Sports»
GM foods: To eat or not to eat?
DEC 14 - Genetically modified foods and the firestorm of controversies that incessantly rages around them have been making quite a number of headlines in the media worldwide. Genetic modification is a collection of special techniques that enable the genetic makeup of living organisms to be altered and messed around with.
How exactly is this done and why? There exist no simple answers to these complex questions. First of all, we need to talk about recombitant DNA technology. This technology alludes to the techniques that allow genes to be transferred from one organism to another. Specific genes are usually transferred from one organism to the other so as to improve various characteristics of the recipient organism. For instance, the pest-repelling property-having genes of a species of firs could be transferred to corn plants grown in a certain area that is infested with the pest concerned and is therefore threatened. When genes are thus transferred, the recipient organism is said to be genetically modified, genetically engineered or transgenic.
The big debate raging these days is on whether to use freely, use in limited quantities under strict supervision and control, or totally ban the consumption of transgenic food products.
One side of the debate which favours free usage without any bars is driven by big businesses from the United States – the country which pioneered the technology and is currently responsible for the production of over two-thirds of transgenic products worldwide. Pressure on the government from big businesses producing GM crops drive the interests of this camp. The proponents of GM food argue that it provides a plethora of benefits to humankind. They claim that GM crops are better in quality and taste, contain additional nutrients beneficial for human consumption, have improved resistance to diseases, pests and herbicides, mature quicker and provide a higher yield. Similarly, proponents of transgenic foods argur that GM animals give a better yield of meat, eggs and milk, are less vulnerable to pestilence, are hardier, feed efficient and healthier.
In the other camp are environmental activists and suspicious governments from developing countries in the likes of China and India, who are wary of GM foods for various reasons.
Environmental activists are primarily concerned over the safety of these foods. Unanticipated allergic responses to novel substances in foods, the spread of pest resistance or herbicide tolerance to wild plants, poisoning of the eco system, the rampant violation of the intrinsic values of organisms, stress to organisms, the unintended transfer of transgenes through cross-pollination, dangerous mutation of organisms, potential loss of bio-diversity and the unknown effects on other organisms are some grounds on which environmentalists oppose the sale of GM foods. They contend that Corporation’s manufacturing and marketing GM foods have not adequately tested their products for long-term safety and are attempting force others to use them, endangering human health and the well-being of other creatures too. Corporations, environmentalists argue, are merely interested in increasing their profit margins at the expense of the fragile balance of the
eco-system.
Developing countries on the other hand are worried that western companies may use intellectual property rights and access laws to, in the long-term, seize total control of the market for seeds and livestock. They fear that increasing dependency on industrialized countries for their food will be no more than colonialism, albeit indirectly.
Proponents of genetically engineered foods refute these charges. They counter-claim that GM products conserve soil and water, are less energy and time consuming to grow/rear and are more efficient to process. According to them, claims by environmental activists of hidden dangers in GM products are no more than misplaced hysterics based on wild and unfounded fears. As for the concerns of developing countries, these are summarily brushed aside as being no more than attempts at trade protectionism. One of the most valid reasons advanced by proponents for increased use of transgenic foods is the quite logical argument that more food of better quality can be produced at cheaper prices. This will help to feed the millions around the world who are starving.
But environmentalists fiercely contend with this conclusion. They claim that such reasoning is merely a ploy by big business interests to mint more money. They further accuse proponents of GM foods with interfering in the natural selection and survival of the fittest theories of Darwin – which will eventually lead to a massive population explosion, the very thing the world is trying its utmost to avoid. This is being done by feeding those who would otherwise have had perished from hunger, something that sounds rather callous and hard-hearted. Posted on: 2003-12-15 05:09
Headlines
Advertisements
