Genetically Modified Foods: Feast or Frankenstein?

Apparently we have been genetically modifying animals for thousands of years. The pro–GM lobby claims that there is no difference between crossing animals with preferred traits with similar species with other preferred traits. This has of course been happening for literally thousands of years. However, only in the last century have we been delving further into the actual mechanics, or biology, of why Gregor Mendel’s peas reproduced as they did.

It was in the thirties that Russian scientists realised that they could isolate a bovine growth hormone from a cow’s pituitary gland. Injecting this hormone into a cow made it produce more milk. (Incidentally, the amount of milk cows produced had been increased by ‘natural’ selective breeding long before the thirties and for a long time after, until BSE came along.) However, the costs involved in isolating the hormone were too great so the scientists didn’t think again about it.

In 1953 Watson and Crick untangled the DNA double helix. This meant that ‘proper’ genetic engineering was possible with the isolation and replication of genes being simple and cheap. Forty odd years later an American lab isolated the Russians’ growth gene and by the mid-nineties, genetically modified dairy products were on their way to American consumers. The company that marketed the product was Monsanto, a giant multinational American corporation which would come to be much hated by many the peasant farmers who had contact with it.

Since then, we are able to insert genes for those preferred traits into pretty much anything. A hepatitis-B vaccine has been injected into a potato; bananas have been grown that protect against diarrhoea. Vitamins and minerals can be inserted too. These quasi-medicinal foods can be fed to those who aren’t able to get either their nutrients or vaccines elsewhere. A saviour for the third world you may think.

Another saviour for those in Ethiopia is the idea that using genetically modified crops brings better yields at harvest. This stems from the fact that GM crops can be grown in more varied climates, in regions where previously the climate would have been inhospitable to them. (This being due to a gene which allows this.)

Weeds in farmers’ fields will compete for light and nutrients with the crop to be harvested. These weeds are often dealt with by herbicides. However, genetic modification can implant a gene into the crop making it repel certain insects and weeds. It can also be made resistant to certain herbicides. This means that, again, the crops can be produced cheaper.

Unfortunately though for those third world countries, things have not gone so smoothly. Pests have, just as many people predicted, developed a resistance and are now tougher and require even more toxic pesticides to kill them. This means that in the end farmers have had to spend more and consumers have been forced to worry over the high levels of toxic chemicals that have been sprayed on their foods.

Because this is the biotechnology industry, patents are involved. And where patents are involved, giant American multinationals (such as Monsanto) will be major players. This is never good news for the poor. It is similar to, for example, the large drug companies that cannot be bothered to produce AIDS medicines for Africans as they have no money to pay for them. Peasant farmers cannot afford to pay the biotech corporations the money they ask for the seeds to grow the new-fangled GM crop. The farmer inevitably has to sell up because the farm next door is working much more efficiently and third world beggars can’t afford to be choosers about whether the food they eat has been genetically modified or not; they need their food cheap.

Also, it was proven in the mid-eighties that a lack of food globally is not the cause of third world hunger when images of Michael Buerk’s skeletal Ethiopians were shown alongside images of huge stockpiles of surplus grain as Europe ironically produced record harvests. The hunger is normally attributed to corrupt governments and the like, not a global lack of food. The point being that genetically modifying foods to create higher yielding harvests will not end world hunger.

Most people will concede that the genetic modification that took place thousands of years ago is not just one step behind the genetic modification that is taking place now. Even the US Food & Drug Administration conceded that ‘the processes of genetic engineering and traditional breeding are different and … they lead to different risks’. With traditional breeding it was between two similar species. It has never been between animals of two completely different species. With traditional breeding, for obvious reasons, that simply was not possible.

Many scientific organisations have lobbied for a moratorium on the release of genetically modified crops until we know more about their long term effects. This has not and most likely will not happen mainly because of the large agrochemical companies behind scientific testing of GM crops not wanting to waste time and money. The call for a moratorium is for a simple reason: we simply do not know enough. The public is not prepared to take the risk, especially as it knows that independent tests have not really been carried out and those that have have produced less than positive results.

A stark example of this is when, in 1998, a prominent scientist, Dr. Arpad Pusztai, announced that rats he had fed with GM potato had suffered serious intestinal changes. He said, most worryingly, that the damage was unpredictable. The British Medical Association called, again, for a moratorium. About a topic with which the public are very concerned and unwilling to believe opposing ‘evidence’, that statement would have set many people forever against genetically modified foods. This led to a revolution in organic farming, just so people could be certain that their food had not been altered by men in white coats.

They couldn’t be really because it was already likely that pollen from GM test sites had floated into supposedly organic fields. This was another problem with the testing, how to do it without releasing it uncontrollably? This is why the moratorium was called for, but then how would the testing be done on a large scale?

No one knows whether genetically modified food is safe. Few people will believe wholeheartedly scientists who say it is because not enough time has elapsed to be sure. I doubt people will ever find out for certain and the GM organisms that have already been created will never find themselves out of the food chain; they will reproduce whether known to their farmers or not. Most people just don’t want to take the risk of ingesting GM food until independent scientific tests are carried out. Of course, they never will be.