Genetically modified organism (often abbreviated as GMOs)
are simply living organism – plants and animals, whose genetical material has
been modified. There are two ways to do
this:
ü
Traditional selection and breeding (much like
breeding animals),
ü
Modern, scientific modification of the crops.
They are those organisms whose genetic material or DNA has
been deliberately altered to incorporate genes from another species. According
to the Human Genome Project, GMOs are designed to confer certain advantages to
the plants and animals in question.
The controversy over the use of genetically modified
organisms has increased as its use has increased in recent years. The creators
of GMOs use the best genes to create organisms that perform to their
intentions, especially fruit and vegetables. Opponents of GMOs do not like the
idea of eating plants that have not been created naturally and feel that
messing with natural processes will be harmful in the long run.
The GMO debate in Kenya has been characterized by a lot of
misinformation. Lets trace the debate:
Advantages of GMO
ü
Less Environmental Impact: Some food crops have
many negative environmental impacts due to erosion, irrigation needs and the
heavy use of pesticides and herbicides. According to the Human Genome Project,
GMO crops have been designed to specifically address these issues. Crops that
are resistant to disease and insects require fewer harmful chemicals. Plants
that are engineered to be drought-resistant require less irrigation, which both
conserves water and lessens erosion.
ü
Less pesticide is needed to be used due to
insect pest resistant plants.
ü
More economically friendly as pesticides do not
go into the air, soil, and water (especially freshwater supplies). Their
production hazards to the environment also decreases.
ü
Decrease in costs of growing and farming, due to
the reduced use of pesticides.
ü
Greater Yields: GMO food crops have been
genetically altered to have shorter growing cycles, greater resistance to both
insects and disease, higher yields, and higher nutritional value. GMO animals
have increased production as well. For example, dairy cows may produce more
milk. The World Health Organization, or WHO, states that the higher yields
afforded by GMO plants and animals may allow food prices to drop while food
sources become more abundant.
ü
Farmers have more income, which they could spend
on such things as, for example, the education of their children.
ü
Less deforestation needed to feed the worlds
growing population (UN projections say that the world population will reach
8.15 billion compared to 6.18 billion in year 2000). This decreases carbon
dioxide in the atmosphere, which in turn slows global warming.
ü
Decrease in food prices due to lower costs and
higher yield. As people in poor countries spend over half of their income on
food alone, lower food prices mean an automatic reduction of poverty.
ü
Less starvation in the world due to decreased
food prices.
ü
More nutritious. This has been proven and tested
many times.
ü
Rigorous testing of ALL GMO crops and products.
This makes GMOs much safer than organic (the traditional) crops.
ü
Scientific development of agriculture, health
and related sciences due to the better understanding of the products. For
example, the development of new medicines.
ü
Creation of “super foods” due to better
knowledge. Super foods are types of food that are cheap to produce, grow fast
in large quantities, highly nutritious.
ü
New products. For examples, scientist identified
the gene responsible for caffeine in coffee beans; by excluding this gene,
decaffeinated coffee beans can be grown naturally.
ü
Developments of new kinds of crops that can be
grown at extreme climates, for example, dry or freezing environments (like
deserts). For example, scientist developed a type of tomato that grows in salty
soil.
Disadvantages of
GMO
ü
Safety: Opponents of GMO foods raise two
concerns regarding their safety: the introduction of new allergens, and the
creation of antibiotic-resistant pathogens, sometimes called “superbugs.” As
genes are inserted into one species from another, new proteins will be made
that may have the ability to cause allergic reactions in some people.
Additionally, the technology used to create GMO foods relies on inserting
antibiotic-resistance genes into some plants, according to the Human Genome
Project. It is possible that during digestion, these genes could become
inserted into bacteria that live in the gut and cause antibiotic-resistant
bacteria. Should these bacteria infect animals and humans, our resources to
fight them would be diminished.
ü
Contamination: Because sun, wind, water, birds
and insects are not bound by property lines, there is concern that
cross-pollination may occur between GMO crops and non-GMO crops in the
vicinity, with the result that genetic alterations may be inadvertently
introduced to the non-GMO crops. Certainly for the farmer who has chosen to
grow non-GMO foods, this would be seen as a great disadvantage.
ü
Loss of Biodiversity: With all of the advantages
offered to farmers by GMO foods, such as greater yields and decreased energy
needs, there is legitimate concern that agriculture will become dominated by
crops and animals that have been genetically modified. This could translate to
a loss in biodiversity, meaning that many other varieties of plants and animals
will no longer be available.
ü
They contribute to lifestyle diseases
ü
Major trading countries that obtain most of the
benefit from the production and trade of genetically modified crops. This might
cause more geopolitical conflicts.
ü
Cross-pollination with traditional, organic
plants. Cross pollination can occur at quite large distances. New genes may
also be included in the offspring of the traditional, organic crops miles away.
This makes it difficult to distinguish which crop field is organic, and which
is not, posing a problem to the proper labeling of non-GMO food products.
ü
Harm to other organisms. For example genes and
their effect included in a crop may turn out to be poisonous to insects
(monarch butterfly poisoned by GMO corns).
ü
Taste of GMOs are not as good or “natural.”
ü
Spread of new, more resistant “super weeds”
ü
Spread of new, more resistant “super pests.”
ü
New trade, tariff and quota issues may arise
between countries, regions.
ü
Unharmonized test-, and safety standards around
the world.
ü
Widening corporate size gaps between food
producing giants and smaller ones. This might cause a consolidation in the
market: fewer competitors increase the risk of oligopolies, which might
increase food prices.
ü
Allergies may become more intense, and also, new
allergy types may develop.
ü
Discrepancies in information flow. GMO producers
stress the benefits, but are reluctant to talk about risks and dangers.
Discussion point: should we allow GMOs in Kenya????
The law on GMOs in
Kenya
Kenya enacted Biosafety Act of 2009, allowing import and
trade in GMos. Kenya is the fourth country in Africa to have GMO-ready Laws.
Other countries include South Africa, Burkina Faso and Egypt. In a Legal Notice
dated June 22, 2011 acting Higher Education, Science and Technology Minister
Hellen Sambili gazette the effective date as July 1.
The Act is consistent with the provisions and requirements
of the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Cartagena Protocol on
Biosafety. The Biosafety Act, 2009 states its objectives as:
ü
Facilitate responsible research and minimize
potential risks that may be posed by modern biotechnology activities including
GMOs
ü
Ensure an adequate level of protection in the
field of safe transfer, handling and use of GMO’s that may have an adverse
effect on human health and environment.
ü
Establish a transparent science-based and
predictable process to review and make decisions on modern biotechnology
activities.
ü
Ensure the definitions used in the
interpretations of the Act are similar to those used in the Convention on
Biological Diversity and the Cartagena protocol.
It deals with applications for contained use, field trials,
exportation and importation and placement on the market. It is not clear where
food aid which Kenya gets from Europe, America and Canada would fall in these
categories especially in light of the fact that GMOs intended for use as food,
feed and for processing are exempt from the advance informed agreement
procedures in the Cartagena Protocol.
The Act also establishes a National Biosafety Authority to
administer the Act. The membership of
the Authority comprises of representatives of the National Environment
Management Authority, Kenya Bureau of Standards, and National Council for
Science and Technology, the Department of Veterinary Services, Kenya Plant
Health inspectorate Service, Ministries of Finance and Science and Technology
among others. The Authority is empowered
to: consider and determine applications for approval for the transfer, handling
and use of genetically modified organisms, and related activities in accordance
with the provisions of this Act.
Section 18(1) demands that a person shall not conduct any
activity involving genetically modified organisms without the written approval
of the Authority. Section 19( 1 ) provides that a person shall n o t introduce
into the environment a genetically modified organism without the written
approval of the Authority. Section 20(1) provides that a person shall not
import into Kenya a genetically modified organism without the written approval
of the Authority. Section 21(1) stipulates that a person shall not place on the
market a genetically modified organism
without the written approval of the Authority. Section 22(1) demands that a
person transporting through Kenya modified organisms in transit, which are not
destined for use in Kenya, apply for a written approval of such transportation
from the Authority and ensure that the GMOs
are properly packaged and transported in accordance with such
regulations as may be prescribed and any applicable international standards.
Finally, Section 23 provides that a person intending to
export a genetically modified organism from Kenya shall provide the Authority
with an advance written consent granted by a relevant authority of the country
to which the genetically modified organism is destined, to the effect that such
relevant authority has no objection to the intended exportation.
To address safety concerns, Section 27 provides for a risk
assessment, that should take into account available information concerning any known
risk posed by potential exposure to a genetically modified organism. Further,
Section 31(1) empowers the Authority to suspend or revoke any approval given
under this Act where the person who has been granted such approval is in
contravention of any of the conditions imposed on the grant of the approval, or
the provisions of the Act.
Moreover, Section 39 requires a regulatory agency with
knowledge of an unintentional or unapproved introduction into the environment
of a genetically modified organism that is likely to pose biosafety risks to,
within twenty-four hours of knowledge of the introduction, notify the Authority
of the occurrence. The Authority may then, under Section 40, issue and serve on
any person a restoration order in respect of any matter relating to release of
a genetically modified organism into the environment. Under Section 42, if the
Authority determines that there is an imminent danger posed to the conservation
and sustainable use of biological diversity, taking into account risks to the
human health, in consultation with the relevant regulatory agency, it may issue
an order for the immediate cessation of an approved activity, or for the
immediate imposition of additional risk management measures with respect to
such activity.
Part VII of the Act provides for appointment of bio-safety
inspectors, with powers to enter without a warrant any premises, facility,
vessel or property which the inspector has reason to believe it is necessary
for him to enter in order to ascertain whether the requirements of this Act or
any approval under the Act are being complied with,
Finally, Section 51 authorizes the Minister, in consultation
with the Authority, to make regulations on;
ü
procedures for conducting contained use
activities involving genetically modified organisms;
ü
procedures for release of genetically modified
organisms into the environment;
ü
procedures for importation a n d exportation of
genetically modified organisms;
ü
procedures for genetically modified organisms in
transit;
ü
procedure for handling, packaging, transporting
and labeling genetically modified organisms.
The Act thus in allowing for GMOs in enya place sthe
necessary safeguards to ensure safety in use of GMOs.
Discussion: Are these
safeguards sufficient?
Section 52 provides a penalty, on conviction in any offence
related to GMOs, of a fine not exceeding twenty million shillings, or to
imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years, or both. The offences include
making contained use of, releasing into the environment, placing on the market
and importing or exporting a genetically modified organism without the approval
of the Authority;
Discussion: is the
penalty deterrent enough?
Conclusion
Kenya allows GMOs in Kenya, but with the necessary
precautions
Internationally GMOPs are regulated vide he CBD and
Cartagena Protocol, discussed in the last class. They allow the use of GMOs but
provide for safety measures.
Quiz
How does the Kenyan Biosafety Act implement the Cartagena
Protocol?
Discuss the weaknesses in the regulatory regime for GMOs in
Kenya
Propose legal reforms on how the above weaknesses can be
addressed?
REFERENCES
- The Biosafety Act 2009 & The Biosafety Regulations 2011.
- Convention or Biological Diversity (CBD) 1992.
- The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety 2000.
- National Environment Management and Co-ordination Act (NEMCA).
No comments:
Post a Comment