Opinion Chicken on eggplant
The irony of the consultation process,which the government is holding in different cities on Bt brinjal,is that a meaningful dialogue has not been possible.
-
Share -
-
-
The irony of the “consultation” process,which the government is holding in different cities on Bt brinjal,is that a meaningful dialogue has not been possible. With around 15 to 40 pesticide sprays required during a season,each brinjal available is a “pesticide bullet”. The GM variety (as per Expert Committee II Report,2009),substantially decreases the number of pesticide sprays required! The same old hackneyed questions on environmental and health safety issues are being raised to favour the pesticide lobby. These questions have been repeatedly answered in the last 20 years in trials and commercial production with Bt cotton and Bt maize in more than 20 countries. There has not been any reported environmental or health hazards under field conditions.
This argument about environmental consequences is overstated,although mandatory experiments to assess the gene flow have to be carried out. Ever since man started practicing agriculture,there has been horizontal and vertical flow of genes across species and the time-scale for such transfers cannot be predicted. How did hundreds of varieties and land races of brinjal evolve over a period of time? There would be differences in the genome sequences,although the basic brinjal character is retained. We are talking about introducing a couple of B.thuringensis genes,which organism is as such used as a biopesticide spray,in a background where larger changes keep happening in an evolutionary scale. Again,it is difficult to predict how long insect-sensitivity to the Bt gene would last. It has held so far and it would be wise to make use of the window period now available,though scientists have already developed gene combinations to handle resistance as and when it develops. Strategies to handle secondary infections that could become primary,once the major pest is tackled,are also being evolved.
Why is Bt brinjal safe? First,more than 100 times the amount present in the vegetable has been given to rats and shown to be non-toxic. Plus,the small amount of Bt protein present in the vegetable is degraded during cooking. Even if some amount stays,it is then degraded in the acidic stomach. The human gut does not have a receptor for Bt protein and even if it survives cooking and the acid in the stomach,it cannot enter.
In the pest larvae,the gut is alkaline and that is required to activate the Bt protein. The lepidopteran larva has a specific receptor for the toxin,through which it binds and kills the cells. Bt corn contains the same Cry 1AC protein as Bt brinjal and is being consumed for over a decade by millions of people in the US and elsewhere.
The developers of Bt brinjal in India,which include a private company and two publicly-funded agricultural universities (with the involvement of ICAR set-ups) have carried out all mandatory trials for seven years. An expert committee has evaluated and accepted the data. More than 2 dozen parameters and trials in 50 locations have been carried out. Some opinion-makers play it safe by stating that they are not against the technology,but “more safety studies should be done”. It is easy to suggest fashionable modern experiments (such as proteomics and transcriptomics). But I fail to understand as to how these will help. I only know that these can change even if you scratch the plant — and would be different in the varieties that already exist!
As the attached graph shows the net economic gain is considerable. And,in the end,Bt brinjal is only one of the options for the farmer — and can be rejected if unsatisfactory. I believe that activists are afraid that Bt brinjal will succeed and the farmer will take to it — as has been the case with Bt cotton!
Blocking Bt brinjal would only kill GM strategies to increase productivity and nutritive values of cereals such as rice — a dire need for an exploding population facing under-nutrition. Under the pretext of opposition to MNCs,the ground reality is that indigenous efforts by our scientists are being crippled by court orders. While,GM technology is not a panacea for all our agricultural problems,it can at least address the productivity issue.
Minimally the government can approve a limited release of the hybrid seeds,so that they can be tested in the concerned states. During this period,the government should put in place an institution to monitor GM crops after commercialisation. This should be an independent statutory body,not just with authority,but with technical competence. The crops should be registered for,say,5-year block periods and the authority should be able to advise on the extension of registration period,health and environmental issues,price of GM-seeds etc.
It will be a tragedy if half-truths and money power are able to suppress the sane voice of hard-core science. The country will be the loser.
The writer,a former director of the Indian Institute of Science,presently serves as honorary professor of biochemistry
-
Share
-
-
-
Share
