Genetically Modified (GM) crops

There is rising debate and awareness over allowing genetically modified crops, especially, food crops, to be grown on commercial scale. I recently received a mail (most probably automated) from greenpeace (to which I have subscribed) asking to oppose the food bill endorsed by government of India. I doubt we could change anything even if all Indian citizens signed the online petition. (I would like request readers to explain how this works! I surely would be signing such petitions in future if they make an impact.)


History of Bacillus thuringiensis  (Bt):

It was first isolated from silkworms in 1901. It caused sudden collapse disease in silkworms and was considered harmful to the industry. It was later isolated from 'flour moth caterpillars' killled by 'Schlaffsucht' disease. It was now found in a pest and its role in pesticide application became apparent. Experiments were done to use Bt against 'European corn borer' (Ostrinia nubilali. In 1938, first commercial formulation of Bt called 'Sporein' was released in France. This formulation was useful only against one class of insect pest called 'Lepidoptera'. Later other strains were discovered that were useful against diptera  and coleoptera class of insect.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My point here is that Bt is used to control pests  in the form of sporulated bacteria since a long time. in the modern GM Bt crops, the plants are engineered such that they produce 'CRY proteins' (components that actually kill the pest) themselves, rather than having to be sprayed from the Bt formulations.
Each CRY proteins are said to be specific to certain class of pests. However, there are reports that show adverse effects (such as increased mortality, reduced reproductive capacity, skewing of sex ration) of CRY proteins on other class of insects. Adverse effect against insects and NOT humans.

Adverse effects on humans is still not studied properly. Studies on rats (90 day trial) show no adverse effects but additional long term studies are absolutely necessary.

According to me, if one wants to oppose GM (Bt) crops, then he should also be opposing the bacterial formulations. Perhaps not many people are aware of this. Besides, what most of the world now grows are hybrid crops. They may not be called GM in strict terms but are outcome of transfer of genes from one kind of organism to other. The high yield of crop we get today was practically impossible without this genetic exchange.

Another example of widely used product of genetic modification is insulin. It is produced in a bacteria and then isolated from it. No, one utters a thing about that! Oh, people will die without that. And people would die of hunger if we don't have high yield crops OR people don't reduce their family size.
One of my friends displayed a pic of various varieties of brinjals that were naturally resistant to pests. Such varieties often have very low yields and transferring pest resistance of such varieties to high yielding varieties would really help get rid of GM crops.

What I find ironic is that most of the world use pesticides which  are more harmful than CRY proteins. Oh, the trend of organic farming is rising but its sustainability on global level is questionable. Besides, organically grown crops are (at least now) affordable only to rich people.

There are two reasons that I strongly oppose GM crops, especially, Bt cops.
First, they are hazardous to wide variety of insects. They will cause a lot of damage in long term (This can be argued as they certainly won't kill all species on earth but will cause damage to some of the existing species. New species and resistant individuals from older species would certainly rise again to fill the gap and Monsanto and other similar companies would have to discover more such proteins to kill them.). I don't suppose most of the people (including me) in world act in any way to protect the environment.

Second, (this is related to my country, India). If we allow a foreign company to produce seeds that we would sow, Indian money would be going outside. This also can be false as exporting the crop's produce may bring the money back in but certainly we would depend on a foreign company for our seeds like we depend on them for our vehicles, clothes, computers, internet and so many things besides this. One more thing! Would it matter? I don't know.


P.S.: I do not have a detailed knowledge of political/economic issues regarding this so, comments that would be productive towards this discussion are most welcome. Comments against or favoring political parties or NGOs would be considered spam and subsequently deleted with a note.

Tweet

Fence at Kas

When the rain starts to wane, the Kas plateau comes in bloom. All of the hill is covered with white, blue, violet and yellow hue. Beauty of this, the plateau attracts lots of tourists. Thus come the vehicles, plastic. One can't  avoid the temptation of plucking the flowers. Some people even lay down over the flower bed.

Recently, the seven kilometer stretch of Kas plateau has been made a no parking zone. Anyone found plucking the flowers are to fined. All these moves are welcome, but there is also a proposal for putting down fence along the road to prevent tourists from trampling the flowers.

The fence, obviously, would serve the purpose but it would also affect the movement of wildlife across the plateau. It would also hinder grazing from cattle from nearby villages. These grazers are also a part of the ecosystem of Kas.

Moreover, the fence is meant for tourists, who are visit the plateau only for about a month.  The fence would certainly cause more damage than benefit to the ecosystem. Even the fence may not stop all the tourists from getting out of its bounds. People always find way to cross such barricades.

Some people also suggest that fencing would stop the spread of natural fires which are helpful for the sustenance of the ecosystem.

Kas plateau, like most other places of natural beauty is sure to be affected by the increasing number of tourists. However the solutions that are meant to prevent such damage must not be of more damaging kind. We should all hope that the administration take advice from some good ecologists before applying any solutions and lastly being wildly optimistic, I hope that people too understand what their enjoyment or romanticism or whatever costs to the beauty of such places and the survival of the species living there.

  

Tweet