs is concerned, we need to look at the other side of the coin. According to recent reports, banana plants could become extinct in another 10 years. This is due to the unique method of reproduction of bananas which makes the plant susceptible to fungi, viruses and pests.
If scientists can’t find a way to genetically enhance the banana’s ability to resist pests, then the bananas may become extinct once for all. A cheap source of carbohydrates and nutrition for the world’s poor will be lost. But the good news is, several biotech companies say they can save the bananas from extinction by genetically modifying it. The opponents of GM crops should definitely welcome such biotechnologies. However, this is not the case. Their real concern then seems to be about “bio-imperialism”. They fear that if farmers across the globe start adopting GM crops, the control of humanity’s food supply will be in the hands of a few big biotech companies.
Though their fear may sound rational at first, it ceases to be a threat if we look at the big picture. All technologies can be patented. The patent gives exclusive rights to the inventor to exploit his invention. The same is true for biotechnology too. With the help of these patents, opponents fear, the biotech companies will have total control over the food crops they produce. But patents, like many other things in life, have an expiry date. Conventional patents have a life of 20 years, after which anyone can exploit the invention or discovery which was protected by the patent.
Thus biotech companies have control over the crops they produce only for a limited period of time. And this can further be limited if the life of biotech patents can be reduced after negotiations between governments and biotech companies. The governments can also setup their own agencies which can control the varieties of GM crops introduced into their countries. Further, the agencies themselves can engage in active research and development of GM crop varieties. This way, the fears of bio-imperialism can be put to death.
On the other hand, the consequences of not adopting GM crops can be dangerous even for developed countries. As one spokesman from the department of agriculture, government of New Zealand put it “It will prove to be a costly mistake if New Zealand fails to ride the wave biotech revolution.” If it’s going to be a costly mistake for an industrialized country like New Zealand, then it should be disastrous for a developing country like India.
Indian economy is almost entirely agriculture based. A majority of its population depends either directly or indirectly on agriculture for its livelihood. But Indian farmland productivity is much lower than the world average. Agricultural output in India is mainly dependant on the monsoons. Even a small deviation from normal in the monsoons spells doom for millions of poor farmers who live on a day to day basis.
For instance, the Cauvery delta farmers in the state of Tamilnadu have been pushed to the brink of existence by the failure of monsoons in successive years. Hunger and poverty are forcing these farmers to eat rats and commit suicide. Drought resistant GM crops can definitely save these farmers and the economy of the state. As Anderson of the International Food Policy Research Institute argues - how can we debate on whether these farmers need drought resistant crops or not, while watching their horrible plight? We certainly do not have any ethical right to do this.
|
Tags
You must be logged in to add tags.
|
Writer Profile
Aravind
Aravind Chandrasekaran is a student of electrical engineering from Chennai, India. His diverse interests include astronomy, web design, social psychology, travelling, and meeting exciting people with great ideas to share.
He is currently doing research, with the help of the Internet, on genetically modified foods and their impact on the environment.
|
Comments
You must be a TakingITGlobal member to post a comment. Sign up for free or login.
|
|
