By Jesica Levingston Mac leod, PhD
In any molecular biology lab cloning is a daily procedure, now getting those clones outside of the lab is the huge issue. Genetic modified organisms or GMOs were subjected to specific genes alterations, and then cloned to obtain a larger number of identical organisms. Here, I would like to compare the two faces of this technology and its impact in the nature.
GMOs as Jedis, the good use of the force:
Since this technology was introduced to the field, the pesticide spraying has been reduced by 499 million kg (-8.7%) and this decreased the environmental impact associated with herbicide and insecticide use on the crops by 18.6% (as measured by the indicator the Environmental Impact Quotient [EIQ]). Furthermore, it has been reported a significant reduction in the release of greenhouse gas emissions from this cropping area, which, in 2012, was equivalent to removing 11.88 million cars from the streets.
Economically, they bring a high advantage to the farmers, allowing them to grow in a competitive environment, generating more products with a lower expenses.
GMOs are helping to supply resources to a never ending growing world population. Therefore, they could be a solution for the doomsday prediction that the economist Maltus made more than 100 years ago: “we are going to run out of resources and we won’t feed an exponential rising world population”. Science published at the beginning of 2000 a breakthrough research: the golden rice. This special GMO counts with the addition of three beta-carotene biosynthesis genes. These compounds added nutrient value to the rice, as they are precursors for the vitamin A biosyntheses. This project was leaded by Drs. Ingo Potrykus and Peter Beyer of the University of Freiburg, whom had the aim to introduce this enriched rice in the african, latin american and asian market where the deficit in this vitamin causes terrible health problems. At the time of publication, golden rice was considered a significant breakthrough in biotechnology, as the researchers had engineered an entire biosynthetic pathway. Five years later, a new version of the golden rice producing up to 23 times more beta-carotene than the original, was announced.
GMOs on the dark side of the force:
As an artificial organism that we are introducing to nature we can only try to predict how are we going to impact the environment. The ecology of this artificial selection was predicted as catastrophic, for example for the soy harvest in Argentina, where the excessive use of this GMO leaves the soil without nutrients, kind of “death” and unable to generate any other product. This exhaustion of the field may bring a negative impact in the future.
According to the center for food safety, GMOs products make up about 90 percent of cash crops like cotton, corn and soybeans nationwide. As Monsanto holds the 80% and the 90% of american corn and soybeans , respectively, and its licenses, the monopoly issue started to rise. Neither the farmers or scientist are allowed to research on the GMOs created by Monsanto, without a legal permission. This avoids the independent safety testing, and some scientists have rise the case to the US Supreme Court.
Furthermore, the farmers are subject to pay the increase price for the seeds that they can only buy for a few companies. Indeed, between 1995 and 2011, the per acre cost of corn and soybean increased 259% and 325%, respectively (US Department of Agriculture). With this strong license policy, an increasing number of small farmers have gone bankrupt as a consequence of having an accidental (like wind dispersal, split seed or cross contamination) presence of GMO on their fields. It is not surprising that with this situation the idea of changing seeds, buying a non-GMO species scares the farmers.
The labeling topic is even more sensible. The Food and Drug Administration favors voluntary labeling and says GMO products must meet the same safety levels as other foods. On the other hand the Center for Food Safety supports mandatory labeling. The GMOs producers prefer to avoid the labeling, as it brings unwanted attention to the product and bad advertising. The pro labeling organizations claim that it is the consumer right to know exactly what they are eating. My favorite comment in this regard was made by Gene Hall, a spokesman for the Texas Farm Bureau: “We don’t need to label something that is absolutely safe.”
As a great technology in development, GMOs are like Anakin Skywalker in his early age trying to decide which side of the force he should join, both present advantages and disadvantages, but without a correct guidance, like Yoda would be, this technology could be joining the dark side of the force.
No comments:
Post a Comment