The Biological Basis
The term Genetic Modification (GM) refers to the techniques by which the genetic composition of a plant is manipulated by adding specific genes to it. Every plant contains genes, which are DNA sequences containing information that determine its specific characteristics or traits. The genes are “inheritance units” that provide instructions for the development and functionality of the plant’s next generation. Crop plants modified through this process are called GM or genetically engineered crops, or transgenic crops (“Process of Developing Genetically Modified (GM) Crops.”, n.d.). The principal steps in the process are:
- The wanted gene is isolated; e.g. one that provides drought tolerance or resistance to insects.
- That gene is inserted into a “transfer vector” (a circular DNA molecule from a naturally occurring soil bacterium) using recombinant DNA techniques.
- Those modified bacterium cells containing the new gene are mixed with cells of the plant requiring modification. Some of them are taken up and inserted into the plant’s chromosomes. An alternative method is to bombard the plant cells with small particles coated with DNA molecules.
- Techniques to favor the modified cells are used to ensure survival of only the transformed cells (those with the new gene).
- The modified cells are placed in cultures to grow them into complete plantlets, which are then transferred into pots and kept in a controlled environment.
- The transformed plants are thoroughly tested to ensure that the wanted gene is present and has introduced the required functional modification.
- The plant performance is tested – initially in limited trials, then in the fields.
- Finally, safety assessments are conducted, for food and environmental aspects.
Social and Ethical Implications
According to a 2002 Summary Report produced by the Nuffield Council on Bioethics: “Genetically modified crops: the ethical and social issues”, there are three main principles applicable in this instance. The first is that of general welfare, which should be taken into account in order to “promote and protect the interests of citizens.” The second principle is that of maintaining people’s rights, for example the right as consumers to have freedom of choice. And the third principle is that of justice, interpreted as meaning that both the “burdens and the benefits of policies” should be fairly shared among all those that they affect. Taking those three principles into account, the Nuffield Report suggests these issues require addressing (p.2):
- Will general welfare be enhanced by improving food safety or reducing agricultural use of chemical pesticides? Or are there unknown environmental and consumer risks that would be best avoided in the interests of general welfare?
- Are there implications that affect consumer rights, such as “the right to be informed about the food one is eating?”
- Are there implications that affect the rights of scientists, such as retaining the freedom of conducting research whilst protecting their intellectual integrity?
- As regards the principle of justice, we have to ask who will mainly benefit from the new technologies and how are they obligated to compensate those who lose as a result?
Outside of those three main principles, the report refers to the perception by many that GM crops are not natural and the view by others that tampering with nature is inherently wrong. That latter view brings the ethics of altering the environment into the debate (p.3).
Having considered all these ethical issues and examining associated scientific evidence, the Report concludes that altering plants in this (GM) manner is not so different to conventional plant breeding so as to render the process objectionable from a moral standpoint. The compilers of the Report conclude that it is essentially a new tool that helps plant breeders produce faster and more accurate results. Whilst accepting that some of the gene combinations achieved are impossible to ever occur naturally, their verdict is that the practice should not be prohibited, so long as the potential side effects are “thoroughly assessed.” However, there is also a recommendation that now that GM foods are widely available in the marketplace, there is a clear case for stronger and integrated regulation (p.3).
Personal Viewpoint
There are said to be tremendous benefits to be gained from developing and growing GM crops. Apart from the widely-mentioned higher yields and pest and disease-resistance of these GM varieties, they require less pesticides and herbicides on the fields, which is good for the environment (less toxic runoff into the groundwater and river systems). These and other advantages are cited by Murnaghan (Feb. 2014). He cites the increased yields as a plus factor to help feed more of the populations in the poorer countries, and mentions that the GM varieties are alleged to be better from an economic viewpoint, even though the seed costs are higher. That is in part because the cultivation of the GM varieties requires less agricultural manpower. They are also said to more tolerant of extremes of weather and can be bred for increased quality and even to have a higher percentage of vitamins for example.
These are all creditable advantages of GM crops, but as Murnaghan points out, there are disadvantages, too. Genes inserted in a plant may come from another plant that triggers human allergies, and bring that allergen with them, or even introduce a new allergy altogether. Murnaghan also notes that the property of the GM crop that harms a pest species could also be depriving another creature of its food source; i.e. having an unintended effect on biodiversity, perhaps even threatening an entire species with extinction.
However, one possible adverse effect that Murnaghan mentions is the one that concerns this writer the most. That is that the bacteria and viruses used in the modification technology to create some GM crops could be a threat to human health. For example, the invisible components of a GM food crop could be the source of a new disease. There could even be long term adverse effects on human health or the environment; effects which so far have not been detected.
The key point made in the Nuffield Report cited earlier is: “so long as the potential side effects are “thoroughly assessed.”” Regrettably, it is probably not in the commercial interests of the GM food giants to look too hard for delayed or cumulative effects of consuming GM foods over a longer period. In addition, taking into account the relative “youth” of the technology and the crops bred as a result, we have to ask whether have they been around long enough to consider them as having been “thoroughly assessed.”
There is no doubt that the potential for feeding an increasing global population is enhanced by the existence of the foods produced from GM crops, and that herbicide and pesticide use can be dramatically reduced. However, just as bacteria are becoming resistant to over-prescribed antibiotics, could the same happen in agriculture, i.e. pests and weed varieties become increasingly able to cope with the new technology? Also, if there are possible hidden and/or delayed health problems waiting to surface, who knows what the ultimate price to humanity could be?
On balance, GM crops have to be considered good for the human race and the environment, but it is essential that these possible adverse factors are not only taken into account, but are exhaustively investigated, to ensure as far as possible that in the longer term GM crops do not prove to be an ecological disaster.
References
“Genetically modified crops: the ethical and social issues.” (2002). The Nuffield Council on Bioethics. Retrieved from: http://www.nch.go.jp/imal/Ethical_Com/Nuffield_Coouncil/gm_crops_summary.pdf
Murnaghan, Ian. (Feb. 2014). “Fact Sheet: Pros vs Cons.” Genetically Modified Foods. Retrieved from: http://www.geneticallymodifiedfoods.co.uk/fact-sheet-pros-vs-cons.html
“Process of Developing Genetically Modified (GM) Crops.” (n.d.). African Biosafety Network of Expertise (ABNE). Retrieved from: http://www.nepadbiosafety.net/subjects/biotechnology/process-of-developing-genetically-modified-gm-crops
