|
After a cold February, spring has finally arrived as I write. I hope that the mild weather persists, and that you have some nice spring weather to go with our spring newsletter.
Genetically Modified Organisms
Genetically modified plants are plants that have been altered by the addition of genetic material from a source that would not naturally be available to them. Such modification or engineering takes place in the laboratory, using techniques developed over the past thirty years.
For instance, plants could have genes of another unrelated plant inserted into them, or could have genes from an animal or bacteria added to them. While this is unnatural, in that it does not happen in nature, it could be useful.
Crop plants could be engineered to tolerate difficult environmental conditions, which might make them more suitable for growing in arid conditions. Such a use could help to relieve famine.
The techniques used to take a gene, say from a fish, and place it into a plant are complex and random. The genetic material of the fish is chopped up into small pieces using enzymes. These are then mixed with bacteria that incorporate the genes into themselves. The bacteria are then introduced to a plant, and they donate the genetic material that they have taken from the fish to the plant. If the scientist is lucky, among the many fish genes incorporated into the plant will be the specific one that gives the characteristic that is wanted. Once one single transformed plant survives (and it usually takes thousands and thousands of attempts to get a transformation), that plant can be bred to spread the gene into a good crop plant of the same species.
The bulk of scientific evidence shows that eating food from genetically modified plants is not harmful to human health. So why are so many people against GMO’s?
From a farmer’s perspective there are probably three reasons.
The first is that genetic modification is in the hands of a small number of powerful multinational companies. The plants and seeds produced can be patented, and thus producers must pay whatever price is asked. Growers in the US have even been prosecuted by the GM seed companies for accidentally growing genetically modified crops and infringing patents.
The net result of the technology being in the hands of private companies rather than government agencies, is that instead of concentrating on public-good type projects like the famine relief example given earlier, profit-driven projects involving plant patents in the developed world are preferred. Therefore, genetic modification is contributing to food supply only in parts of the world where there is already an over-supply of food.
The second two reasons that producers are against this technology are environmental.
Plants that have been modified to resist pests, for instance in the case of cotton, have an effect on “non-target” organisms. While with standard cotton, a grower could decide to spray to kill a pest of cotton if it were present, this choice is now removed. The genetically modified cotton automatically produces the pesticide in its leaves, and now any animal that eats its leaves (even if it is an endangered species that does no significant damage to the cotton) will be killed. Instead of making the growing of cotton more environmentally-friendly, as you might expect if spraying of pesticides is reduced, the genetically modified plant is actually causing more damage, because the grower is unable to choose not to apply the pesticide, or cannot choose a time to apply it when least damage might be done.
The other environmental argument against GMO’s is gene release. In scientific trials, gene release from modified plants to closely-related wild species has been clearly demonstrated. The effect is that a gene which, in a history of plants dating hundreds of millions of years, has never been present in any plant, is now released into the wild environment. The effect of such a gene in the wild cannot be predicted and is irreversible. Thus it is argued that the benefits are not worth the risk. I for one certainly concur, and until GM technology is used for public good, I will be against the commercial introduction of such technology.
Despite the worries, and undoubtedly due to pressure from big business, the US government has sanctioned the growing of GM crops for some years, and the EU Commission is now heading in the same direction. This is despite the fact that about 80% of EU consumers are against GM foods.
So what can we do? For one thing, you can take control of the area around you, whether it is a home garden, farm, café, shop or restaurant. You can get a GM-free zone sign, and put it up, in the process raising public awareness, and putting Irish politicians on notice that people are against GMO’s.
Signs for indoors and outdoors are available via the web at www.gmfreeireland.org.
Locally you can get them from Richard Auler, Ballybrado, Cahir (052-42816). Richard has a 40cm round
aluminium sign for €26.75 which includes postage.
Earth day 2005 falls on April 22nd this year, and as part of the anti-GM food campaign, 1000 farms and businesses will be declaring themselves GM-free zones. Why not join in? Further information about steps that you can take is available at
www.gmfreeireland.org.
Note: Medical biotechnology has much to offer in the advancement of health and medicine, without the potential downsides of inevitable gene release and other problems mentioned in this article. It is the view of most authorities that medical biotechnology has a positive contribution to make, and it is not being targeted by the GM-free food movement.
|
