GMOs must be embraced
October 22, 2015
In Uganda, a country in which 82 percent of the populace is involved in agricultural production, 14 percent percent of civilians are underweight. In the United States, a nation that uses GMOs, as well as more effective farming techniques, less than 2 percent of the adult population is underweight, and less than 2 percent of the population lives on farms. Malnourishment is, in large part, due to the poverty in countries such as Uganda, but that is just an offshoot of the more important issue of the inaccessibility of nutritious food. Ahead of a Senate hearing on GMOs next Wednesday, it is clear that the use of GMOs should be embraced.
In areas where the ability to consume food is dependent on the populace’s ability to grow it to grow it, higher proportions of people go hungry. This method of subsistence farming is especially susceptible to nature as a single disaster has the potential to wipe out the livelihood and food sources for entire families or villages.
In Uganda, 75 percent of farmers grow bananas for a living. Agriculture is worth 23 percent of their economy. From 2001 to 2004, banana wilt cut the banana crop yield in half across Uganda. In response to this, the Uganda National Agricultural Research Organization created a banana crop that resists the banana wilt, and wants to give it away for free. The ability of GMOs to affect change is real and should not be ignored.
There are few solutions to the world hunger crisis, and none of them are as focused as they need to be. The idea of world hunger is shunted to the back of our minds, condemned to an existence firmly rooted in jokes about throwing away food or clickbait photos. We refuse to address an issue that plagues many millions of people, and instead focus on our own food being organic and GMO free. In reality, GMOs have the potential to save lives, keep children in a healthy weight range and promote more balanced diets among societies where the majority of food grown is a single crop.
One of the main arguments against the usage of GMOs is that they aren’t as healthful or nutritious as organic food, despite advertisement that foods engineered to be hardier will still provide nutrition. A famous example is golden rice, a genetically modified version of rice that is resistant to crop failure but requires larger amounts of consumption to provide the same benefits as normal rice.
However ineffective golden rice may be, it is a strong step in the right direction. With more research and funding, genetically modified foods are the answer to hunger. While it is true that there is enough food and areas to produce food in the world, the simple fact is that they’re not accessible enough. GMOs provide less expensive food to people who need it, as well as opportunities to diversify and grow hardier crops in more difficult climates. Letting the opportunity to feed more people go to waste is a mistake that we, and those we claim to wish to aid, cannot afford.
Opinions expressed on the editorial pages are not necessarily those of WSN, and our publication of opinions is not an endorsement of them.
Email Patrick Seaman at [email protected].
Kristof and Stacia Nordin • Nov 2, 2015 at 4:24 am
My wife and I have been implementing and teaching about sustainable agriculture methods in Malawi, Africa for over 18 years. We can assure your readers that the problem of food insecurity in Africa does not lie in the seeds, but rather in the ignoring of hundreds upon hundreds of highly-nutritious, highly-adapted, and open-pollinated local species of food crops. Despite much of Africa having tropical climates, which allows for the year-round seasonal production of hundreds of perennial crops, many countries have now moved towards a one-time annual harvest of a high-carbohydrate low-nutrient food–such as maize–in one month at the end of a rainy season. Here in Malawi, despite over-producing maize from 2005-2014 (8 consecutive years) we continue to see 47% of the nation’s children nutritionally ‘stunted’. As monocropping has disrupted the ecological balances, we now see genetic engineering being used to adapt our plants to unhealthy systems of agriculture. Instead of using natural Integrated Pest Management (IPM) techniques, we see genetic engineering being used to make our foods inherently toxic. Instead of recognizing that many of what agriculture now labels as ‘weeds’ are actually highly nutritious vegetables (i.e. amaranth, blackjack, jute, quickweed, crotalaria, etc), we see genetic engineering being used to make crops resistant to the free-for-all spraying of herbicides. Instead of acknowledging that good nutrition comes from the production and utilization of diverse foods, we see genetic engineering being used to put nutrients where they don’t belong (i.e. Golden Rice, gm bananas, etc). So far, every example of genetic engineering in the field of agriculture has been in response to problems that have been created and exacerbated by humans—not nature. Africa has not even come close to tapping into its potential for food production, but we are quickly approaching the limits of the current industrialized, corporate-controlled, environmentally-destructive approach.
mary • Oct 25, 2015 at 5:41 pm
While GMO food sounds promising, it is turning into a very serious health issue! One reason to create GMO food is so the plant can withstand the roundup applications. Works great, but now the weeds need more roundup to die. That roundup is also sprayed just days before a harvest for some crops. That roundup is a probable carcinogen and causes all kinds of health problems including cancer. Plus, making gmo seed requires adding dna from an unrelated plant or bacteria that people are reacting badly towards. GMO food needs more independent research, not the biased research that the producers perform and can manipulate results. It is unethical to promote GMO’s without having solid science behind your facts. Truth is, organic farming is more productive and we can feed the world without killing off the population!
Elliot • Oct 24, 2015 at 6:57 pm
So let me try to understand the logic of Patrick Seaman. Should I just cut and paste the opening paragraph? Because the logic of it fails to impress me. I would have to say what’s happening in Uganda with regards to agriculture and malnourishment has absolutely nothing to do with what’s happening in the US in those areas. The analogy doesn’t make any sense and to throw GMOs into the mix only adds to the confusion. If Mr. Seaman thinks he will be having a career in journalism he better learn to write better articles with explanations that have some kind of meaning not just complete nonsense, and that doesn’t matter if you agree with GMOs or not. You go to NYU?
Art • Oct 24, 2015 at 9:13 am
We farmers fed stock with meal, a rogue protein was created and gave cattle BSE, this destroyed the beef industry. Farmers were blamed as usual, but something else happened human genomes were altered by a rogue protein that gave people CJD. Who in their right mind would eat GMOs if they did not need to in the first place.
First Officer • Oct 23, 2015 at 8:08 am
Good article but I fear you have an inaccurate picture of Golden rice mind. Please visit the Goldenrice.org site for up to date information.