Have you ever wondered about the consequences of all those anti-GMO rants you see online? Perhaps you’re familiar with the picture of the two ears of corn, one of which was mostly eaten and the other uneaten? The uneaten corn is said to be GMO and a rat or squirrel (I’ve seen both) won’t touch it because of some instinctual knowledge GMOs are bad. Or, the fruit with the syringe stuck in it?
I could understand how it might scare people, especially given the frequency at which it crosses social media feeds. I can’t blame someone for sharing something they believe might impact the safety of his or her friends and family. But, what are the consequences?
In a recent post, I wished Dr. Brian Boman, a former BMP Coordinator for UF/IFAS, well on his retirement this summer. When I emailed Brian the link to the column, he replied with a gracious thank you.
Brian also noted that he was replying to my email from Kazakhstan where he was working with local growers to improve the yields of their crops. The day before, Brian said he had held a news conference with media to discuss how the work was progressing.
At the news conference, he and collaborators reported impressive yield increases of three- to fivefold for tomatoes and peppers with hybrid seed and production practices being demonstrated with the local growers. You would think local media would be impressed and cheer on the advancement. I am sure some did, but it didn’t take long before questions turned to GMOs.
Brian told reporters how the use of drip irrigation, good fertilization, cultural practices, and quality hybrid seed led to the impressive yield increases. Reporters became suspicious. That can’t be — crops that yield three to fives times better than locally grown produce and look so pretty must be GMO.
The public there has been led to believe that lower quality, lower yielding fruit must be healthier for your consumption. The logic is that kind of produce is more likely to be organic. Brian says one reporter insisted if the “hybrid” seed in these demonstrations came from Europe or North America, they must be GMO. Yes, those seeds came from the West just like those anti-GMO social media posts that are shared time and again.
Those seeds were not GMO, but enough fear and uncertainty has been created by the movement against the technology that suspicion is in danger of denying innovation — breakthroughs that could feed the world in the future. Three to five times more in tomato and pepper yields might not mean that much in America — it might even be a bad thing considering markets and prices. But, in Kazakhstan, it is a big deal.
Brian had to follow up with media to reassure them these seed and practices have nothing to do with GMOs. He explained the types of seed: open pollinated, hybrid, and GMO. The seeds that brought higher yields in the demonstration with local growers were hybrid.
What if GMO varieties were to come along that would increase yields even more or improve the quality of diets in Kazakhstan or other places in the world? In 2002, GMO crops could have helped people in Zambia who were facing famine. But, the government rejected the food aid from the West because of fears it might be “contaminated” with GMOs.
Hopefully, the hysteria the West has perpetuated on GMOs will not stifle the potential of moving our production forward enough to help feed a growing global population. It is something worth considering the next time you see that picture of ears of corn in you social media feed.