More Scientists Disagree On Need For GMOs
The media has reported many times on the potential difficulties that will be faced in the future, with a growing need to have food distributed to billions of people. There are a variety of projects that are trying to address this, and to meet that hunger need it has been frequently suggested that GM foods are essential, that they are the only answer, but are they? Scientists in Nigeria disagree, among others.
To try and fight against unwanted weather conditions, pests, to gain higher yields etc, scientists have frequently advocated for biotechnology. While selective breeding might have been around for many years, modern biotechnology is much different which involves directly modifying the genome of the crop. Not everyone is a fan of this biotechnology, and some of those who have even been a part of creating that technology have now come to question their methods, urging caution while moving forward in this industry suggesting that pressing forward blindly might reap unintended consequences on the environment and our bodies.
There is a group of scientists in Nigeria who are now questioning the need for genetically modified organisms, saying that they pose serious challenges in the areas of immune dysfunction, allergy, and toxicology, among other concerns.
“When we talk about genetic engineering we must realize that tampering with nature has consequences because every GMO that you have is an unnatural organism that cannot be found in nature." - Casmir Ifeanyi of the Department of Veterinary Microbiology, Faculty of Veterinary Microbiology
According to one environmentalist from the region, Nnimmo Bassey, he says that GMOs don't address food insecurity and that his community doesn't need GMOs. Bassey negates the myth that GMOs always produce higher yields and he says that to address food availability, this is not the answer.
“These chemicals are all over Nigerian markets. Tell me, where will poor Nigerian farmers get justice when the calamities begin?’’ asks Bassey.
He wants to see his community move forward with other solutions and there are plenty.
Some might say that it isn't a need to grow more food that's the top issue, because there is plenty of food now and a great deal of it being wasted, but there is a more urgent need to improve food distribution. Thankfully, a growing number of individuals have been looking to use technology to help do just that, by pairing restaurants and other stores etc that might have expired food, with those who are willing to either pay discounted prices or take it for free.
As well, there are a variety of ways to address the need to grow more food, especially in regions that have difficulty with weather or land issues, they can turn to underground greenhouses, aquaponics, hydroponics, and other types of growing to try and get the most out of their space. There are other alternatives to GMOs and there is no consensus that GMOs are the only way to address the hunger needs of the entire world.
Pics:
pixabay
Monsanto is evil and GMOs are Frankenstein food for our genetics. Natural and organic the way to go.
I am so pleased to hear of the opposition by scientists with GMO.
The biggest pieces for me saying no to GMO is
A study done by a group in the UK performed the feeding GMOs to rats beyond the 3 month trial that the FDA specified. In which they found not only a LOT of cancer tumors, but a LOT of tumor.
The other piece is magnetic germination. Increase plant size, health and production without modifying anything.
CRISPR is a hatchet where a scalpel is needed. There is no guarantee that the DNA will be splice where you want, and only where you want.
Scientists don't even know what DNA does. (junk DNA??!! What an absurd name) How do they expect to modify it and know what changes they have wrought.