When we take a closer look at GM seed manufacturers claims, they look either deceiving or unable to deliver and their attempt to explain crops failure by blaming insufficient fertilization in laboratory is not really convincing …

The ISAAA (International Service for the Acquisition of Agro-biotech Applications) released its data GMOs culture for 2008:

- 125 million hectares (around 310 million acres), representing 8% of all farmed surfaces worldwide, an increase of 9.4% from 2007.

- 13.3 million farmers buy GMO seeds.

- 25 countries are growing GM crops, 30 have authorized its imports.

- The global seed market represents 34 billions USD, GMOs market share is 22%.

http://www.isaaa.org/resources/publications/briefs/39/pressrelease/default.html

In the same report, Clive James, chairman and founder of ISAAA and author of the report was reported saying: “The positive experiences in these new regional footholds in south, north and west Africa will help lead the way for neighboring countries to learn by example. Additionally, political leaders globally are increasingly viewing biotech enhanced crops as a key part of the solution to critical social issues of food security and sustainability.” He continues “Biotech crops make two important contributions to global food security,” James said. “First, they increase yields, which increase food availability and supply. Second, they reduce production costs, which will also ultimately help reduce food prices. With 9.2 billion people to be fed by 2050, biotechnology plays a crucial role in helping satisfy the growing demand.”

Really? Following the release of a University of Nebraska study comparing yields from 3 different soybean variety in April 2008 found that a Monsanto GM soya produced 6 per cent less than its closest conventional relative, and 11 per cent less than the best non-GM soya available. Monsanto said that it was surprised by the extent of the decline found by the Kansas study, but not by the fact that the yields had dropped. It said that the soy had not been engineered to increase yields, and that it was now developing one that would. A similar study involving GM cotton seemed to have produced similar results.

So what exactly made the Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao to say: “to solve the food problem, we have to rely on big science and technology measures, rely on biotechnology, rely on GM.”? Monsanto’s web site claims “Our Seeds and Traits business works to meet farmer demand by offering seeds with the best possible germplasm, or improved genetics, for a higher yield.” This is probably the same sales pitch that convinced thousands of Indian farmers to switch to GM cotton – or was it they did not have a choice. It appears that the 1500 farmers from the agricultural state of Chattisgarh who committed suicide in mass last month had been using this variety, which is more expensive. Media outlets have pointed to falling water levels and inconsiderately planned dam constructions. Rightfully it has contributed to crop failure. But who can argue that GM seed manufacturers’ business model coupled with deceiving marketing claims (http://www.commodityonline.com/news/Chattisgarh-becomes-another-farmers-graveyard-17092-3-1.html) have not been critical in increasing farmers’ level of debts? If one is not yet convinced of the threats these practices represent, why not assessing South African farmers recent misfortune?

Another article in Le Monde (http://www.lemonde.fr/archives/article/2009/05/09/malgre-leurs-deboires-les-agriculteurs-d-afrique-du-sud-croient-aux-ogm_1190919_0.html) sheds light on some of the setbacks suffered by farmers who have turned to GM crops. Michael de Jager from Bothaville in Free State province, saw a noticeable difference between conventional and GM corn, the later yielding 65% less than the former. He exclaimed pointing to a parcel of GM corn: “Look here, seeds have not even germinated”. He is not alone. An estimated 400 farmers have been affected. Monsanto claims that the difference is only of 10% lesser than conventional corn on average. In these cases pollination seems to be the issue. The company has allocated $10 million to indemnify farmers. Michael de Jager who had planted 75% GM corn said “this year it’ll be 50/50”. However, Marian Mayet, director of the Africa-centre for biosecurity in Johannesburg, says Monsanto was grossly understating the problem. According to her own information, some farms have suffered up to 80% crop failures.

Other bad news for Monsanto: for the first time, a study has shown Ostrinia nubilalis, an insect that feeds on corn has developed resistance to the infamous Bt Corn from Monsanto that is supposed to fight. Of course, in South Africa, no one is debating over the undesirable effect of GM seeds. 62% of corn production come from GM seeds. Worst, 56% of consumer food labeled GMO free contains traces of GMOs.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS