Life is complicated. It is never black and white. We like to think that our choices are easy and that the answers are right in front of us. So, what about Genetically Modified Food? Here is how I see and understand it:
Norman Borlaug started his work in the middle of the 20th century. There were thousands of starving people in Mexico due to crop failures. His work led him to specialized breeding of wheat crops that were more resistant to crop blight and produced higher yields. This was the early stages of genetically modified agriculture. He took his work to India, Pakistan, even China to produce strains of crops that produced better yields and were more resistant to the diseases that were destroying crops in third world countries. In return, thousands (or perhaps millions) of people were saved from starvation around the globe. Norman Bourlag was a humanitarian and has some of the highest awards in the world.
His one and only goal was to produce food to feed starving people around the globe. There are still countries where the food supply is desperate. Genetically modified food crops could produce higher yields and coupled with some other modern technology, could help some of these developing nations to feed and support their own people. Remember, any cross breeding of crops is a form of genetic modification. But even gross genetic manipulation, in a lab, that produces food crops that can feed starving people is not necessarily a bad thing. While I don’t see any reason to have GM food in my food supply, who am I to say that our American lifestyle of throwing away an average of 40% of the food that we produce means that starving people in Africa and India should have nothing rather than GM food crops. The idea of GM food was originally conceived to feed third world countries.
Unfortunately, with any progress in science, someone is out to make a buck. While I would like to eschew this philosophy entirely, it is the system of capitalism that we live in. It has become pretty obvious that the Marxist Utopian society does not exist. Besides, the pursuit of the almighty dollar has led to some of the biggest and most impactful advances in technology that the world has ever seen. If you are reading this blog, then you have are experiencing the benefits of that innovation. For good or bad, we are not the kind of people that can stay static, and the desire to be better off has been the motivating factor for that small smart phone, the iPad and even the automobile. So in this environment of making it rich, it is not so shocking that we developed a wonder like the “Super Tomato.” The idea behind this fruit is that commercial farms in America can produce stronger tomatoes through genetic manipulation that would not bruise as easily and would transport farther, thus making them more money. This type of thinking has led to Monsanto’s development of GM corn that is patented and easily cross breeds with other corn. So when they plant it in a field, it often cross pollinates with smaller farms nearby, who now have the patented GM corn of Monsanto growing in their field, whether they want it or not. Just to make sure they make more money, the basic strain they plant for production is completely sterile, so farmers now need to buy new seed corn instead of setting aside some of their own crop. Who wins? Certainly not the small farmer.
On the other extreme are green purists. In this far extreme lie groups like Greenpeace. While Greenpeace hold many of the same values that I hold, they often are too radical in what they cling to for my liking. Opposition to GM food crops by Greenpeace and many of their contemporaries led to a distinctly terrible situation in Zambia in 2002. Some of the food donations to poor and starving people in a drought and famine afflicted country contained some portion of GM food. Outspoken opponents to the GM movement encouraged the leaders of Zambia to reject this food. In the end, many people starved and in some cases continue to starve due to rejections like this.
Somewhere in the middle lies the best course. But due to propaganda and fear, the middle ground is often not where anyone lands-just look at American politics. Yes there are risks to GM foods. When you add a gene from a Brazil nut to a soybean so it produces a more nutritious soybean, you can trigger allergies in those who are allergic to nuts. When we look at the rise in things we don’t completely understand (like nut allergies) it make GM food look like a great scapegoat for many of our ills. To make matters worse, greed goes head to head with ethics. In the case of Starlight corn, the government approved it only for animal consumption due to allergen trigger concerns, until more tests were done. However, producers of corn products never bothered to tell farmers this, as they expected approval before harvest, so the result was Starlight corn illegally added to consumer products. We do not know the long term affects of GM foods on the health and well being of humans (and remember doctors used to smoke and endorse cigarette brands). On the other hand, taking a blanket stand against ALL GM food seems extreme as well. If we can use GM foods to produce safe and healthful crops that can feed starving people in third world countries, then it definitely has a place in our modern world-at least for the time being.
As individuals, we are responsible for making our own well informed decisions. I do not see any need for GM food in my particular diet. Unfortunately, there is no clear labeling requirements, so it is already there. I do my best to buy local food. This reduces my chances of introducing GM food. That being said, I do not make my own taco shells, so GM food is already there. While I would like to avoid GM food for myself, I don’t think I have the right to make that choice for the millions of starving people around the world.
Tags: food, genetically modified foods
What Borlaug did was “cross-breeding”, the same thing farmers have done for centuries. This is not really genetic modification in the modern usage. Cross-breeding is hit and miss, you may try to get a dog with long legs and end up with dogs who have long bodies and back problems. Nature takes care of how the genes turn on and off, even with this human manipulation.
Genetic Modification in the modern sense is when we actually cut out certain chromosomes or replace them, or splice new ones in. Nature still plays a role (so far) by disallowing certain combinations such as the non-existent human-animal hybridism the right wing fears so much lately. However, by such absolutely direct manipulation of the DNA itself, we have no idea what other genes are turning on and off, including those that create carcinogens or produce unwanted hormonal reactions in humans. Tampering in this way with our food supply has dangers we don’t yet comprehend, and Monsanto and their ilk didn’t wait to see what effects their GM crops may have on the population; they just looked at the desired product and went to market.