In 1996, global seed companies like Monsanto and Syngenta promised that genetically modified (GM) crops would be our salvation. GM crops would solve world hunger, rescue the small farmer from bankruptcy, and reduce our reliance on environmentally damaging and expensive agrochemicals. Over ten years have passed since these claims were made, and serious research in the area has proven these claims to be morally misguided and ecologically disastrous.
A recent publication by Friends of the Earth gives a detailed, evidence based assessment of the impact of GM crops around the world. A summary of the report’s conclusions and a downloadable pdf can be found here. Some additional conclusions in the body of the report are worth noting:
- A decade of worldwide commercialization of GM crops and increased penetration of GM crops in a few countries has failed to deliver the benefits its proponents claim.
- GM crops have not improved the livelihoods of small farmers in a sustainable manner. On the contrary, data from across the world demonstrates that GM crops have often performed worse than conventional varieties in countries including India, Brazil and Paraguay.
- No GM product commercialized today offers any benefits to the consumer in terms of quality or price.
- GM crops commercialized today have on the whole increased rather than decreased pesticide use, and do not yield more than conventional varieties.
GM crops, like most technologies, and especially biotechnologies, have been subjected to the law of unintended consequences. The full social and ecological costs of GM crops have yet to be measured, and it is likely we will be seeing their effects for decades, in not centuries, to come.
In the realm of ecology, the monarch butterfly is currently in a conservation crisis as a result of the massive adoption of Round-Up Ready® soybeans in America’s heartland. The increased application of the herbicide glysophate has destroyed milkweed and other important sources of nectar that monarchs have relied on during their annual Southern migration.
In the area of human health, the early indicators are both alarming and disturbing. For example, the GM crop Pioneer Hi-Bred International soybean was abandoned in 1993 when it was found that the infusion of Brazil nut genes produced immunological reactions in people suffering from Brazil nut allergies. While this is a case of industry erring on the side of caution, the lack of labeling requirements in the US means that the consumer’s ability to discern which foods may provoke an allergic response has been greatly diminished.
It is, moreover, highly possible that new genetic configurations will result in the creation of proteins that have never been part of the human diet. These new proteins may affect our bodies in ways that are unpredictable and dangerous, and allergic reactions to “traditional” foods may become more and more common place as our food supply becomes increasingly contaminated by GM crops.
The erroneous belief that GM crops would result in our agricultural salvation is merely a symptom of a larger sickness in our world view and an unshakable faith in technological innovation and profit motive. Agroecological problems cannot be engineered out of the system in the same way an engine can be fine tuned for improved performance.
Since the Enlightenment we have suffered from the terrible misconception that Nature is a machine, and by merely tightening a bolt here or loosening a nut there, we can manipulate and control it for both profit and pleasure.
