To be sure, genetic engineering is a decades-old technology. But genetically modified food is unlike any of the other products that have been produced with it. With the production of genetically engineered medications, the transgenic organism remains confined to a flask in a lab; GM crops are out in the real world, growing and sharing genes with other organisms, and being eaten by both animals we are raising for food and directly, by humans— many of whom are very uneasy about the prospect.

Since the first genetically modified foods appeared in the early 1990s, a vocal contingent of activists—mostly in the United States and Europe—have rallied against such products—dubbing them “Franken Foods” and strongly contesting their safety. What if humans proved allergic to some of the proteins whose genes were being spliced in, they asked? What if negative health effects took years to manifest? Today, even as GM crops permeate the U.S. food supply, other countries (including Japan and much of the European Union [EU]) continue to fiercely resist the technology. As of 2014, only two genetically modified crops were authorized for planting in EU member states, and only one of them is currently planted—a Bt corn variety. Individual countries have the option of banning cultivation of any EU-authorized GMO within their borders.

One enduring concern is that the genes introduced into genetically modified crops could be passed to wild plants through cross-pollination—that is, they could escape into the natural world and be incorporated into other plants for which they were not intended. For example, if an HT gene were accidently transferred to a weed species, it could enable the weed to grow more aggressively and outcompete other plants, including our crops. This has already happened in the United States. So far, 16 weed species have acquired a gene for herbicide tolerance. These so-called superweeds, including giant ragweed and pigweed, can be found in 22 states and can tolerate all the herbicide a farmer can spray. They take over entire fields, stop combines, and are tough to clear by hand.

Another fear is that crops engineered to resist pests could inadvertently repel beneficial insects, or that they might give rise to a new population of Bt-resistant pests much more quickly than would traditional pesticide spraying.

310

The rise of secondary pests (those not affected by Bt) is also a concern in some cases. For example, several studies have shown that the amount of pesticides applied to Bt cotton was as great as the amount of pesticide used on traditional cotton because the elimination of Bt-susceptible pests enabled other Bt-resistant pests to thrive.

Raising up only a few plant varieties (as we did in the Green Revolution) could further degrade crop biodiversity precisely at a time when genetic and species diversity could not be more important. Only a deep genetic storehouse would allow us to develop crops that can cope with global climate change and other environmental challenges in the future.

For consumers, the data are less clear. Some critics express deep concern over possible allergens or toxic substances in GM foods, though such claims have not yet been well studied. Purported advantages of GMOs—like better-tasting or more nutritious foods—while feasible with current technology, have yet to hit the market. There are even some concerns that the nutritional content of some GM foods might decline; increasing the production of one nutrient in a GMO might affect the ability of the food to produce other nutrients. Currently in the United States there are no federal labeling requirements for informing consumers that foods contain GMOs (though certified organic food must be GMO free). In June 2014, Vermont became the first state to pass a law requiring GMO labels; the Grocery Manufacturers Association called the bill “critically flawed” and promised to sue the state in federal court in an effort to overturn the law.

Finally, opponents also worry about the prospect of putting even more of our food supply under the control of a few multinational corporations. In the United States, companies like Monsanto have been known to tightly guard their GM seeds. Because they are patented, farmers are not permitted to save seeds from one year to the next but instead must repurchase them year after year. Worse yet, when GM crops grown by one farmer have accidentally (that is, naturally) cross-pollinated another farmer’s field, the second farmer has been held liable and forced to pay for the seeds, even if she didn’t plant them—and even if she doesn’t want to grow GM crops. “Food security in private hands is no food security at all,” U.S. Senator Tom McGovern said, “because corporations are in the business of making money, not feeding people.”

Proponents argue that in Africa especially, where individual countries lack the capacity for large-scale research and development, private investment is essential to agricultural development. “The country programs, agencies, and research centers don’t have expertise,” Gates said. “And they don’t have time to build it from scratch.” If we are ever to develop technological solutions to the challenges of developing world agriculture, he said, we will have to rely on the expertise of the private sector. INFOGRAPHIC 16.5

Gates and others point out that technological innovation is exactly how developed countries like the United States turned Dust Bowl—era food shortages into vast surpluses in less than a generation. It is unfair, they say, to tell impoverished countries to forgo the technologies that we ourselves have benefitted from, especially while the people in those other countries are still starving. “This postmodern resistance to agricultural science makes considerable sense in rich countries, where science has already brought so much productivity to farming that little more seems needed,” Paarlberg said. “It becomes dangerous, however, when exported to countries in Africa where farmers remain trapped in poverty.”

Meanwhile, in the shadows of this global debate, many African farmers have been devising their own solutions to food insecurity.