India's Genetically Modified Mistake

Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh could have given his citizens access to safer and cheaper brinjal—but he didn't. Why?


Without agriculture's Green Revolution, India never would have been able to feed its booming population in the late 20th century. By rejecting the Gene Revolution this week, the Congress-led government in New Delhi now threatens the ability of Indian farmers to increase the yield, quality and safety of the food they produce for their more than one billion fellow citizens.

On Tuesday, environment and forestry minister Jairam Ramesh ignored the findings of a scientific panel that had declared genetically modified brinjal safe for human consumption. He called for more study, but his decision has nothing to do with a genuine need for additional research. Instead, he bowed to political pressure from Greenpeace and other antibiotechnology organizations.

Farmers in North and South America have enjoyed the bounties of the Gene Revolution for more than a decade. Genetically modified corn and soybeans have increased yields and decreased the need for pesticide. In the United States, Canada, Brazil, and Argentina, people eat food derived from biotechnology every day. Mr. Ramesh had the opportunity to let Indian farmers reap similar benefits in one of its most important food crops, as brinjal is a staple in many parts of the country.

.The experience of agriculture biotechnology in India and around the world is instructive. In 2002, New Delhi granted farmers the right to cultivate genetically modified cotton. Today, we harvest more than 20 million acres of it. The practice has spread quickly because it lowers input costs and increases productivity. Farmers wish the seeds were less expensive, but they've come to understand that investments in biotechnology represent good value.


Scientists have learned how to transfer similar advantages into brinjal, which Americans call eggplant and Europeans call aubergine. They've created a variety of the plant that naturally resists pests, using the same principle that has improved cotton. The potential gains are enormous. Brinjal takes a long time to grow, which means that it is more vulnerable to pest attacks than other crops. What's more, many of India's farmers are poorly educated and don't know how to get the most out of existing pesticides. They're at the mercy of dealers who too often provide them with improper instructions and inferior products.
Genetically modified brinjal has many benefits. It has a built-in resistance to pests. At the same time, it's actually easier to grow because it requires fewer applications of pesticides. Because of these qualities, genetically modified brinjal has the potential to let us produce better and safer food. Its adoption would cause prices for consumers to fall. We would improve our ability to fight malnutrition, which is a major problem for the people of India. The success of genetically modified brinjal also would create a compound effect by encouraging the application of biotechnology to other food crops.
Biotechnology also would deliver an economic benefit. Higher farm productivity would help address the looming problem of income disparity between the rich and the poor, as well as between urban areas and rural regions.

Opponents say that they're worried about human health, but they can point to no actual evidence of a threat. Last fall, a government body called the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee declared genetically modified brinjal safe for consumption. The decision was based on extensive study that involved agricultural research institutes, universities, and a pair of expert panels, including one appointed by the Supreme Court.
India has a desperate need for agricultural biotechnology. If we are going to produce enough food for our people, farmers must have access to the same tools as growers in the developed world. We must participate in the Gene Revolution.

-Mr. Kumar grows brinjal and other vegetables on 120 acres in Tamil Nadu and is a member of Truth About Trade & Technology's Global Farmer Network.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704140104575057233227825988.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTTopBucket

clarifications provided by FBAE on the Bt brinjal issue

Foundation for Biotechnology Awareness and Education (FBAE)

These are some clarifications provided by FBAE on the Bt brinjal issue:

• Bt brinjal helps in reducing the cultivation expenses on the use of synthetic pesticdes up to 77 percent, benefiting millions of farmers by enhancing marketable yield. The consumer gets health fruit and value for money paid. It also greatly reduces the risk from synthetic chemicals to the farmers, consumers, non-target organisms, soil, water and environment in general.

• Bt brinjal has passed through the prescribed mandatory bio safety tests according to Indian regulations. Two expert committees reviewed the bio safety dossier. The second committee concluded on October 8, 2009, that the Bt brinjal with event EE-1 ( Cry 1 Ac) has been extensively tested for its bio safety and no additional studies/review are necessary. Based on this, on October 14, 2009, the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC) approved Bt brinjal for commercialization.

• However, the Minister of State for Environment and Forests (MoEF), had opted for further consultation with different stakeholders, which virtually overrides the decision of the GEAC. All the stakeholders had already involved themselves on the issue of Bt brinjal for about five years.

• The stand taken by the MoEF has created a lot of regulatory uncertainty for no valid scientific or environmental concern. No technology developer can afford to operate in the country to develop any biotech crop with such an uncertainty of an approval process that is not based on science.

• The charge sheet by activist include several issues, such as that a) genetically engineered (GE) crops are toxic and allergenic, b) they harm non-target organisms, c) gene flow from transgenics eliminates related varieties/species, d) they become super weeds and eliminate all vegetation, e) they negatively impact ecology and bio diversity, f) there is a terminator gene in GE crops affecting farmers' interests, etc. They even attribute farmer suicides to failure of GE crops. There is extensive scientific literature that amply demonstrates that there is no truth in any of the above charges and allegations.

• The activist make an emotional argument that India is the country of origin of brinjal, for which there is no scientific evidence.

• The opposition to Bt brinjal means to India nothing but a reduced marketable yield, an increased use of pesticides (with economic as well as health damage to farmers, consumers and environment). The government should decide whether to help Indian farmers or pesticide producing corporations.