- Get link
- X
- Other Apps
- Get link
- X
- Other Apps
Gilles-Eric Serilani is a professor at the University of Caen in
Normandy in France. Two years back, in 2012, he published a research paper that
created a scientific uproar across the globe. In this landmark study, he fed
rats for two years, which is the normal lifespan of rats, with genetically
modified corn treated with a popular weed killer Roundup. The result was
shocking. These rats developed mammary tumours, much bigger in size than what
we normally see, and also liver and kidney diseases.
This was the first time a study had been conducted on
rats for their full lifespan, which corresponds to about 80 years in human
life. Normally, scientific feeding trials are conducted for 90 days, like in
India, which corresponds to about 20 years of human life.
The path-breaking study was vociferously contested by
pro-GM scientists. All kinds of charges were framed against Dr Seralini so much
so that he was even accused of tampering with the results. This study was
subsequently withdrawn by the scientific journal which first published it. But
the catch here is that it was retracted only after a Monsanto person joined the
top editorial team. Nevertheless, the study has since then been republished by
another scientific journal Environment Science Europe.
At a time when studies now show that the harmful impact
of chemical pesticides are passed on from generation to generation, I have
never understood how could the regulatory bodies feel satisfied with feeding
trials lasting for only 90 days in rats, which means about 20 years in a human life.
A more recent study now tells us that your kidney problem can be related to the
pesticide exposure your grandmother had.
In a study: https://news.wsu.edu/2014/07/ 24/pesticide-linked-to-three- generations-of-disease/#.U- C5lKOJWRM researchers say ancestral exposures to the pesticide methoxychlor may lead to adult onset kidney disease, ovarian disease and obesity in future generations. Michael Skinner, Washington State Uinversity professor and founder of the Center for Reproductive Biology at the University, and his colleagues document their findings in a paper published online in PLOS ONE (http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/ journal.pone.0102091). The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health.
If this is true with pesticides,
shouldn’t longer feeding trials be held in case of GM crops to be doubly sure?
Why are the scientists therefore in a hurry to push GM crops to unsuspecting
populations?
The argument that I hear in the print media and TV
channels is that if we don’t allow GM crop field trails how will we know of the
performance of these crops? But what is not being told is that all across the
globe it is through field trails that GM contamination has spread in the wild.
GM plants carry an alien gene that can escape into nature by wind or by
cross-pollination. In America, because of the GM contamination ‘super weeds’
have erupted in 100 million acres requiring more potent chemicals to kill these
weeds. ‘Super weeds’ become resistant to all kinds of chemicals and often
require hand weeding.
Shouldn’t India therefore first conduct long-term
feeding trials of GM seeds before these are tested in crop fields? No one is
against scientific testing, but considering that GM genes escape into nature
and also in the absence of tight regulatory control, the GM crops do get mixed
up and get into the food chain, why can’t Environment Minister Prakash
Javadekar first direct the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC), the
nodal inter-ministerial body that approved the GM crops for cultivation, to
conduct long-term trials to know the impact on human beings. After all, in a
country where combating disease and health disorders remains a challenge why
add on to the prevailing crisis?
But the moment you bring up the question of the need
for long-term impact on human health, you will find a chorus that is often
repeated ad nauseam is that the Americans have been eating GM foods for almost
20 years now and there have been no fatalities. What is however not being told
is that since the GM industry does not allow human clinical trials to be
conducted how will we ever get to know the health impacts of GM foods. So far
there has been only one human clinical trial in which GM created problems for
lab rats. After that the GM industry has ensured that no human clinical trials
are conducted.
Ever since the first GM crop – a GM tomato – was introduced
in the United States in 1994, there has been a remarkable spurt in diseases.
There is a 400 per cent increase in allergies; 300 per cent increase in asthma;
1500 per cent increase in autism to name a few diseases. I have been often
saying that the US is the sickest nation among the developed countries. There
is certainly no evidence of a direct link, but also there is also no evidence
that this may not be linked somehow.
And finally, let us look at one of the tall claims of
the GM industry. These crops were supposed to reduce the use of chemical
pesticides and thereby make environment much cleaner. Washington State
University researcher Charles Benbrook has shown that between 1996 and 2011,
farmers in US are applying an additional 400 million pounds of pesticides. In
2012, on an average 20 per cent more pesticides were applied by GM farmers as
compared to farmers not growing GM crops.
In Latin America, Brazil and Argentina are two major
cultivators of GM crops. In Argentina, the application of chemical pesticides
has risen from 34 million litres in the mid-1990s when the GM soybean crops
were first introduced to more than 317 million litres in 2012, roughly a ten
times increase. On an average, Argentine farmers use twice the quantity of
pesticides per acre than their American counterparts. In Brazil, which has
recently taken over Argentina as far as the spread of GM crops is concerned,
pesticides use has gone up by 190 per cent in the past decade.
In China, which has been promoted as a silver-bullet case,
the bubble burst when a 2006 joint study conducted by Cornell University and
the Chinese Academy of Sciences showed that
seven years after the introduction of Bt cotton, Chinese farmers were
spraying 20 times more pesticides to control pests. Why then do we need GM
crops, especially when they don’t even produce more than the existing crop
varieties. According to US Department of Agriculture, crop yields of GM soya
and corn are lower than the non-GM crop varieties. # (Some portions of this article have appeared elsewhere also)
The Hindi version of this article appeared in Nai Dunia, Aug 5, 2014.
किसे है जीएम फसलों की जरूरत?
http://naidunia.jagran.com/ editorial/expert-comment-who- needs-gm-crops-155245
Also, in Orissa Post, Aug 7, 2014.
No need to rush for GM crops
http://www.orissapost.com/ epaper/070814/p8.htm
Also, in Orissa Post, Aug 7, 2014.
No need to rush for GM crops
http://www.orissapost.com/
Comments
Post a Comment