Scientists warn of DDT trap.
Dairy Exporter July 1999
The New Zealand dairy industry, in its enthusiasm to adopt biotechnology,
must be careful it doesn't fall into the same trap as the world did with DDT.
That is because the introduction of genetically engineered products into
the agricultural environment is a "one-way street, but unlike DDT the
pollution from genetic engineering once introduced, will be
self-perpetuating in the soil, the plants, the animals and the rest of the
environment." This is the view of NZ and internationally recognised soil
scientists from Massey University, Dr Max Turner, a soil chemist, and
Dr Neil Macgregor, a soil microbiologist.
Both men consider' themselves objective scientists without anti-science
leanings, though they say that in questioning the value of GE crops and
foods they will probably be labelled 'luddites' by those promoting genetic
engineering, and its products, mainly for the 'profit of the promoters and
at a cost to the gullible'.
For dairyfarmers facing the prospect of genetic engineering of cows to
produce pharmaceuticals, and modification of crops like maize to resist
insect attack, there is a lack of information on potential risks involved,
the pair said in a recent joint interview.
Though there has been some debate on GMOs (genetically modified organisms)
and GMF (genetically modified food) issues in the press (mainly concerned
with human health and food safety issues), they said there was very little
research being done into the risk factors agriculture could face were
genetic engineering to be wholeheartedly embraced by NZ farmers.
"We believe," Dr Macgregor said, "the time has come for the technology
to be assessed on how safe it is for the environment and for sustainable
farming. The current research is not designed to evaluate risk, only to
find out how to make it work."
Dr Macgregor and Dr Turner feel that some NZ scientists could be dragged
into GE research and technology by non-scientists, amid the push for
profit-driven research funding. A giant company involved in genetic
engineering, like Monsanto, sees itself as a biotechnology company, but
they say GE issues embrace much wider parameters.
"The gains the corporates and their promoters are promising us from GE
will not solve any problems," Dr Macgregor said, "either from the view
of lowering costs or increasing production."
Citing USDA funded research through University of Wisconsin involving 5000
non-GE and 3000 GE soybean crops in 8 US states, he said it had been
found the GE modified crops yielded on average 6% to 8% less than
non-modified crops, and seed plus weed costs rose from around $20 to between $40 and
$00'acre. Less yield and higher costs of production for the GE crops was
not good news. In the United States, already more than 10 million acres
has been planted with GE crops, while research is just starting to
assess the environmental risks of the technology.
Broaden debate
For New Zealand, Dr Turner said, the only answer to the GE conundrum
was to broaden the debate and extend the research further from just food
safety aspects into the wider implications for land use and soils.
"Nobody has looked at the soil implications," Dr Turner said. "Most of
the current interest is in health and food safety issues, but no one has
taken into account that GE modified crops are likely to leave a genetic
imprint on land on which they are grown.
"For NZ this could mean that land on which these crops grow or on which
GE modified animals roam could lose value. The use of GE products could
limit the versatility of the land in a similar way to what DDT use on
Canterbury cropping and sheep farms has done; These farms have effectively been
devalued because they can no longer be used for dairying.
"No one has even thought of the implications of crop residues, from GE
crops, remaining in soils after the crops have been grown and harvested:'
he said.
Dr Macgregor and Dr Turner said they were speaking out on the GE issue
because they felt that some in the dairy industry hierarchy were pushing
GE solutions for problems which did not exist. They believed, as
Independent members of the academic community, it. was their duty to
speak out on controversial issues like GB when other scientists were not so
free to discuss these issues in public.
They said another problem with the GE debate to date was that anti-GE
arguments were labelled as 'emotive' when in their view the advocates of
GE technology were guilty of using emotive tags, such as solving the
world's food supply problem, to promote their stance.
"Being part of the global agricultural community" Dr Turner said, "we know
there are potential major risks associated with GE which are not being
properly recognised in NZ at the moment.
"The demand for NZ's produce is based on the perception of 'clean,
green' quality technology, and future profitability is likely to be tied to
servicing wealthy niche markets which may be put at risk forever by use
of GE products on our farms.
Two edged sword
"From a farming point of view, farmers are in a bit of a cleft stick.
They are going to be told - they are being told - that GE will solve a
myriad of their problems. For that reason GE crops and products will offer
enormous appeal to them, but they must be made aware it is a
double-edged sword.
"For them it Is not so much the products that are the problems, but what
they could be doing to their land and to this nation's potential niche
markets.
Dr Turner and Dr Macgregor emphasised they were not just talking about
the on-farm risks to Individual farmers, but also for national trade
reasons, NZ's agricultural future, and possibly even the health of existing and
future citizens. Consumer perception, they said, was already turning
against GE products among the wealthy nations of the particularly in
Europe.
NZ farmers must realise and acknowledge this because their future wealth
generation was probably not in commodity markets, because of the country's small size,
but lay within the rapidly growing wealthy niche markets, such as for
organic foods.
Noting that the British medical journal, the Lancet, had run articles
critical of the risks associated with GE modified food, they said they
felt the general trend in wealthy nations outside the United States would
be to be 'anti' these foods. They foresaw a time when in many markets
anti-GE sentiment could become more widespread, if not mainstream, as
consumers are more acquainted with the risks of GE technology. NZ farmers
should stay outside the GE trade war which they saw developing between
the US and the European community.
"The Europeans," Dr Macgregor said, "do not accept that GE foods have
been independently and adequately tested in the US, nor do they accept GE
foods on their supermarket shelves."
There was no necessity for them to accept them either, Dr Turner said.
The problems in world food production were not so much a general shortage
of food but where it was produced, how it was distributed, and at what
price.
Dr Turner and Dr Macgregor predicted "GE is probably not the solution to
our agriculture, but could become the problem."
Dr Max Turner, a soil chemist, is a member of the Soil & Earth Sciences
Group within the institute of Natural Resources at Massey University, a
position he has held for almost 30 years. He obtained bachelor and masters
degrees in agricultural science at Massey and a PhD in soil science from
University of Minnesota. He held a postdoctoral position in the USDA
Plant, Soil & Nutrition Laboratory at Cornell University, New York, and has
been a visiting professor at University of Colorado in Fort Collins and
University of Wisconsin in Madison. He is a member of the American
Agronomy Society, the Soil Science Society of America, NZ Soil Science
Society, NZ Grasslands Association and NZ Agronomy Society. Dr Turner
teaches, or has taught, soil chemistry, soil fertility, fertiliser matters to
agricultural,
veterinary, degree and diploma students at graduate & postgraduate level.
Dr Neil Macgregor, a soil microbiologist, is an academic member of the
Soil & Earth Sciences group in the Institute of Natural Resources,
Massey University. He graduated BSc and MSc from University of Otago, and PhD
from Cornell University, New York. He has held faculty positions at
University of Arizona in Tucson and University of Wisconsin in Madison,
and research and technical advisory positions with Institute National
Recherche Agronomique, Montpellier, France, and International Atomic Energy Agency
at Vienna, Austria. A member of OPEG (Organic Producers Export Group) of
Tradenz, Dr Macgregor's primary lecturing and research activities are
in cell biology, soil biology and biochemistry (e.g., biological nitrogen
fixation), and microbiology, and co-ordinates the Organic Farming
Systems course.