COMMENTARY
Benefits to be had in crop biotechnology
By Paul Koehler
The huge benefits of crop biotechnology — a cleaner and safer environment along with increased agricultural productivity and improved nutrition — stand to be denied by a small number of activists trying to advance their philosophical agenda. In this regard, the House leadership under the skillful direction of Rep. Clift Tsuji and House Speaker Calvin Say are to be commended. Their decision not to hear the bill banning genetic engineering research on taro reflects well on their courage and vision.
If we truly want to expand Hawai'i's economy beyond the service/tourism industry, we must embrace the latest in responsible science and technology. That's where the opportunities are, particularly for graduates of our local colleges and universities who are leaving the state in search of well-paying jobs.
Creating such opportunities are critical to Hawai'i's future, as they are tied to the economic aspirations we all have for our state. The fact that we can do this while benefiting society in so many ways is particularly heartening and noble.
In 2005 alone, simply planting biotech crops let American growers reduce pesticide applications by 69.7 million pounds. Between 1996 and 2004, farmers globally reduced pesticides by 493 million pounds. In 2005, low-till farming permitted by crop biotechnology reduced greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to removing 4 million cars from the roads, and it preserves 1 billion tons of soil each year.
New varieties of bio-tech food crops that resist higher-temperature climates, withstand drought, or thrive in salt water will help stem potential food shortages in the future.
New corn seeds being developed here will be planted elsewhere to meet demand for increased ethanol production that is expected to reduce our nation's dependence on foreign oil.
And, there are new crops currently in development that will help improve nutrition and human health:
One of the frustrations of engaging in discussions about genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, is that many opponents make their case using hasty generalizations and citing research that is either unconfirmed or discredited.
An example is the claim that biotech papaya ruined organic papaya production in Hawai'i. The Hawai'i Papaya Industry Association says that — except for GMO-Free Hawai'i's study — no other research confirms that GMO papaya is cross-pollinating with conventional papaya on a widespread basis.
Another tactic opponents are using to create fear is to take the U.S. Department of Agriculture to court over administrative and procedural violations involving regulatory oversight and control of crop biotechnology.
While limited, "low risk" errors have occurred, they have been or are in the process of being resolved. However, court rulings confirm that at no point has human health or safety been at risk. The biotech safety record shows the regulatory system is working. It will continually improve as policies and procedures evolve to keep pace with advancements in biotechnology.
Organizations that say biotech crops and foods are safe include the American Medical Association, American College of Nutrition, American Farm Bureau, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, national academy of sciences of the U.S. and seven other nations, French Academy of Medicine, Royal Society representing scientists of the United Kingdom, and the World Health Organization.
Even a report by the European Commission has come out in favor of biotech crops. Its 2001 report on the safety of plant biotech (summarizing 15 years of research by 400 scientific teams) states that, "Research on (genetically modified) plants and derived products so far developed and marketed, following usual risk assessment procedures, has not shown any new risks on human health or the environment ... indeed, the use of more precise technology and greater regulatory scrutiny probably make them even safer than conventional plants and foods."
During the 12 years biotech crops have been commercially grown, people have consumed more than a trillion servings of food containing biotech ingredients. Throughout this time, there has not been a single documented case of an ecosystem being disrupted or a person made ill by these foods — in Hawai'i or anywhere in the world.
The benefits of crop biotechnology keep multiplying while the risks remain almost entirely hypothetical and even contrived. Those who adopt a zero-tolerance attitude toward genetic modification threaten to deny everyone the benefits of crop biotechnology by playing on fear of the unknown and fear of change, despite the huge body of knowledge that supports GMO crops.
Let us hope wisdom and courage prevail in future discussions so that we are not denied the benefits of crop biotechnology by a vocal minority with other agendas.
Paul Koehler is Monsanto's manager of scientific and community affairs for Hawai'i, based at the company's site on Kihei, Maui, and past president of the Hawai'i Crop Improvement Association, an industry association representing member seed producers. He wrote this commentary for The Advertiser.
