The Future of Food, Genetic Modification and Other
Developments in Farming
Last night I watched a program on the television about the developments
in farming and food production. I found it quite disturbing, which has
prompted this article.
Effectively these broke into two areas:
- Conventional Breeding
- Genetic Modification – Trans-genetics
Our science has reached the point where we are able to take the gene
from one species and insert it into another. Now in all the thousands
of years of selective breeding, this is the one thing we have never
been able to do.
Conventional Breeding
For thousands of years, way before any formal understanding of genetics,
human beings have bred animals and plants to select the characteristics
we wanted. This can be seen most clearly in the dog.
Nature selected wolves to be efficient hunters, balancing between different
factors to achieve the most efficient maker of more wolves. A powerful
jaw is useful but not so powerful that you can't lift your head from
the ground. A larger, more powerful wolf may seem a good idea but too
large an animal requires more food to support it whereas too small a
wolf can't actually bring down a deer. Thus nature produced a carnivore
capable of surviving in the forest, optimised for its environment.
Man has taken the wolf and bred dogs ranging from the Yorkshire Terrier
to the Great Dane. This range of selection has resulted in many breeds
that have reduced life expectancy because the animals have not been selected
for life-span but for other traits that pleased man.
When we look at the difference between a wild boar and the pig, we can
see this breeding has selected a more docile, efficient meat producing
animal. They are still obviously members of the same family.
In the vegetable kingdom, nearly everything we eat has been selected.
Carrots were originally white but orange was selected by Dutch breeders
some 300 years ago to honour the House of Orange. Just look at the huge
range of tomatoes, from marble sized cherry tomatoes to grapefruit sized
beefsteak varieties. All are the result of patient selection over many
generations.
Two extreme examples of this type of breeding were shown. The first
was a cow that has little fat but enormous muscles. The huge beast looked
similar to the most steroid pumped body builder you can imagine. To my
eyes it was quite obscene but I'm applying an artistic standard based
on my expectation of what a cow should look like.
The next example was the humble chicken. Some strains of these have
been selected for fast growth over the years to the point where the poor
creatures legs often break under their own weight because their legs
don't develop as fast as they grow. Now these fast growing poultry produce
a lot of body heat. Unfortunately, they can no longer lose that heat
as fast as they produce it in warm climates and so they have found a
mutant chicken that has no feathers.
Now we are breeding for solutions to problems caused by our breeding
them. Once again it looks obscene to my eyes but as with the cow, an
aesthetic subjective judgement.
One good thing about this sort of breeding is that it is relatively
slow, It takes generations of breeding and even the Yorkshire Terrier
is, at heart, a wolf. We are limited by the breeding cycle and so we
have time to both accept these things but also to find out any flaws
that may not be apparent immediately.
We also have a reservoir of the original stock. If those
orange carrots had been susceptible to some disease, we may be all eating
white carrots or purple ones. The next topic they covered was the much
thornier problem of genetic modification.
Genetic Modification - Trans-genetics
Our science has reached the point where we are able to take the gene
from one species and insert it into another. Now in all the thousands
of years of selective breeding, this is the one thing we have never been
able to do.
You can physically mate a dog and a cat but there
will never be any offspring. Their basic structure
has diverged too far to rejoin.
Genetic transfer enables much, much weirder things
than that to be accomplished. The first example was
a rabbit, an ordinary looking white bunny, that has
had a gene inserted from a jelly fish. It's eyes glow
green in the dark. Now this may have no practical purpose
but it proves that we have reached the point where
we can do almost anything we imagine.
Undoubtedly we can conventionally breed things that
many of us would find disturbing or offensive but this
technology is of a different order.
Golden Rice
One example of this is Golden Rice. Many people in
the world rely on rice as their staple food but rice
doesn't contain vitamin A. By introducing a gene from
the daffodil into the rice it now contains that vitamin
and could help prevent millions of deaths and blindness
in the poorest parts of the world.
This certainly seems to be a good thing and certainly
the scientist who developed it was passionate in his
disdain for the Luddites preventing him from helping
the poor to better health.
What wasn't mentioned that much of the millions spent
on this was spent on marketing and promoting it or
that the genetic structure was patented and so all
those millions of poor people would have to pay a western
company a royalty to grow it.
The risk that worries the 'Luddites' is simply this.
If this rice is grown in the wild it may interbreed
conventionally with ordinary rice and pass on this
daffodil gene.
So what, you may think – would that not actually
be a good thing? Now imagine that we find after 10
year or 20 years that this gene causes some illness
in people or makes the rice susceptible to a disease
of daffodils.
An entire, extremely important crop could be wiped
out or millions could die.
Now even if we have a panel of scientists who are
not in the pay of the investors in this product say
it is safe, should we take the risk? DDT was considered
safe before we realised the horrendous results developing
over the whole world. DDT was found in Polar bears
as well as mothers milk.
On the other hand, by being too scared to grasp the
possibilities this technology offers us we may be condemning
millions to death who could have been saved.
Remember the promise of electricity too cheap to bother
metering that nuclear power offered? That ended in
Chernobyl and huge expenses cleaning up the power stations.
Conclusion
I suppose the main conclusion I have reached is that;
just because you can do something, it doesn't mean
you should do it.
The question of using genetic transfer and modification
technology is one that does affect everyone and everything
on the planet. It offers the prospect of wonderful
things but also the threat of horror beyond imagining.
You don't give a two year old child a box of matches.
Are we old enough to play with these matches?
|