GM crops

Most countries rely on natural produce from their land to sustain the economy via a process of imports and exports. Produce can range from actual food products to useful commodities such as cotton, oil, gas and so forth. Using developments in science such as the introduction of genetically modified foods to help was seen as a good thing... to begin with.

Genetically modified/ engineering organism = using recombinant DNA technology to manipulate the genetic code of an organism. It usually involves combining the DNA of the original organism with DNA molecules from another source to produce a completely new genetic code – a new genetic code.

GM foods were thought to be a better way to improve existing crop yields by making the organisms resistant to disease and the use of less fertilisers and pesticides. GM crops also entertained the real possibility of eliminating world hunger. However as time has passed, it has become more clear that the promise of GM foods may not be all that it was cracked up to be. It has been suggested the world already produces enough food to feed its inhabitants and that a simple redistribution of food would solve the problem of hunger especially in third world countries. However by producing crops with the same genetic code, the variation between species decreases, which can cause huge problem. Hypothetically if a particular disease is able to overcome the barriers put up by the manipulated genetic code, then effectively the entire strain can be eliminated, perhaps even the whole species of the organism. This poses a real threat to biodiversity and could also have a knock on effect on our own health. Before any new drug is released into the market, its effects are extensively researched and through checks are made by numerous regulatory authorities such as the FDA. However, the effects of GM crops haven’t been exposed to the same rigorous checks it seems as other products. A small slip in production could lead to unknown effects i.e. the cross breeding of GM crops with other plants in the wild could have untold effects, which have not been monitored. In addition to this it seems that the only people that are benefiting from the introduction of GM are large biotech companies that are involved with the production of the seeds, for their own commercial gain.

A recent example in the news was of cotton farmers in India. In order to avoid crop eradication, the Indian government state that those who choose to grow the GM cotton species - bacillus thuringiensis (BT) - should also plant the non-BT variety in at least 20% of their land. Yet environmentalists are still not happy and some claim that there is positive correlation between the increased use of BT cotton seeds in an area and the suicide rate amongst farmers within that area. It highlights the case of a specific Indian farmer, a Mr Virender, who grows the GM cotton. He states that he much happier with the BT variety as he gains a better yield and doesn’t have to use as much pesticide – beneficial both for him and the environment. However in recent times, the farmer was asked to plant a new strain the species which didn’t provide a good yield like the previous year. Furthermore his wife suffers from an allergy from the BT variety (something that didn’t happen with the non BT variety) but because of economic pressure, she puts up with it. The company that controls the distribution of GM seeds is Mahyco, which is also looking into the possibility of growing a new BT aubergine seed. This essentially means that a GM food will be introduced for consumption for the first time in India. It is slightly worrying as most of the population are not fully educated as to what this means and those that are educated still do not know the full effects of what may or may not happen. It seems that in order to make a quick profit, the proper use of science and its’ processes as well as educating the masses has been neglected – very disappointing indeed.