I was really excited about this book. I was so curious – could GE (genetic engineered) crops and organic farming co-exist? If so, as the book description implies, surely I’m missing something about GE.
The book is co-written by a married couple Pam, a Genetic Engineering (GE) Researcher and Raoul, a farmer and teacher at an organic market garden. The premise of the book is that organic farming and genetically engineered crops need to exist collaboratively in order to feed the world’s growing population.
Raoul’s chapters were interesting, easy to read and described the many decisions, barriers and benefits to managing an organic market garden. Pam’s, however, were highly scientific and delivered case by case on how GE crops have benefited agriculture. Where Raoul was realistic and promising of a better food growing future, Pam seemed desperate to sway readers to support GE crops.
The first 70ish pages were great. Written by Raoul, drawing the reader into the optimism of a productive organic farm. The benefits of organic agriculture and the descriptions of plant roots drawing water up from the healthy soil that is replenished each year with fresh compost made on site. The rotation of crops throughout the year (the authors work at UC Davis in Northern California and enjoy a long growing season), and the carefully curated planting and harvesting schedule that optimizes the space without exhausting the soil. At this point, I was enjoying the book and eager to read with my morning coffee. But then Pam took over, monopolizing much of the remainder of the book. The enjoyable read quickly became a 200 page slog with Raoul infrequently breaking up the science, politics and legal side of genetic engineering.
One thing that Pam did very well was to address some of the many common concerns around GE crops. What she didn’t do was sway me to support the science and in some cases, made it even murkier.
Are they safe? I don’t personally have concerns around the safety of consuming GE crops, but I do have concerns with how safe they are for an ecosystem in the long run. Science is a rigorous process and in order for anything to be fit for human consumption it must go through many, many tests in order to prove that it won’t cause harm (to people). The data lacking is how this is affecting our ecosystems and other crops over 5, 10, 20 years.
Who owns the seed? Who owns the genes?
If you’re familiar with Vandana Shiva’s documentary, The Seeds of Vandana Shiva, you may be familiar with the cycle that farmers get into when buying GE seeds from big seed suppliers. Paying huge amounts of cash upfront to buy wonderful seeds only to learn at harvest that the yields won’t cover the cost of the seeds, sending farmers into a spiral of debt. My understanding from this is that the company that produces the seeds, owns the seed. It turns out I’m partially right.
Raoul explained, while reading a seed catalogue from Johnny’s Selected Seeds, how hybrid seeds are developed, why they cost so much, and who owns them (the company that sells them). Many seed houses, Johnny’s Selected Seeds included, sell predominantly their own seeds, including hybrids they’ve developed. Who owns the genes, though, is a bit more convoluted. First of all, there are patents. Companies can apply for patents at any point during the development of the ideal seed, locking down their advancements so no one else can benefit. There are few companies capable of carrying out this research, and as such they own many of the patents of seed that’s on the market. Because of the patents, one company can quickly monopolize the market for a specific (perfect) crop. Other companies and government agencies are trying to catch up and infiltrate the market, but it requires enormous financial investments, not to mention time to get there. In the meantime, big seed companies are owning the genes and the seeds.
Are there any benefits to GE?
This message kept popping up and Pam did a wonderful job of outlining the many ways in which people have benefited from genetic engineering. The development of a flood resistant rice crop that is used in small villages in Central China to allow farmers to harvest a crop each year that could be washed away with a flood is one example. Another is biologically altering mosquitoes in some parts of the world to not carry Zika or Dengue, disrupting the need for broad insecticide sprays. These are very specific examples and while one may support the humanitarian approach, I’m not sure they need to be included in the same context as many of the GE crops we’re more familiar with. It’s possible that there is a positive application for genetic engineering and maybe that’s as far as GE should go.
“Natural” adaptation of crops
Some of Pam’s other arguments described how GE has helped to combat viruses, on papayas and wine grapes specifically. What’s lacking here is the organic approach of building up the soil. Composting and ensuring proper soil health will go a long way in growing virus free crops. Additionally, the number of bushels of corn that US farmers are harvesting in 2014 vs 1920 and vs regions such as South America and sub-Saharan Africa makes one wonder if we are abusing the science that we have. Do we really need US farmers to be harvesting upwards of 500 bushels of corn per acre to combat global food security? Maybe there is a better approach that will be reliable in the long-term.
All in all, I find the book to be a desperate plea to organic growers and consumers to support genetic engineering. I did not find common ground between organic farming, genetics and the future of food as the subtitle suggested. I did find that organic farming and genetics can both contribute to the future of food in their own ways, but not in a collaborative way. That being said, I am still firmly on the organic farming side of the fence.
Leave a Reply