“Only when the last tree has died and the last river been poisoned and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money,” famous comment from the Cree Chief Seattle.

Genetic Engineering (GE) is the process of artificially modifying the genetic constitution of an organism by inserting new genes from another organism (either from the same species or from a different species altogether). Genes are the blueprint of life. These are the units that make a human being human, or a maize plant a maize plant.

Scientists want to transfer desirable qualities or characteristics from one organism to another. For example; the fish genes that make it resist cold can be transferred to a potato plant to make it resist cold as well. However, this technology raises some moral and ethical questions pertaining to religious beliefs, health and environmental pollution.

In other instances, chemical manufacturing companies insert genes resistant to certain chemicals. This allows a field to be sprayed with those chemicals so that all the other plants, except the genetically modified ones will die. This has many dangerous implications as, increased use of the chemical can kill off a wide variety of other plant and animal life and pollute of ground water, through run off. It also makes farmers dependent on the chemicals produced by a particular manufacturer.

GE is a new technology. According to its promoters, it was created to improve food production and increase yields to feed the growing world population. According to some studies however, not all genetically modified seeds increase the crop yield. An example being researchers have found that Roundup-Ready soybean seeds (GM seeds by Monsanto) produced fewer bushels of soybeans than similar conventionally bred varieties. Far from being a solution to the world’s hunger problem, the rapid introduction of GE crops may actually threaten agriculture and food security, increasing the need for additional fertilisers, herbicides and pesticides. In practice, it is more likely to give particular suppliers and manufacturers greater dominance in the industry. In fact the entire agribusiness industry is already dominated by a few TNCs, who are involved in GMO technology, seed, chemical and fertiliser production, as well as in food processing and distribution.

Countries like the United States and Canada, where Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) are prevalent have argued for the production and trade in GMOs because they want to increase their share of the global food market. However, even if the genetically engineered crops were to produce more yields, the reality is that the world already produces more food than it needs and yet one in seven people suffer from hunger. Because of the prevailing unjust economic and political conditions, the food is not accessible to many. So it is not a question of availability but that of distribution and accessibility.

What are the risks?

From the days of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic disasters through the Green Revolution and now with the War on Terrorism, society has been recognising the side effects of nuclear pollution, global warming and the toxic effects of pesticides and herbicides. In each case it has taken time for hazards to come to light and for action to be taken. The effects of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombings are still being experienced. Babies are being born with disabilities as a result of the bombs that have affected that generation’s genetic constitution.

In like manner genetic engineering poses changes of an irreversible nature. Unlike chemical or nuclear contamination, new living organisms, bacteria and viruses are being released into the environment to reproduce, migrate and mutate. They are likely to transfer their new characteristics to other organisms and these changes can never be reversed or contained. Because living organisms are highly complex, genetic engineers cannot possibly predict all of the effects of introducing new genes into them.

On the surface, the dangers identified in the production and trade in GMOs so far include:

• New toxins and allergens in foods
• Other damaging effects on health caused by unnatural foods
• Increased use of chemicals on crops resulting in increased contamination of water supply and food
• The creation of herbicide resistant weeds
• The spread of diseases across species barriers (e.g. mad cow disease)
• Loss of bio-diversity in crops
• The disturbance of ecological balance
• Artificially-induced characteristics and inevitable side-effects passed on to subsequent generations and to other related organisms
• Dominance of agriculture by the bio-technology and agro-chemical industries to the detriment of small players and restriction of farmers’ choices.

In addition, GE can also produce unforeseen and unknown allergens in foods. Simple scientific facts point to the following:

• The introduced gene may act differently when working within its new host
• The original genetic intelligence of the host will be disrupted
• The new combination of the host genes and the introduced gene will have unpredictable effects, and therefore
• There is no way of knowing the overall long-term effect of genetically engineered foods on the health of those who eat them

Genetically engineered foods that contain genes derived from bacteria and viruses have been introduced in shops, particularly in US supermarkets. Some concerned retailers have opened what they call Health Food shops that do not accept GM products. GM foods can cause unexpected changes (mutations) in the organism that then create new and higher levels of toxins in the engineered foods (mostly because the species involved are different).

Threats to Third World Agriculture and livelihood

Besides the exposure to the above risks, the third world countries face additional risks. In the United States, GM maize has been under production for the past several years. The syrup that comes from that maize is now being used in the food and drink manufacturing industries in soda drinks and other sweeteners. Besides the health concerns there are important moral issues such as the fact that the maize syrup has replaced sugar cane syrup. Apart from its other effects, this has also destroyed the sugar cane industries of poorer countries and exacerbating hunger.

The bio-technology industry has provided multinational corporations with an opportunity to cash in on GMOs. In addition, the agro-based TNCs are now promoting the de-location of agriculture from Third World Countries to developed countries. Plants or crops that have been growing in specific regions in the south, like bananas, sugar cane and cocoa (tropical regions), now can be grown anywhere because of GM technology. As agricultural producers, third world countries have already seen their export revenues shrink and are now condemned to being mere consumers of more expensive products. As a result poverty and destitution in such countries are on the rise. This represents a shift in terms of agricultural production from third world countries that have been relying on it for their survival to developed countries. Even in developed countries, it is likely that farming will be dominated by the big multinational companies and small farmers will be put out of business.

GMOs and patents

Transnational corporations (TNCs) have acquired the right to patent seeds that they have been able to modify genetically. This means that farmers are tied into contracts to buy both seeds and chemicals and are not allowed to plant farm-saved seeds. This is already causing widespread social problems and food insecurity, particularly in developing countries. The patenting of GM seeds will deepen the plight of farmers around the world who are already struggling. If a farmer switches to a genetically engineered seed, that farmer has to sign a gene licensing agreement, which specifies royalty fees and dictates the seed, fertiliser and chemicals to be used. These agreements prohibit the storing of seed for the following season. Such an agreement undermines the right to food security, which must always take precedence over profits and patents. Food is not just a commodity or product like any other. It is a fundamental human right, the right to food.

Currently 50% of the patents on genetically modified foods are owned by just 13 TNCs. Like other forms of intellectual property rights (IPRs), patents are a form of incentive and reward for inventions. Such rights have traditionally been associated with industrial intellectual property in developed countries, and have been little used in agriculture. But agro-based TNCs involved in biotechnology have been advocating for IPRs that cover life forms as being no different from any other type of technology. Most corporations have been engaged in bio-piracy by acquiring the knowledge of generations of indigenous farmers. After subjecting this knowledge to scientific analysis, they take out patents on the resulting product. The advent of these patents therefore represents a new and potent threat to the people of the South, most of whom are involved in subsistence agriculture or related businesses.

Way Forward

Genetic engineering is still a very imprecise science and scientists concede that they are still very ignorant about its ramifications. The regulated interaction of genes is very complex. This, as well as the role of individual genes within the overall functioning and viability of an organism is hardly understood and many have more than one effect. The primary beneficiary of Genetic Engineering is the biotech industry, which will obtain short-term commercial gains at the expense of the health and safety of the Earth. It is potentially the greatest danger of any technology yet introduced, because many of its damaging effects are irreversible. The precautionary approach is essential if problems are to be prevented before they occur.

To protect the health of the people and the environment:

• Any food produced through genetic engineering should be banned until scientifically shown to be safe and safe for everyone.

• In the meantime labelling should be required for any food that contains even one genetically engineered ingredient, or that has been produced using genetically modified organisms. Everyone has the right to choose what to eat, and therefore, to know what is contained in the foods offered for sale. During the height of the food shortages in Zimbabwe, supermarket shelves were flooded with South African products (a country that has been in the forefront of promoting GM technology). Milk that was being imported from South Africa may have contained genetically modified bovine growth hormone, known to cause cancer in humans and mastitis in animals. Without labelling, consumers lose their freedom to choose what they eat and feed to their families. International agro-chemical companies adamantly oppose the labelling of the GE foods on the grounds that this will scare off people from buying them. But nations should not be subjected to the dictates of TNCs. Governments must expedite the process of coming up with laws that regulate the trade in GMOs.

• Only the experience of extensive laboratory experiments, repeated tests and carefully controlled field trials over a long period of time will provide any realistic basis for a broad claim of the safety of genetically modified foods. A precautionary, safety-proven policy must not be sacrificed in favour of corporate financial interests.

• All applications of genetic engineering that carry the risk of accidental or intentional release of genetically modified organisms into the environment should be banned.

• The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. This is the first legally binding international agreement governing the trans-boundary movement of living modified organisms. The treaty was adopted in January 2000 by member countries to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and entered into force on 11 September 2003. This protocol was negotiated under the CBD in order to promote the safe transfer, handling and use of living modified organisms (LMOs) resulting from modern biotechnology that may have adverse effects on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity. The Convention also takes into account risks to human health and specifically focusing on trans-boundary movements.

The Protocol establishes a harmonised set of international rules and procedures designed to ensure that countries are provided with the relevant information to enable them to make informed decisions, before agreeing to the import of LMOs. It also ensures that LMO shipments are accompanied by appropriate identification documentation.
Countries that have ratified the protocol should make use of it fully to protect public health and the environment. This means modifying laws to complement the protocol.

• In the process of negotiating the WTO Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) member states of the WTO should include a freeze on trade in GMOs in the Agreement until they are proved to be safe scientifically.

References:

1. Convention Biological Diversity website on Biosafety Protocol: http://www.biodiv.org/biosafety
2. Paper on Genetically Modified Food: The Impending Disaster, http://www.tradeobservatory.org
3. Genetically gineered Food – A serious health risk, http://www.netlink.de/gen/fagan
4. Machemedze Rangarirai, SEATINI Fact Sheet, Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, January 2003