Genetic Engineering: A Food Fix?

Forbes recently published a very interesting article on genetically engineered (GE) crops which are often discussed as the way to feed the world’s growing populations and to mitigate the affects of climate change.

But the spreading of those same genetically engineered traits to weeds is now well documented.  Invasive plants  become “super weeds” and insects develop resistance to the trait, making them even tougher to fight than they were before the use of GE crops.

Researchers in China recently confirmed this.  They announced that while the spread of engineered traits to weeds in rice fields is slower than they previously thought, it is also “unavoidable".  Using GE rice created to fight pests, for example, causes the number of insects in a field drop.  Weeds then don’t have a reason to adopt the trait and the gene takes a longer time to be incorporated into the make up of the invasive plant.

But is this good news?  If the spread is “unavoidable” – since weeds in rice fields are typically a variety of rice in the first place – does it matter that the genetic mutation is slow?

Yes and no.

In the world of agriculture, as with popular medicine, the theory is to treat the symptom (in this case insect invasions) and to hope that by the time fix becomes ineffective we have something else figured out to spray, engineer or swallow to re-bandaid the problem.  At the moment, large amounts of pesticide are sprayed to accomplish this task in rice fields.  And in places like California (the second largest rice growing state in the U.S.), weeds are now resistant to almost every (legal) chemical known to humankind.

Genetic engineering, in the short term, then would save us the pollution, expense and growing weed resistance caused by pesticides.  But in the long term, these weeds (and perhaps the insects as well) will also become resistant to the genetically engineered fix, thereby rendering it useless and breeding us hardier weeds.

So what is the answer?

How about we start by fully researching all the free, less invasive methods, first?  Most of the world’s producers are small scale, economically poor farmers without the financial means to purchase pricey items like genetically engineered seeds and chemical fertilizers.  Why not start with better growing techniques and soil maintenance – methods proven to be equally or more effective than high-tech seeds and chemicals – to ensure the ability of farmers to feed themselves without changing the natural landscape?

It is nonsensical to promote expensive GE seeds for short term solutions to long term (never ending?) issues.  The world’s poor farmers need inexpensive long term knowledge and techniques, not high-tech, short term “silver bullets.”