London (8.3.10) – Now that the dust of the recent aubergine furore has settled a little – until the next time – it is possible to look back with some equanimity to the remarkable events of the past few weeks.

Indian scientists have prepared a genetically modified strain of “brinjal” (aubergine) resistant to attacks by insects which cause a good deal of damage to the crop and need to be kept down with insecticide sprays or losses, often extensive, will be suffered. Similar resistant strains have been made using recombinant gene technology to introduce the Bt-gene into cotton and maize; with remarkable success, insect damage to the crop has been minimised in India, China, the US, Brazil and latterly also in Mexico. Introducing the Bt-gene either avoids the use of very large amounts of insecticide spray to control insect attack or markedly increases the crop yield compared with a vulnerable and untreated plantation.

So far so good. The Bt-brinjal went through the tests required of new GM-constructs (and only of them; new plant strains bred in any other way need not be tested for human health safety or for the possibility that they might cause “environmental damage”) (1) The Indian government was clearly getting ready to approve the crop for sale as a food in India but, sensing a reaction from the organised anti-GM movement, arranged for a series of public meetings around the country.

What happened at those meetings is not altogether clear when viewed from a distance of several thousand miles. Some reports speak of legions anti-GM brigade members brought in by the busload; others of battalions of totally uninformed labourers dragooned on behalf of the biotech. companies hoping to secure approval of their product (“Waving placards and appetising images of aubergines, known in India as brinjal, they shouted themselves hoarse praising the transgenic vegetable”, reported The Economist [2]). Indian scientists complained that they were not listened to at Minister Ramesh’s public meetings but were shouted down or prevented from speaking (3).

European scientists also maintained that a vital study cited by Ramesh in his justification for postponing the approval process is flawed, with experts claiming that its author was unduly influenced by the renowned international NGO Greenpeace — with its aggressive green agenda — which sponsored the study, and that he failed to carry out a peer-reviewed laboratory study on the GM crops he called hazardous, including Bt maize and Bt brinjal, its gene or seeds (4).

Whatever it was, the Indian government in the person of Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh took fright at what had become too difficult a political situation. As is all too common in such cases, he kicked the problem into the long grass by saying that more studies were needed to ensure genetically modified aubergines were safe for consumers and the environment (5). How many more studies, and to answer exactly which questions was, as usual, not made clear.

A long justification was issued (6) while the world looked on amazed: “No urgency to introduce a GM food crop?” asked the (London) Daily Telegraph. “How about the fact that India has some of the highest rates of child malnutrition and mortality in under-fives in the world? Or the fact that malnutrition has been found to be worse in India than it is in sub-Saharan Africa?”…“It would have taken only a little bravery from India’s environment minister to approve the GM food crop, paving the way for dozens more. This would have been good for India, good for Indians and good for the environment. How infuriating, then, that he has bowed so quickly to bad science and public pressure” (7).

Much of the reaction to Mr. Ramesh’s action was vigorous. The Indian Express wrote of an “enviro-caliphate” with the Indian environment ministry gaining a noted reputation for needless obstructionism. Ramesh had been expected to play down the politicisation of essentially procedural or scientific decisions but chose instead to opt for populism, last-man-standing vetoes, crowd-pleasing politics and ranting against private sector input into research — when, across the world, it is the private sector that drives biotech, and India’s private sector cannot afford to be left behind (8). There will be costs (9).

What happens next? How long will the issue remain in the long grass? For several months at least said Minister Ramesh: “I cannot give a deadline. I took a decision….I may be wrong. The basis of my decision is available on (environment) ministry's website" (10). Public confidence must be created (in Bt-brinjal or the Minister’s decision?) (11). There is no telling which way things might go (12) but meanwhile, again not surprisingly, the Minister has the support of the organic movement (13).

As things moved along, and to add to the confusion, there came a report that If the Ministry of Science and Technology has its way, criticising genetically-modified (GM) products could land you in jail. An Indian citizen who questions the safety of any GM food or medicine could be put behind bars for a minimum period of six months under a new law proposed by the ministry on the grounds of misleading the public (14). That, surely, is an interesting and novel way for a democracy to resolve what ought to be a technical issue. If they threaten that for questioning GM crops, what would be the fate for anyone bold enough to challenge other government-supported scientific positions – climate change, for example?

But some expressed sympathy for the Indian government’s position: “The Bt brinjal issue is yet another reminder of how difficult the government's balancing act is - and of the extra pressures that a democracy like India face compared to more authoritarian countries”, wrote Time Magazine (15). “Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and many farmers struggling against debt, rising expenses and stagnant yields, have called for a second Green Revolution. But for this, India will probably need the help of biotechnology, a discipline in which India has the potential to be a world leader. Because India allows protests and debate, though, pro-industry rulings are often overturned….One of the problems, as Minister Ramesh conceded this week, is that the country's regulatory system lacks the expertise and autonomy required to put decisions beyond reproach.”

Whatever the reason for Minister Ramesh’s decision, it was clearly not based on science: “The safety and efficacy of so-called "Bt technology”, which involves incorporation of one or two chosen genes from the universally occurring soil bacterium, Bacillus thuringiensis, into the genome of a crop targeting the most devastating pest threatening that crop, has been investigated for repeatedly by the mandatory regulatory regimes of every one of the 25 countries that commercialized these crops in the past decade-and-a-half. Genetically modified food is widely available in the United States, and will soon be in Europe, too” (16).

So there we stand. Comments continue: Dr M S Swaminathan, the father of India’s green revolution, feels the genetically modified (GM) version of brinjal may kill biodiversity: “If you have gone to the market to buy baingan (brinjal), you would have seen the round baingans, the long baingans, the green baingans, the purple baingans … there are more than 600 varieties….We don’t want them to be wiped out….. Once the pest-resistant hybrid variety is approved, farmers will go in for Bt brinjal and discontinue farming the earlier varieties, virtually killing them” (17).

That seems an odd thing to say. Surely choice of which brinjal to buy is a matter of personal choice as expressed in the marketplace. If people want and buy the 600 varieties, farmers will continue to provide them. And if not they won’t: time passes and things change. In north London it is now quite difficult to get horses shod and totally impossible to go to work by tram. Both used to be commonplace but time indeed does pass and things do change.

Sources:

1. M/s Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds Company Ltd. (Mahyco), Mumbai, University of Agricultural Sciences (UAS), Dharwad and Tamil Nadu Agricultural University (TNAU),Coimbatore (8.10.09). Report of the Expert Committee (EC-II) on Bt Brinjal Event EE-1. Government of India, Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (http://moef.nic.in/downloads/public-information/Report on Bt brinjal.pdf)

2. India and GM food: Without modification – A setback for GM in India. The Economist (11.2.10) (http://www.economist.com/world/asia/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15498385)

3. Ravish Tiwari (11.2.10). ‘At Jairam’s hearings, no one heard us’. Indian Express (http://www.indianexpress.com/news/at-jairams-hearings-no-one-heard-us/578398/)

4. Zia Haq (12.2.10). Scientists slam key study behind Bt brinjal ban. Hindustan Times (http://www.hindustantimes.com/Scientists-slam-key-study-behind-Bt-brinjal-ban/H1-Article1-507896.aspx)

5. India defers first GM food crop. BBC News (9.2.10) (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/8506047.stm)

6. Bt brinjal: Note by Ministry of Environment and Forests. Decision on commercialisation of Bt-brinjal. The Hindu (9.2.10) (http://beta.thehindu.com/news/national/article103839.ece)

7. Will Heaven (9.2.10). India shelves GM food crop plans – while millions remain malnourished. Daily Telegraph (http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/willheaven/100025557/india-shelves-gm-food-crop-plans-%E2%80%93-while-millions-remain-malnourished/)

8. Enviro-caliphate. Indian Express (11.2.10) (http://www.indianexpress.com/news/envirocaliphate/578406/)

9. Moratorium costs. Financial Express (5.3.10) (http://www.financialexpress.com/news/FE-Editorial---Moratorium-costs/587323/)

10. 'I took a decision... I may be wrong'. Hindustan Times (14.2.10) (http://www.hindustantimes.com/rssfeed/newdelhi/I-took-a-decision-I-may-be-wrong/Article1-508644.aspx)

11. Create public confidence on GM crops: Jairam Ramesh. Press Trust of India (17.2.10) (http://www.siasat.com/english/news/create-public-confidence-gm-crops-jairam-ramesh)

12. A K Bhattacharya (16.2.10). The political ploy over Bt Brinjal. Rediff Business (http://business.rediff.com/column/2010/feb/16/guest-the-political-ploy-over-bt-brinjal.htm)

13. Bt brinjal - Jairam gets support of organic farmers. Indian Express (http://www.indianexpress.com/news/Bt-brinjal--Jairam-gets-support-of-organic-farmers/580822)

14. Dinesh C Sharma (19.2.10). Govt moots jail for GM food critics. India Today (http://indiatoday.intoday.in/site/Story/84730/India/Govt+moots+jail+for+GM+food+critics.html)

15. Madhur Singh (15.2.10). What an eggplant uproar says about India's economy. Time (http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1964217,00.html)

16. C. Kameswara Rao (3.3.10). Why Is India Shunning Safer Food? One thing's for sure: The moratorium on genetically modified eggplant wasn't a decision based on science. Wall Street Journal (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703862704575099042296849572.html?mod=WSJINDIA_hps_MIDDLEThirdNews - articleTabs_comments)

17. Bt brinjal may kill biodiversity, says Dr Swaminathan. FNB News (4.3.10) (http://www.fnbnews.com/article/detnews.asp?articleid=27111§ionid=1)

<<<back