GM Foods: A Moral Dilemma

Genetically modified (GM) food has come a very long way in terms of its technological advance and the stigma towards it. These stigmas are based on a lack of knowledge or myths which I wanted to explore in further depth. For example, in an article by the Economist in 2002 titled ‘Better dead than GM-fed?’, I was shocked to read how Zambia had refused American food aid into the country because of fears surrounding GM corn and soya (The Economist 2002). Levy Mwanawasa, president of Zambia, declared the aid as poison (ibid). There were uncertainties regarding the overall safety of these GM crops to human health, and fears of ‘contamination’ with other non-GM crops (ibid). Do these myths hold any weight? The phrase in the article’s title ‘better dead’ was very gripping as it demonstrates that sometimes difficult and unfavourable decisions have to made in order to achieve the lesser of two evils. But to reject food aid in a desperate situation where food supplies were expected to be depleted in Zambia within two weeks, is bizarre in my mind.

Throughout the course of this blog, I have demonstrated the various ways in which Africa is bracing itself for climatic variability and improving its adaptive capacity. GM foods can provide a way to increase crop yields and provide a greater outcome per unit of water. In other words, GM foods can be genetically engineered to more drought resistant and if implemented on a wide scale, can contribute to Africa’s long awaited green revolution (Schnurr 2015). GM foods can also be modified to be insect-resistant, herbicide-tolerant and more nutritious (Qaim 2014). For example, a new drought-resistant maize has been undergoing development and testing since 2008 by Water Efficient Maize for Africa (WEMA) (Schnurr 2015). Studies have revealed 20% increases in yield (ibid).

Myth 1: Health

The majority of studies have suggested that GM foods are indeed safe to eat, including a recent report by the National Academy of Sciences. But widespread public concern remains (National Geographic 2016). No matter how health-conscious you are nor how carefully you select your foods, you’re probably already consuming GM food without realising. Depending on where in the world you live, you will have different exposure to GM food in your diet.  For example, GM ingredients are found in 80% of packaged food in the USA (Fast Company 2014). This is contrasted to the UK which currently does not grow any GM crops (New Scientist 2015).

Myth 2: Contamination

One of the promises that you may have heard is that farms growing GM crops can be kept separate from other organic farms. Unfortunately, there have been many reported cases of contamination worldwide: 396 cases across 63 countries to be precise (Price and Cotter 2014). You can find more information about the specific cases here.

Myth 3: Seeds

The successful 20% increase in yields from the water efficient maize is distracting from one particular characteristic about GM food that I find distressing; farmers are forced to buy new GM seeds year on year because GM crops are designed to be sterile (Genetic Literacy Project 2015). How can this be morally correct, in a time where farmers in poverty cannot afford the seeds year on year? It seems wrong that companies would design their GM crops to be sterile. If they truly cared about poverty and food security, they would allow farmers to make a one off payment. The concept is formally named Genetic Use Restriction Technologies (GURTs), and is one of the most controversial biotechnologies in current debates surrounding GM crops (Lombardo 2014). The main reasons for this technology is to prevent unlicensed use of patented seeds. From an economic standpoint, research and development is a costly process and patents allow to compensate for this innovation (Genetic Literacy Project 2015).  Seed piracy, where GM crops are covertly planted in unregulated regions, can also be prevented by GURTs (ibid). This is extremely important because without regulation, the government will obtain inaccurate information regarding its use of GM foods and will not be ill equipped for any potential problems.

Even after explaining these justifications, the commercialisation of nature in this regard is still an upsetting one for me. GM foods have a big potential to provide resilience to climate change through drought-resistant crops, but we are disrupting the way of life for millions of people who depend on seed saving and the exchanging of seeds to save money and secure an income (Lombardo 2014).

List of References

Fast company (2014) ‘The Genetically Modified Food You Eat Every Day’ (WWW) (https://www.fastcompany.com/1676104/the-genetically-modified-food-you-eat-every-day; accessed 26/12/17).

Genetic Literacy Project (2015) ‘GMO patent controversy: Terminator genes, seed piracy and 'forcing' farmers to buy seeds’ (WWW) (https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2015/12/14/gmo-patent-controversy-terminator-genes-seed-piracy-forcing-farmers-buy-seeds/; accessed 26/12/17).

Lombardo, L. (2014) ‘Genetic use restriction technologies: a review’, Plant biotechnology journal, 12, 8, 995-1005.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2016). Genetically engineered crops: experiences and prospects, London: National Academies Press.

National Geographic (2016) ‘Scientists Say GMO Foods Are Safe, Public Skepticism Remains’ (WWW) (http://theplate.nationalgeographic.com/2016/05/17/scientists-say-gmo-foods-are-safe-public-skepticism-remains/; accessed 26/12/17).

New Scientist (2015) ‘More than half of EU officially bans genetically modified crops’ (WWW) (https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn28283-more-than-half-of-european-union-votes-to-ban-growing-gm-crops/; accessed 26/12/17).

Price, B. and J. Cotter (2014) ‘The GM Contamination Register: a review of recorded contamination incidents associated with genetically modified organisms (GMOs), 1997–2013’, International Journal of Food Contamination, 1, 1, 5.

Qaim, M. (2014) ‘Genetically modified crops and development’, in V. Desai and R. Potter (eds.) The Companion to Development Studies: Third Edition, London: Routledge, Section 4.5.

Schnurr, M. A. (2015) ‘GMO 2.0: Genetically modified crops and the push for Africa’s green revolution’, Canadian Food Studies/La Revue canadienne des études sur l'alimentation, 2, 2, 201-208.

The Economist (2002) ‘Better dead than GM-fed?’ (WWW) (http://www.economist.com/node/1337197; accessed 26/12/17).