|
The Indian government puts commercial cultivation of Bt brinjal on hold following pressure from 13 state governments, groups opposed to genetically modified food, and members of the scientific community
India’s environment minister Jairam Ramesh has announced an open-ended moratorium on the introduction of Bt brinjal until such time as independent scientific studies establish, to the satisfaction of both the general public and professionals, that the product is safe for human consumption. Significantly, the moratorium is only on approving commercial trials of Mahyco’s Bt brinjal variety using the Cry1Ac gene. The brinjal, genetically engineered to produce a bacterial toxin that kills worms, was developed by a consortium of scientists at Mahyco, and state agriculture universities in Coimbatore and Dharwad. Apart from Mahyco’s Bt brinjal, trials of another variety by the Indian Institute of Horticulture Research, Bangalore, using the Cry2A Bt gene are at an advanced stage. The Indian Institute of Vegetable Research in Varanasi has also developed a variety of Bt brinjal using a different gene. Dozens of research groups are trying to engineer cauliflower, mustard, rice, soybean and tomato, among other crops, in an effort to impart new traits to the plants. Last week, a Delhi team announced a tomato that survives without refrigeration for 45 days. The ministry said the moratorium on Bt brinjal would have no implications on efforts to develop other GM crops. “A moratorium implies rejection of this particular case of release for the time being. It does not, in any way, mean conditional acceptance. I am not getting into any timeframe... the moratorium will continue for as long as it is needed to establish public trust and confidence,” the minister said. The official announcement has capped weeks of fractious public “consultations” across the country. It also comes after pressure from a number of state governments that argued that trials to assess the genetically modified crop’s effects on health and the ecology had not been conclusive. The brinjal underwent over two years of field trials and animal toxicity studies. The Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC) of the Ministry of Environment and Forests examined crop performance and animal studies data submitted by the developers to certify the brinjal ready for cultivation in October 2009. Ramesh noted that a number of scientists from India, Australia, France, the UK and the US had sent emails to him raising “very serious doubts” about the GM brinjal and about “the way the tests have been conducted in India”. At a snap press conference called on February 9, Ramesh appeared to heed the warnings. “There is no overriding urgency to introduce it (Bt brinjal),” he said. “When the public sentiments have been negative, it is my duty to adopt a cautious, precautionary and principle-based approach.” The GEAC is expected to take follow-up action on the issue of further studies and tests with protocols at appropriate laboratories during the moratorium period. The ministry would like the GEAC to “engage and interact with all scientists, institutions and civil society groups that have submitted representations,” Ramesh said. Further, the GEAC will, in consultation with scientists like M S Swaminathan, Pushpa M Bhargava, M Vijayan, Madhav Gadgil and Keshav Kanti, draw up a fresh protocol for specific tests to be conducted in order to generate public confidence. The GEAC has been renamed the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee. The government has been keen to resolve all doubts over the health and environmental impact of the Bt vegetable. M S Swaminathan agrees with the view that since brinjal itself contains natural toxins, there is a need to be extra careful with Bt technology, the minister said. Swaminathan’s own institution -- the M S Swaminathan Research Foundation -- is involved in the development of genetically modified rice that may be able to tolerate salt water. Swaminathan has often advocated the use of biotechnology to address food shortages in the coming decades. In a letter, the senior agricultural scientist said: “There are unquestionable benefits in the short term, but also potential risks to human health and our brinjal heritage in the long term… What will be the impact on numerous local strains? Such a collection must be carefully preserved before we permit the extinction of the gifts of thousands of years of natural evolution and human selection.” Ramesh said he had consulted Swaminathan before finalising his recommendation. The scientist stated that there were three areas of concern: chronic toxicity since brinjal is frequently consumed in India, independent tests that command credibility and do not depend only on data provided by the developers themselves, and the need to have an independent regulatory system that would be in a position to study all aspects of GM technology in agriculture and arrive at a measured decision. Swaminathan said that the moratorium on implementation of Bt brinjal across the nation was to provide a “breathing spell” for putting the house (regulatory mechanism) in order. “The Bt brinjal debate was not inspiring confidence in the common man, farmers, media, professionals and government officials. Hence, these consultative meeting across seven states were held. It is now time that the detailed reports received by the Centre for Environment Education during the public consultations be analysed. Study should be carefully done on the risks and benefits without undue risk to the thousands of young men and women who are studying and working in biotechnology sciences,” Swaminathan said. He added that with more Bt crops in the pipeline, the country should start working on the new technology. “There is a need for the country to have an authority to calculate the benefits and risks of any new technology. Even after 2004, when I submitted a report to the government on the need for a National Biotechnology Regulatory Authority to be headed by professionals and to be approved by Parliament things haven’t moved forward,” he noted. Over the past year, environmental groups and a small number of scientists, including senior biologist Pushpa Bhargava, have questioned the integrity of the GEAC process. Statisticians have also punched holes in the bio-safety dossier approved by the GEAC, and critics have often in the past questioned the reliability of safety tests which were sponsored by the developers of the brinjal and not conducted in independent laboratories. Environmental groups and scientists who have criticised the GEAC process have welcomed the moratorium. “He (Ramesh) has shown enormous courage,” Bhargava said. “He has listened to science, and to the voice of the people.” Biotechnology industry representatives however dub the moratorium “an unfortunate decision” that is going to deny farmers a “beneficial technology”. “Emotions have overtaken science,” said K K Narayanan, chief executive officer of a plant biotechnology company. “Mahyco has always followed the directives of the Department of Biotechnology and GEAC. Mahyco is confident that sound science based on evidence obtained over nine years of rigorous testing will prevail and India’s farmers, consumers and farm labour, and the environment, will benefit from agriculture biotechnology,” the seed company said in a statement. What’s the controversy about? The decision to introduce a genetically modified type of eggplant, known as Bt brinjal, has been pending since last year. It sparked a heated debate over the potential benefits and dangers of genetically modified food crops. Advocates of genetically modified crops say such varieties can boost food resources for India’s 1.2 billion people and protect farmers (they can better withstand adverse weather), raise output significantly, and mitigate the heavy use of pesticides. Opponents say GM seeds like Bt brinjal can be hazardous to the environment and public health, threaten diversity, and must be tested thoroughly before they are commercially used. What’s at stake for India? Over half of India’s population is directly dependent on agriculture, which is subject to the fickle monsoons. Agricultural output lagged behind as India’s overall economic growth boomed in recent years, and now faces a growing threat from the effects of climate change, some experts say. The worst monsoon in nearly three decades in 2009 helped drive food prices up in the country where hundreds of millions of people live below the poverty line. According to data from India’s agriculture ministry, crop yields are among the lowest in the world. In 2006, the wheat yield per hectare was 3,124 kg against 10,598 kg in Egypt. The yield in neighbouring Bangladesh was 3,904 kg/hectare. For corn, the yield in India was only 1,938 kg/hectare compared with 2,906 kg in Pakistan and 9,360 kg in Turkey. Source: The Economic Times, February 10, 2010
The Indian Express, February 10, 2010
The Telegraph, February 10, 2010
Business Standard, February 10, 2010
http://www.moneycontrol.com, February 2010
|
