According to a prominent molecular biologist, genetically modified (GM) crops will be essential to the global food supply as the population grows and the changing climate makes it more difficult to grow unmodified grains, fruits, and vegetables in the years ahead.
In a paper published this week in the journal Agriculture & Food Security, Pennsylvania State University biology and life sciences professor Nina Fedoroff explained that the technology allowing scientists to modify crops would be critical to feed the world’s growing population.
Professor Fedoroff, who was also a former science and technology adviser to Hillary Clinton and Condoleezza Rice, explained that the human population was now seven times higher than it was two centuries ago, and the projected addition of up to three billion more means that food production needs to increase by 70 percent over the next 35 years to meet demand.
In her paper, she wrote that “current yield growth trends are simply insufficient” and that in order “to live sustainably within planetary constraints, we must grow more on the same amount of land using less water, energy and chemicals. The molecular genetic revolution of the late 20th century that powered the development of precise GM methods is the most critical technology for meeting these challenges.”
Changing public perceptions about GM crops
In addition, she said that the negative effects of climate change on the agriculture industry is expected to worsen, and that some currently usable land could ultimately be lost to salinization, urbanization, and/or desertification. Fresh water supplies are also at risk, Federoff said, which could threaten key crops that require a lot of H2O, including corn, wheat, soy, and rice.
Advances in modification technology have resulted in methods that can create drought-resistant crops, and use of GM methods have resulted in a 22 percent increase in crop years over the past two decades. Furthermore, GM crops require fewer pesticides, can increase profits for farmers, and can be engineered to add vitamins and nutrients. Still, Federoff recognizes that GM crops will be a tough sell to the many people who are staunchly against them.
“There are both skeptics and well-organized efforts to scare people into believing that GM foods are everything from poisonous to evil,” she told redOrbit via email. “Fears sell a lot better than facts and are very much more effective in influencing people’s beliefs. So how do we go about changing such negative perceptions and convictions? I think that the media play an extremely important role in changing perceptions. Over the past couple of years, we’ve seen increasing numbers of journalists digging into the subject and writing sensible articles about GMOs.”
“That said, it’s very difficult to change belief systems once they are formed,” she added. “As a scientist, what I have to offer is my best analysis of what we’ve learned so far from experiments and experience. Science can’t ‘prove’ something safe. Many millions of dollars and much effort has gone into trying to figure out whether the modern GM techniques are hazardous. But they’re not.
“In fact, when scientists have looked closely as how much genetic disturbance is caused by the older techniques (including conventional plant breeding) and the new techniques, they find that the new techniques cause the least disturbance, so [they] have the smallest chance of causing unexpected side-effects.”
Fedoroff explained that she attempted to frame the food production and GMO issue in a global and historical context, as the majority of people today live in urban areas and are detached from the food-production processes, making them susceptible to misinformation. She compared the issue of GMO safety to the introduction of smallpox vaccines, which initially raised the ire of some who were concerned about government control, but ultimately helped eradicate the disease. The same types of debates are currently ongoing regarding modified food, she said.
Ability to protect plants from pests, diseases increasingly important
Historically, the agriculture industry has focused on increasing yields and protecting crops from disease and pests through chemical and biological means. As the population increased from one billion people to seven billion, the food supply kept up with demand by using more land to grow plants with synthetic fertilizers, mechanization, and by improving crop varieties.
“We’re pretty much out of land, so that avenue is closed in the future,” Fedoroff said. “In much of the world, we’ve maxed out in the use of fertilizers, so that avenue is closing down – but the population is still growing. Developed world agriculture is highly mechanized, though there’s still room for improvement. That brings us to improved crop varieties.”
“Yields increases through traditional breeding methods are leveling out,” she added. “Current projects say that the current rate of increase won’t keep up with population growth, and indeed, the climate is warming. Scientists are already beginning to see crop yields decreasing as a result of climate warming. The less predictable effects of climate change will be on the patterns of pests and disease pressures on agriculture.”
“This is where the ability to protect plants from pests and diseases biologically will become increasingly important and on a much shorter time scale than we’ve ever experienced,” the Penn State professor continued. “It would be a tragedy if we, as a society, turn our backs on the best (and safest) methods we’ve ever developed to create disease- and pest-resistant varieties, as well as varieties that do better under more extreme climate conditions.”
GMOs post ‘no significant health risks’ to people, animals
Fedoroff, who noted that she was one of the very first plant molecular biologists, told redOrbit that she has been involved with the development and implementation of modification techniques for more than 30 years, and that she had witnessed “extraordinary advances” in the field during that time.
She also emphasized that she was “confident that there are no unique hazards associated with using these techniques to make crop plants more able to resist diseases and pests, and making them hardier and more nutritious. I am also confident that the GM crops on the market today pose no significant human or animal health risks.”
Fedoroff added that there was “good evidence” that GM crops can benefit the environment and the economy, and that they are nationally beneficial as well. The crops can be altered to improve the nutritional content of crops such as rice, which will benefit those living in poorer nations and help them as the international community looks to improve their economies.
However, she also told redOrbit that GM crops are not “the only answer to feeding a growing population. As my article seeks to show, GM crops are just one of the tools in our toolkit if we are to keep up with the food needs of a growing population even as we seek to protect what’s left of our precious biodiversity and put agriculture on a more sustainable foundation.”
(Image credit: Thinkstock)
How necessary are genetically modified foods?
Christopher Pilny
Comments