TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 9 °C Wednesday 22 May, 2013

Column: We should be wary of GM foods, if the past has taught us anything

In the past received wisdom was to blanket our fields in chemicals, writes Walter Ryan-Purcell – so what does that tell us for today?

Walter Ryan-Purcell

FORTY YEARS AGO my father told me how much he admired people with engineering and science degrees also having an arts degree. Forty years later, I understand what he meant.

Thirty years ago my father brought me out to the sugar beet field to show me an ugly outgrowth on a sugar beet, and explained that it was cancer, a multiplication of cells. As intensive farmers we spread enormous quantities of artificial fertilisers, nitrogen, phosphorous, potassium, and sulphur to make everything grow a lot faster, a multiplication of cells. As dairy farmers we added acid to grass to make silage, used the chemicals ‘Gramoxone’ and ‘Roundup’ to ‘burn off’ all green growth prior to re-seeding.

We used pre-emergent chemical sprays in the tillage fields, we sprayed herbicides, pesticides, and gassed the straw with ammonia to make it more digestible as feed for cows. We sprayed the crops with chemicals to prevent rynchosporium, septoria, and various moulds. We sprayed the potatoes to prevent blight. We sprayed the docks with ‘Bandock’, and the nettles with ‘Nettleban’, the briers with something, the rushes with something else, and sprayed around young trees to stop weeds and grass growing around them.

If the cows had clots in their milk we treated them with antibiotics, and blanket treated all with ‘dry cow’ antibiotics at the end of each years lactation. We used Simazine to stop the weeds growing in the yard, hydrochloric acid and caustic ‘Hydrosan Plus’ to clean the milking machine, and the milk churns. We walked the sheep through Formalin to stop them getting footrot, dosed them with anthelmintics, injected them with live vaccines, and living near the village we were on a public water supply containing chlorine and fluoride, which both we and the animals drank.

When we fertilised the cabbage field, according to advice, the field was ‘white’ with nitrogen to enhance growth, a multiplication of cells. I went on to college to learn more about intensive farming practices – how to rid waterways of weeds with ‘Roundup’ “that doesn’t affect the fish”, and how to kill every weed under the sun. The agricultural scientists knew it all, and taught it as gospel. Thirty years later our home farm is certified organic, and our little farm in West Cork is virtually organic.

‘Twenty one years ago this month my father died of cancer’

Twenty one years ago this month my father died of cancer, a multiplication of cells. Shortly after that I sent milk samples to various laboratories around the Country to analyse them for nitrate content. I sent the various results to our national dairy research station but they did not reply.

At the moment our national research body, Teagasc, is applying to the Environmental Protection Agency to grow trial plots of genetically modified potatoes. This is a very controversial subject. To go down this road is obviously irreversible, narrows the gene pool, and puts an enormous amount of world plant breeding in the hands of very few commercial companies.

Often the ‘seed’ from these crops grown will not germinate, so cannot be used by farmers to grow subsequent crops. Seed can only be bought from the ‘supply companies’. If these genetically modified ‘Roundup Resistant’ plants fail, in my humble opinion, we could face very serious worldwide famine. Is this something we Irish, of all nationalities, wants to promote? And on potatoes for that matter. Have we forgotten something?

I suppose my main question is why do scientists, or ‘experts’ in their respective narrow fields of knowledge protect their disciplines at all costs, without much attention to the many other possible side effects? And why do they think they know it all? Surely the real expert realises how much there is to learn.

We adhered to advice on blanket usage of chemicals on food producing land according to the perceived wisdom of the scientists. We are now paying the price. Now people are questioning whether to go down the narrow field of genetically modified crops. Could we not just grow good food in good unadulterated soil, with unpolluted water, in this mild climate, at their own pace, without forcing the multiplication of cells, or changing their genetic makeup. If we do this we will be the envy of the world when the man made ‘plants’ break down, soils become desertified, and clean water becomes scarce.

In five weeks’ time Professor Hartmut Frank, University of Bayreuth, Germany is giving a presentation at the New Energy Era forum in Skibbereen on the importance of studying ethics as part of narrowly focused technical degree programmes. Scientists can get carried away for science’s sake, making scientific breakthroughs, without considering important side effects and significant consequeces. Let’s broaden the discussion, protect plant diversity, and ultimately our supply of good food.

Walter Ryan-Purcell is the director for the Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas, the founder of BioPower Group and Local Campus. He is the organiser of the New Energy Era Forum coming to Ireland in May 2012. Full details on localcampus.com.

Read next:

Comments (50 Comments)

  • Maybe we should stop wasting food first..

    In the US, food waste has increased by 50 percent since 1974
    40 percent of all the food produced in the US is thrown out
    Food waste accounts for more than a quarter of freshwater consumption and 300 million barrels of annually.
    Food is the third largest waste stream after paper and yard waste
    8.3 million tonnes of food is thrown away by households in the UK annually

    Reply
  • No-one knows the long term effects of GM foods on the food chain. Its alright saying “don’t eat them if you don’t like them” but will restaurant menus, frozen food manufacturers. school meal suppliers detail if GM foods are used.

    Reply
    • we have 2 choices here. Reduce the human population or go gm. I dont buy into the green argument about gm crops no more than I buy into the likes of the corporate forces that control the technology. As with all these type of arguments the truth lies dead.center. We are not feeding the population of the world & many things are at play however gm technology is key to solving a lot of these problems. So dont listen to the polarised arguments of the vested interests find the truth & you will then see the benefits of this technology.

      Reply
    • Polorised arguments of vested interests you say, so who are the two groups of vested interests? On one hand we have Monsanto the largest chemical Agri-biotec corporation on Earth the largest producer of pesticides on the planet, the company that brought the world Agent Orange, recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone, Terminator Seed Technology, PCBs, dioxins, Farmer suicides, Toxic dumping and the other vested interest, some Irish people.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto

      Ireland has plenty of farm land enough to feed our population, the only reason we were being pushed to introduce these methods is if we are being expected to feed someone else’s population, as we were during the great famine.

      Reply
    • The problem with that position is if every country only fed its own population then the human population would decrease as most countries dont have the capacity to do this. Also the Arab countries would keep all their oil because your promoting self.sufficent countries so.we wouldnt have any agri sector as its totally dependent on oil. Now with the human population at 7+billion it will take all the capacity available to feed the world. GM will help with this not totally but it will help.

      Reply
    • michael,
      if the world committed to eating locally produced seasonal produce the positive effect on the environment and the economy would be substantial.

      Reply
  • Is the author trying to link the working of a science based approach to farming or eating farm produce with contracting cancer without actually saying it? Is the author trying to link the veracity and harmfulness of a product because of the name on the tin? Does plant nutrition force growth or assist growth? Would the widespread adoption of lower yield organic farming result in a less chance of world famine? I don’t really get it.

    I do get the bit about GM terminator gene technology in seed. That’s hard to justify.

    Reply
    • JayK 09/04/12 #

      In order to use GM seed, you need to buy your year’s supply from the company each year. You’re paying for a product developed by a business – 1 year’s modified seed. In order to prevent farmers buying one year’s supply and simply saving the seed at the end of the harvest to replant next year, the plant are engineered not to germinate. Without this, farmers don’t buy more seed, businesses make losses and no one develops GM. Besides, no one is being forced. You can either buy a year’s supply of non-germinating GM seed, or you can use germinating non-GM seed. People might not like it, but it’s perfectly justified. Terminator technology also prevents seeds “escaping” into the wild, or crossing with wild type plants.

      Not sure what the rules are on posting direct links, but the Wikipedia article on Monsanto v. Schmeiser is an interesting read on the topic.

      Reply
    • Yes he is. whole article is scaremongering nonsense but fair dues for spotting it…

      Reply
    • Conor
      That Seamus git is all over the place tonight…ta se a pain in the arse!

      Reply
    • Yes he is and he’d be correct in doing so, for-profit high intensity farming is devastating environments and causing massive public health problems around the world. The fact the US continue to use antibiotics as growth promoters in livestock despite the European moratorium, despite start warnings from the WHO that we will have no effective antibiotics owing to the spread of multi-drug resistant strains of bacteria, clearly demonstrates that the profit motive comes before humanity. When such powerful technologies find there way into the hands of powerful non transparent, unaccountable corporations, expect nothing good to come of it. Don’t buy into the slick propaganda. Any scientist who works for one of these companies, including those based at Teagasc, should reflect deeply on what it is they are involved with.

      Reply
  • Watch ‘The World according to Monsanto’. The most evil corporation on the planet hands down trying to impose their propaganda, most notably in India where he farmers kill themselves by drinking the pesticides they buy because they can’t afford the GM seeds.

    Reply
    • Good point. But it has potential to feed the worlds hungriest people. It just must be managed correctly

      Reply
    • In todays world you have to make a multiple of choices.
      You either do away with chemistry and science and face issues such as crop failures and a starving population.
      Make use of modern chemistry and you will be guaranteed food on the table.
      Possibly at a risk of cancer etc.
      But you just have to consider the increased lifespan of mankind due to modern medicine, chemistry, agricultural policies etc.
      I finally wish to add that most chemicals such as Gramoxone have been outlawed by many nations.
      And one more thought on the onslaught of cancer. Studies have proven that stress in todays society is a major contributor.

      Reply
    • @ Conor, it cannot be managed correctly where profit is the motivation. End of.

      Reply
    • Conor,
      There lies the problem..
      You can’t control it..
      There is no way to guarantee against cross contamination…

      Reply
    • Do you think that we can feed 7, 8, 9, 10 billion people without intensive farming and using science?

      The fact is, virtually everything we eat has been genetically modified by humans over the centuries. Have you any idea who corn looked like before the first farmers, or wheats or oats? Or cattle? Carrots used to be skinny purple roots. Seedless grapes???

      By selective breeding, humans have genetically modified virtually everything we eat.

      And we haven’t all died of cancer/AIDS/autism/H5N1 or whatever the scaremongering condition du jour is.

      Reply
  • look up what Monsanto and these other gm producers are doing to farmers who refuse to buy their seed!! it’ll make you sick!! you can harvest the gm seed btw but Monsanto keep tabs and have the power to check what is growing gm your field and who bought what, they have teams out checking if you are using their product and know by what has been ordered- other than all that these genetic modifications are now starting to bond with human DNA and are even showing up in human breast milk! Monsanto have governments in their pockets and it’s plain as day, on an island like ours we would not be able to control cross contamination and all organic and non gm farming would be impossible! look at the recent case in America, they are bringing farmers who do not grow gm crops to court over cross contaminants because it’s their seed, they make the cost run into millions and the farmer can’t afford to fight it and it shuts them down, 40 organic farmers brought a clear cut case against Monsanto lately to pool their money before they were shut down as all the others around them, the judge refused to hear the case!!! is this what Ireland needs rite now, another shower controlling the puppets in Lenster house?????

    Reply
    • This is potentially horrific.
      Anyone seen food inc?

      Reply
    • Good comment Sinead. Monsanto are a private organisation with private interests. They are listed as a chemicals company. Surely this must set off some alarm bells and if that doesn’t then what about the patents they hold? They are building up the GM market to control the patents of food (you could even go so far as to say nature). If every country was to adopt the GM standard then Monsanto will be the corporate entity of all things edible just like Goldman Sachs are to International Banking, Incestments, corruption and so forth.

      There are cases of Monsanto, in the US, crop dusting fields with their patented seeds so as to kill off the natural crop and to grow their own which then results in a legal battle against said farmer because they broke the patent rights of the seed. This is happening, and just like the banking sector there is no regulation because the FDA is in the pocket of Monsanto.

      Why should we adopt GM foods? There’s a lot of talk about feeding poorer nations that suffer from drought, starvation, disease, etc. WHat about the private companies such as Coca Cola, Shell, Exxon, etc that are re0-routing rivers to their plants and causing drought. What about the massive effect that agriculture is having on this planet. 97% of the world’s soy is GM and the majority of that, like corn and maize is used to feed cattle and other agricultural delights. Why not cut down on consumption and take the power of life away from privates entities’ hands? For every good cause there are a majority of bad causes.

      I’m not down with GM foods, and it’s not because of the cancer risks that the writer of this piece stated (without clear cut evidence), it’s because private corporations don’t give a flying hoo-haa about feeding the world. Once they control the food chain they basically control the populations. This isn’t conspiracy theorist rhetoric either, this is plain fact. It’s artificial selection from the powers that be to make a dollar.

      Reply
  • mattoid 10/04/12 #

    Two questions for the author:
    1) If the seed from these crops cannot germinate, then how do the ‘manufacturers’ produce the seed they sell? (genuine question)
    2) What is your justification for believing that scientists “think they know it all”? In my experience most scientists are acutely aware of just how little we know, and striving to gain a deeper understanding of the world we live in is the main motivation behind their work.

    Reply
    • Thank you Mattoid.. On you second question I suppose I had a different experience, my background is Agricultural Science. When I qualified (nearly 30 years ago) everything was very much taught in black and white, and advice was given as ‘blueprints’ to farmers. Spread so much nitrogen per acre after the first cut silage, more after the second cut, use various chemicals etc etc.This may well have changed by now, hopefully. I have come across a number of engineers and scientists recently with very set ideas. And others with very open and clear minds. On your first question the companies can do this but this would be covered by privacy and patents.

      Reply
    • They are manufactured in a plant. Just like disposable razors, lighters, etc. It’s the basics of supply and demand which powers the market.

      Check out “the lightbulb theory”. A great documentary about how companies, such as Phillips, got together to reduce the life cycle of the lightbulb so as to make a buck.

      Reply
  • This seems very much like a scaremongering column to me. Yes there are vast ethical issues surrounding GM foods and overpopulation, but we need a proper discussion of how best to proceed with food production. This discussion should include independent Irish and international experts in this area and be transparent and accessible as it is something that affects everyone. One sided scaremongering articles do not contribute to the debate at all and only confuse the issue further by spreading false biased information.
    “Could we not just grow good food in good unadulterated soil, with unpolluted water, in this mild climate, at their own pace, without forcing the multiplication of cells, or changing their genetic makeup. If we do this we will be the envy of the world when the man made ‘plants’ break down, soils become desertified, and clean water becomes scarce.” I’m not even sure where to start with this statement…

    I think it is important to remember that Monsanto does not equal genetically modified food and that we are not debating Monsanto taking over agriculture in Ireland, we are debating GM foods and more widely the best farming practices overall, considering environmental, ethical, production, labour and health issues. If organically grown plants are the best overall then wonderful, let’s promote that method of agriculture in Ireland.

    “I suppose my main question is why do scientists, or ‘experts’ in their respective narrow fields of knowledge protect their disciplines at all costs, without much attention to the many other possible side effects? And why do they think they know it all? Surely the real expert realises how much there is to learn. We adhered to advice on blanket usage of chemicals on food producing land according to the perceived wisdom of the scientists. We are now paying the price. Now people are questioning whether to go down the narrow field of genetically modified crops.”

    I wonder why a quick Google Scholar search for articles by these dastardly scientists yields 171,000 results for “genetically modified food environmental issues” and 46,600 results for “genetically modified food ethics”. It looks like they actually consider these issues. Perhaps you should research what some of their studies say. Also when publishing scientific articles, authors disclose conflicts of interest and the source of funding is usually written somewhere in the article as well, so you can check for bias and vested interest.

    http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=genetically+modified+food+ethics&hl=en&btnG=Search&as_sdt=1%2C5
    http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=genetically+modified+food+environmental+issues&btnG=Search&as_sdt=1%2C5&as_ylo=&as_vis=0

    I’d just say to anyone reading this article to question what they are being told. Just because something sounds scientific doesn’t mean it is right, but also just because something is traditional or natural doesn’t mean it is good.

    Reply
  • Read the article waiting for the intro to end and the info to start…. But it was all waffle, the facts never appeared.

    At least define what you are talking about. Genetic modification is similar to selective breeding in a lot of cases, which has been done for thousands of years by farmers and gardeners. Cross one plant with another… Pick the most successful offspring and reproduce.

    The main problem with GM is that it is so young. In theory it is an amazing science, which could have wonderful results in our future if used correctly. The problem being all the mistakes that will be made along the way.

    Reply
    • no its not anything like selective breeding! they use genomes from DNA for example frog DNA in tomatos to help them retain water! chemical bonds to help soy become resistant to roundup these mutations have the ability to cause cancer in the consumer!!

      Reply
  • Bio-dynamic agriculture would be much better than using GM crops.
    I saw a documentary on GM crops where lab mice fed on GM food died horrific deaths from it, and yet, the GM food was declared safe for human consumption and no further testing needed to be done and also, GM food did not need to be labeled.
    I would take bio dynamic agriculture over GM crops any day.
    There’s a good documentary about it and the hazards of using GM crops here: http://onemanonecow.com/

    Reply
  • Genetically modified crops are good if corporations don’t have patents on particular types as Monsanto does with certain types of soya beans. This type of GM control which effectively stops farmers from producing there own seeds for production is what makes GM foods look like a bad investment for farmers and consumers. If farmers are given free rein on what they can and cannot plant this makes unmodified and genetically modified food more compatible for society.

    Reply
  • If the past has tought us anything then please recall the great famine.
    The irish potatoe crop has failed.
    Many died.
    Many emigrated.
    Potatoe blight is now under control thanks to science and the chemical industry.
    When you read the headline that thousands of children are dying in impoverished countries you immediately take sympathy.
    That is just not good enough.
    We have no choice but to involve science and chemistry to sustain an ever increasing global population.

    Reply
  • That was one of the worst articles I’ve read here. So awful I don’t know where to start. Garbage.

    Reply
  • Teagasc are proposing to perform GM crop trials in Carlow..

    Read study below.
    GM foods responsible for deaths in rats.

    http://www.ask-force.org/web/Ermakova/Ermakova-Proceedings-Davos-2006.pdf

    Reply
  • “broaden the discussion” Michael? You’ll have to stop misrepresenting the truth, linking the unlinked and basically making stuff up first! “multiplication of cells” is cancer? laughable. Shame on thejournal.ie for posting such ill researched rubbish!

    Reply
  • I plan on going onto something in plant breeding or Gm crops in the future, I believe that it just has to be given a chance we havent fully seen what we can do with if anything. It may be that Gm crops arent the way to go forward but just think of what we can do if we succeed, we can make plants grow in deserts or Siberian regions opening up ways of feeding an ever increasing population.
    The population of the world will continue to grow and with global warming and climate change we need crops that are going to stand up to the harshest environments we just cant find these crops naturally we have a choice either limit the population a bit like china has done which I dont think anyone will accept but this would be very successful or MAKE new ways of feeding everyone.

    Reply
  • Excellent article Walter-we need more articles like this. Check out sinn fein’s policy on GM-see their website..policies..agriculture: “The island as a whole should be declared GM free zone.” Foresight and long term planning!

    Reply
  • Thank you for your considered comments. Growing population is certainly a problem, and feeding them. We could grow an awful lot more food in Ireland and elsewhere. England will be looking West more and more for food supplies, and possibly water supplies. The recent Chinese visit was also spending a lot of time looking at food supplies. China is buying up millions of acres of land in South Africa, New Zealand and other countries for food supplies.I came across an incredible invention recently http://www.viaqua.com (unfortunate name!). It energises water, which results in 25% plus extra plant growth. This is proven and accredited by Kew Gardens. This is an excellent example of innovation/science/engineering coming up with a solution, and a natural one at that (if the electricity used is generated responsibly). I think we should distinguish between plant breeding/selection and genetic modification, the latter which artificially inserts genes from a different origin, eg rat genes in wheat. My experience is that virtually everything man made breaks down at some stage. It terrifies me that a narrow family of gm foods would break down to some disease at some stage, causing intercontinental famine. I would love to develop more natural scientific and engineering solutions to the impending problems (oil depletion being one of them). There are many ways to prevent cancer and other diseases eg more alkaline bodily systems, more vitamin use, better nutrition, better circulation, less obesity. Not a lot of research and interest is attributed to these. There is much more (financial) interest in cures. How can we all keep a good discussion going on this subject??

    Reply
  • Has anyone ever seen a gm gun? It’s pretty cool and just a quick way of cross breeding different wheat varieties.

    Reply
  • Ah, another article from yet another person with no knowledge whatsoever of the scientific facts behind what they are attacking. Just because something is genetically modified does not necessarily equate to it causing cancer. GM crops would essentially contain genes for pesticide/herbicide resistance and also have altered genetic programs so that flowering times would be sufficiently reduced so that more crops could be grown in a shorter time scale. Scientists don’t research these things to cause trouble, they research to make a difference, and to make life easier.

    Reply
  • Siad na sasannaigh a thainig suas leis an coinceap GM – na dean dearmaid ar na faibheanna leis na pratai agus aris ce bhi faoi bhun na faibheanna suid?

    Reply

Add New Comment