The Genetically Modified Crops Debate: Pick a Side

At some point in time, long before the progress of modern man, before the emergence of religion or science, we learned how to conjure fire from stone. I can picture a small group of our evolutionary ancestors sitting around their residential cave, shivering and huddled when one curious entrepreneur decided to share something with the group. “UUUUUGH, ARP NARP” he or she probably said, beckoning the attention of the others to the two rocks it carried, then excitedly hammering these rocks together, a flash of light illuminating the startled faces of these cave dwelling simpletons.

I can picture a small group of our evolutionary ancestors sitting around their residential cave, shivering and huddled when one curious entrepreneur decided to share something with the group. “UUUUUGH, ARP NARP” he or she probably said, beckoning the attention of the others to the two rocks it carried, then excitedly hammering these rocks together, a flash of light illuminating the startled faces of these cave dwelling simpletons. Maybe the spark was captured in some dried grass bedding, either through a dim-witted accident, or some later experiment, and our path was changed forever. But what of the others in the cave, startled and terrified by the flash of light?

So, the debate started. I know that at some point the conclusion was reached (by our less learned forebearers) that the sky was not looking after them at night. After a couple of fires raged out of control, a deeper understanding of it was gained.

The debate will never end, it rages on still. Whether it be genetically modified crops, stem cell research or three parent babies. The fight between urgent progress and cautious conservatism is ever present, and increasingly vehement. But amongst the hateful exchanges, rallies and frustration, more people than ever are starting to realise they have vested interest in the battle.

Genetically modified (or GM) crops are probably the most important topic currently twisted in the pegs of debate. The population of our planet is constantly increasing. With every passing second someone clenches their teeth and squeezes another hungry mouth into the world. The rich and poor alike love to procreate, and who can blame them, right. Even with the development of the pill, the implant, and other none erection-killing contraceptives, the birth rate is still unsustainable. We need food. We need enough of it, and we need it to be affordable. GM crops are probably our best bet at achieving a less hungry world.

The science here is complicated and misunderstood, but the information is there for anyone to read. Even a cursory glance at Wikipedia could enlighten a lay person to the techniques, advantages and disadvantage of GM crops. There are a few different techniques commonly used. One such technique, which is delightfully referred to as the Gene Gun or Bioballistics. Developed from a nail gun, of all things, it fires particles of gold or platinum (usually gold), which is coated in genes, into the nucleus of a plant cell. There is also microinjection, which is pretty self-explanatory. Agrobacterium that utilises the bacterial parasites that already exist in plants and are known to swap genes with the plants that host them. There are others too, each more complex and intrusive than the last.

It’s not the techniques we use to change these plants that people find so appalling. Not many cry out in protest of a plant’s pain or worry that they suffer at all. It seems to be what changes can be made, what these changes could lead to and even that we would change them at all. The most emotive phrase that those against employ is that these scientists are “playing God”. A phrase that is used repeatedly to breed distrust towards the motives of the people responsible for these breakthroughs. I try not to engage in arguments over religion on the internet, but I would hope that the majority of the intelligent, modern, cyber-community are unconcerned about incurring wrath from the sky. As such, I will gloss over any concerns of deity like behaviour, and move straight to the more earthly benefits and risks.

 

The Benefits

GM Crops Benefits

Pesticide replacement: As a chemist, I have studied pesticides quite extensively, and while there are a few pesticides which don’t have too many terrible downsides, the majority are extremely detrimental to the environment.

Increased yield: To create the food that the planet needs, we have to either increase crop yield or stop procreating at the same rate. Increases in yield mean more food can be made, and much cheaper too.

Lower fertiliser dependence: Creating crops that will grow in harder environments means a drop on the use of nitrogen fertilizers, which too are not very friendly to the environment.

Increased nutrition: Balanced diet on a budget? Just eat rice, which has been engineered to have higher levels of iron, vitamin A, vitamin E and lysine. In fact, the nutritional value of many cereals, vegetables and fruits can be increased.

Vaccination: It’s not just nutrition. Imagine the ability to vaccinate people with maize. A developing country might struggle to reach it’s more far-flung citizens with vaccinations. Literally eat to achieve herd immunity.

There are other benefits too, if those listed above aren’t enough for the more discerning sceptics out there. Have a look, and go source hopping. Start at the references on Wikipedia and see where you end up. You will also discover many of the unsettling risks.

 

The Risks

GM Crops
Image: The Daily Mail

Unintentional allergens: There is the risk that people may develop allergic reactions towards modified foodstuffs. It could be that unexpected allergens, or antinutritional substances render food dangerous or inedible.

Escape of the genes: Some genes may cross over from the intended plant species into another species. This could create plant pests and weeds that are extremely hard to eradicate.

Hard-as-nails pests: Pests may build resistance to the toxins that the plants are engineered to create. These tougher pests would render the advancement null.

Killing nicer creatures: Although we wish only to kill none-cute, horrible beasties, there is the chance of other organisms also being poisoned by these toxins.

Yet again, other risks are identified. Have a read. Learn and think all you can about it, and then join a side of the argument.

 

In my opinion, we need to act now. In Britain there has been very little GM crop backing, and unlike the USA and continental Europe, we have not been able to feel the benefits of it. So far no country has reported any of the half expected problems which are listed above, although this doesn’t mean they won’t at some point. But I find it more prudent to act, and ignite this fire. I feel as a species we have always been much more accomplished at quenching the flames of temperamental industry, than we have at bearing the villainous cold of our own inaction. It is better to fix a problem on a full stomach than an empty one, and there are already so many empty stomachs.

I don’t expect everyone to side with me on this, but I hope that fear through ignorance will not stop the progress. Science needs sceptics. It keeps the industries in check, and encourages healthy. questioning of the established truth. However, an argument of this magnitude requires well-informed opinion. So pick a side. Either side will do, but please have a read around. We are falling behind, and division through ignorance is not an excuse for failing to feed our children’s children.

Some of the coverage you find on Cultured Vultures contains affiliate links, which provide us with small commissions based on purchases made from visiting our site. We cover gaming news, movie reviews, wrestling and much more.