Prof. Jim Dunwell, a Plant Biotechnologist at University of Reading, UK, in this interview with Abdallah el-Kurebe at Biosciences for Farming in Africa, B4FA Media Fellowship workshop, which took place at IITA, Ibadan recently,took time  to react  to some issues  raised by the President  and Founder of  Slow Food Movement, Carlo Petrini on reasons to say “NO” to Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOS). Excerpts:

Some researchers and scientists in many countries observe that cultivating GMOs safely is impossible because of lack of adequate natural barriers to protect organic and conventional crops. Do you share these views?

GM crops are subject to detailed regulation prior to their approval for commercialisation. This testing includes a rigorous assessment of any effects on the environment. This includes effects on other organisms and on soil conditions. Those GM crops that are grown commercially are considered to interact with the biotic (biological) and abiotic (non-biological) environment in a manner that is similar to conventional crops.How can organic, biodynamic and conventional farmers be sure that their products are not contaminated?

The term “contamination” has obvious associations, and implications of harm, or potential harm. There is no evidence of such harm from the cultivation of GM crops. Certain types of organic and biodynamic farmers are fundamentally opposed to any cultivation of GM crops but others are less inclined to oppose their growth. “Conventional” farmers in many countries, principally North and South America, have adopted GM crops on a large scale.

Prof Dunwell

In Europe, growth of GM is much more limited, but some farmers would like the opportunity to test such varieties.  In summary, there should be a balance between the rights of those farmers opposed to the technology, and those who would welcome the crops. None of the groups should have the right of veto; and a compromise should be developed. Likewise the rights and preferences of consumers should be taken into account.

Is it true that there are proofs that animals that are fed with GMOs can develop health problems, let alone humans?

There have been several published reports claiming that animals fed on GM material suffer health problems. However, in all cases detailed analyses of these results by international experts and regulatory authorities have failed to substantiate the findings.

What do you have to say on the allegation that GM seeds are owned by multinationals to which the farmer must turn every new season?

For the last century farmers in most countries, particularly in developed countries, have not improved and selected their own seed. Instead, they have relied on the purchase of seeds developed by plant breeding companies.

It is these seed companies that have developed those GM varieties that are on the market. The genetic performance of hybrids, whether or they are not GM, is not maintained beyond the first growing season, and seed is purchased each year.

As mentioned, farmers for the last century have made this decision to pay for improved performance in order to maximise their economic return. Payment of royalties will depend on the precise term and condition under which a farmer bought their seed.

Don’t you see that introducing anonymous products with no history would weaken a system that also has close links to the tourism industry?

In general terms and in most areas agricultural tourism is not a significant issue. Where such systems are present farmers can grow the varieties of choice. There is no compulsion in any situation for a farmer to grow GM varieties.

It has equally been observed that GM crops impoverish biodiversity because they require large surface areas and an intensive monoculture system. Growing only one kind of corn for human consumption will mean a reduction in flavors and knowledge. What it your take on this?

It is not correct that GM crops need to be grown in any particular agricultural system. Also, farmers grow specific varieties that are adapted to their particular region, or environment. No single variety, GM or not, can be grown in all regions. There is no automatic effect on biodiversity, or reduction in flavour or quality attributes.

Will GMOs affect crop rotation?
Crop rotation is still important in many regions and will not be affected by GM crops. However, rotation cannot remove the need for protection against insects. Such protection is offered by insecticides, and the need for some insecticides is reduced because of the use of GM crops. This has economic and other advantages for the farmer. The cultivation of GM crops that are tolerant to herbicides does not mean an inevitable increase in the use of herbicides.

For the 30 years since GMOs began to be studied, results in the agricultural sector concern only three crops (corn, rapeseed and soy). Some scientists have posited that the plants do not support the genetic modifications very well and that this science is still rudimentary and partially entrusted to chance. GM Cotton varieties are also widely grown, and have led to significant economic advantages for farmers in countries such as India and Pakistan.

It is 30 since the first GM plants were developed and it is not correct to describe the science as “rudimentary and entrusted to chance”.  As information on the genetic composition of crop species becomes more extensive, then GM and related techniques will become even more precise.

Your take on the need for modern research to support sustainable agriculture and its needs?

Crop yields have increased significantly over the last century and it is estimated that genetic improvement has played a large role in these increases. GM techniques represent one aspect of this improvement but in long term it is important that all approaches should be employed to develop sustainable agricultural systems in the long term.