Further, their prediction was validated by some biotech companies by releasing Corn with boya protein (from soybean) in haste with commercial consideration, which was allergic to the Caucasian population. This incident resulted in a total Ban on GM crops in the UK over the last decade. First, it is crucial to understand what GM crops are. GM stands for genetically manipulated crops and essentially contains genes of foreign origin. The origin of transferred genes distinguishes it from conventional transfer using classical breeding methods where reproductive barriers prevent cross-species gene transfer. Incidentally, GM crops became synonymous with crops containing toxins which are essentially not true, as is evident from the definition itself. Many such examples are available where genetic manipulation is done for improving nutritional quality, as in the case of golden Rice, or shelf-life as in the case of flavor savor tomato. Hence, the next important question arises: Are GM crops harmful to health and the environment? My answer will be an emphatic –No. As I have discussed earlier, when Genetic manipulation's objective is the improvement of nutritional or post-harvesting traits, these manipulations are safe and have no consequence on human health. However, where manipulation involves pest and disease resistance through overexpression of various toxic proteins, a long-term perspective of human and animal health implications must be studied before making it available for public consumption. In this regard, All currently available data are from short-term studies and are non-conclusive and do not give any advantage to any kind of pro or against debate.
Interestingly vertical gene transfer, which is considered a significant concern, seems scientifically impossible. Since we all know that fertilization is a very complex event and three levels of interaction (stigma –pollen, Style –pollen tube, and Pollen nuclei-ovum) are critical. The outcome of these interactions is essential for pollination, and this underlies the basic concept behind the cross-species reproduction barrier. I do not think GM crops have any evolutionary advantage, which will help them overcome this cross-species barrier and lead to vertical gene transfer.
Then, What's wrong with my GM crops? Scientifically, I support GM crops and feel that most arguments do not stand scientific scrutiny or need long-term experimentation to be commented upon. So what makes me skeptical about GM crops?
1. In GM crops, foreign genes are overexpressed (that means they are expressed above their average level); hence chances of allergic reaction are reasonably large. Therefore, it is crucial that proper allergic studies on various population groups and important animal species need to be done, and data should be made public.
2. Mandatory labeling of the source of genes and allergic reaction needs to be mentioned on the covers. GM products need to be sold in a regulated market, not in an open market until long-term health hazards are not studied.
3. Labeling is essential an ethical and religious points of view also. Like a plant, carrying an animal gene is vegetarian or non-vegetarian is a crucial ethical and religious question.
4. Cultivation of GM crops requires certain field restrictions like fringe cropping with non-GM crops. Governmental agencies must enforce such regulations if GM crops are allowed.
5. Many eminent agriculture scientists believe that GM crops are the solution to problems in agriculture. I think this is a myth. As we all know, monogenic resistance will be broken in a brief period under field conditions. So always, multigenic resistance through conventional breeding is a better solution for pest and disease resistance in tropics having higher pest loads. In this regard, characterization of newer traits in wild and germplasm collection and conservation is more important.
We all admire designer clothes but seldom use them.
