Canada is going to need genetically modified organisms in the future, even if the typical public response is generally strong, negative, passionate and extreme.
People distrust or fear the unnatural essence of GMOs, and transferring genes from unrelated species is comprehended as a Frankenstein-type experiment that inflicts death and destruction.
Unfortunately, when people don’t understand things, there is a natural tendency to fear them. People should not get swooped into anti-GMO movements because of fear. Anti-GMO movements are hindering our future success in solving global problems and environmental sustainability.
Anti-GMO movements claim that GMOs will cause cancer, autism and allergies, and claim the GMOs have been understudied. This is incorrect — genetically modified food is among the most extensively studied scientific subjects. In 2013, a review of 1,783 papers on genetically modified crops published between 2002 and 2012 found no evidence of dangers from the use of GMOs. There is a broad scientific consensus that currently marketed food containing GMOs poses no greater risk than conventional food. Consuming foods containing GMOs is no riskier than consuming the same foods containing ingredients from crops modified by conventional plant breeding.
In Canada, there is no mandatory labelling of GMOs in food, although there is intensive campaigning by anti-GMO movements. Labelling can only serve to mislead and falsely alarm consumers. Labelling efforts are not propelled by evidence that GMOs are actually dangerous, but rather these initiatives are driven by the persistent perception that such foods are “unnatural” and “untested.”
Anti-GMO movements are consistently crowning Monsanto as the “most evil corporation on Earth.” Perhaps they ought to focus their agendas on being anti-Monsanto or anti-corporate.
Monsanto is the No. 1 company developing GMO plants and controlling the largest market share of GMO crops in the world. Yes, it has certainly benefited from engineering crops; it spends millions developing them and charges large premiums to recoup its costs and make a profit, but it is important to realize that many others are also obtaining significant benefits. Farmers growing GMO crops that contain biological insecticide have greatly reduced their use of highly poisonous chemical insecticides, cutting their costs and harmful effects.
There are some big-business dealings that have left bad tastes in all our mouths, but there’s a lot more to GMOs than scheming monopolies. There are researchers who are determined to solve global problems.
Research being conducted on GMOs can generally be related to environmental sustainability. Research can range from reducing insecticides, crops with improved resistance to disease or drought and increased nutrient levels, fish species with enhanced growth characteristics, and plants or animals producing pharmaceutically important proteins such as vaccines.
Anti-GMO ideas do not fit with environmental sustainability. We need to be pro-science, pro-enlightenment and pro-technology. We are seeing large agricultural science companies, as well as universities and public institutions, withdrawing from GMO research because of the unclear legal situation, low public acceptance of GMOs and general antagonism.
The science behind the future of climate change is clear, and we will experience sudden, unpredictable changes in climates. The use of GMOs will allow us to adapt to these sudden changes, since new varieties can be created quickly.
Conventional crop breeding can take up to 15 years to establish a new crop variation, but with genetic engineering we can establish a new GMO variation in less than six months. We can establish crops containing genes that allow them to flourish in poor soils or in conditions of drought or high salt, or plants with genetic traits that allow them to combat pests or fatal diseases. We have the technology to establish more precise changes and adaptations, in a shorter amount of time.
This will be especially important in Canada because we are a major agri-food exporter with grain farmers alone generating $9 billion in economic output.
So please, don’t get caught up in anti-GMO movements simply because you don’t understand the process behind genetic engineering or genetic modifications. Sure, all new technologies have potential dangers and these call for caution, care and thorough scientific testing, but the claim that GMOs are understudied has become a staple of anti-GMO movements, asserting that GMOs have not been safety tested or that the companies that produce the seeds have done all the research on the impacts of GMOs.
There have been thousands of well-designed scientific tests, concluding that GMOs pose no unique threat to the environment or the public’s health.
The potential positives greatly outweigh the potential negatives, and if anti-GMO groups succeed, we won’t be able to use this technology to feed the growing population in the future. Instead of relying on anti-GMO claims, take an hour and do a little research on what the scientific community is actually saying about GMOs.
Valerie Leithoff of Langford is a University of Victoria student working on a bachelor of science degree in geography.
