GM Foods: From the point of view of...
GeneWatch
GeneWatch UK is a genetic engineering watchdog. GeneWatch is not
opposed in principle to all GM crops and food but believes that human
health, the environment, choice and the public interest must be primary
to decision making about genetically modified foods and crops. So far,
this has not been the case.
GM Food: time to think again
What's different about genetically modified crops?
Crossing species boundaries. In GM crops genes have been transferred
into the crop, usually from bacteria, viruses or other plants, to change
a particular characteristic - to make it resistant to a chemical weedkiller
or produce its own insecticide, for example. Genetic engineers can cross
evolutionary boundaries which have remained intact for millions of years.
In sharp contrast to traditional breeding techniques, novel combinations
of properties can be achieved through GM that could not be achieved
through the use of traditional or even laboratory techniques such as
chemical or radiation induced mutation.
Ownership and control. 80% of GM crops are produced by 5 multi-national
corporations - Monsanto, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Du Pont and Aventis.
These companies have patented genes, crops and seeds so they have monopoly
control over their use and could charge royalties if farmers want to
keep seed to re-sow in future years. An estimated 1.4 billion people
depend on farm saved seed in developing countries.
How could GM crops be harmful?
Genetic pollution. If GM crops pollinate related plants they could transfer
the foreign genes into the native gene pool and no one is sure what
the long-term effects might be but any adverse effects will be irreversible.
GM crops could also pollinate non-GM or organic crops, contaminating
them and possibly making them more difficult to sell.
Damage to the food web. Many complex interactions could take place
in the environment. For example, crops with an in built insecticide
could harm beneficial insects as well as their intended target pests
feeding on the crops. Laboratory experiments have shown that ladybirds
and lacewings are harmed by feeding on pests fed on GM crops containing
an insecticide toxin. Because birds feed on insects, the whole food
web could be affected.
New allergens or toxins. The GM technique could disrupt the normal
function of genes in the crop, alter biochemical pathways and lead to
toxins being produced. In the same way the novel protein made by the
foreign gene may cause allergies. Such unexpected changes are very difficult
to test for in the laboratory and scientific uncertainty will always
remain.
Threat to global food security. GM crops are mainly being developed
to suit the needs of the developed world and will not help address the
inequalities in food distribution which lead to starvation in developing
countries. The production of GM crops with sterile seed (so-called Terminator
Technology) or that require the application of a chemical to flower
or resist disease could intensify the problems faced by poor farmers
in developing countries by obstructing seed saving and pushing farmers
into greater chemical dependency.
What should be done?
A moratorium on commercialisation. There have been billions of dollars
invested in GM crops and therefore companies are anxious to get financial
returns as soon as possible. This is not the best atmosphere under which
to assess safety and put in place adequate safeguards and controls.
GeneWatch UK, together with over 90 other organisations including consumer,
environmental, development, and religious groups believe there should
be a 'Five Year Freeze' on the commercial use of GM crops and foods
and patents on genes and crops for use in agriculture.
This breathing space would allow us to establish:
- A system which ensures people can exercise their right to choose
products free of genetic engineering;
- public involvement in decisions on the need for and regulation of
genetic engineering; further research into the environmental and
human health hazards and appropriate regulations;
- Strict legal liability for adverse effects arising from the release
and
marketing of GM organisms;
- Independent assessment of the implications of patenting of genetic
resources and the social and economic impact of genetic engineering
on farmers.
Taking time to get things right now is a much more sensible approach
to the introduction of such powerful technology rather than rushing
ahead and making mistakes. But all areas must be addressed - science
never gives absolute proof so research alone is not enough, other issues
such as legal liability must be in place too.
|
