Krish Ashok is at it yet again. He thinks he has built a nuanced position for GMOs. Nothing could be far from the truth. His recent video conflates artificial selection that has happened over thousands of years with lab developed GMOs which have a questionable history over 50 years.

At its broadest, the definition of a GMO can include anything that has had its genes altered, including by nature, without human intervention. All species are genetically modified over time by mutations and still are being modified – that is what evolution does.

A little narrower definition would include Genetic Modification by humans, which would include artificial selections pressures over millenia for selecting certain features in plants and animals – it is this precise power that humans yielded that resulted in the Agriculture Revolution.

An even more narrower definition of GMO would be genetically engineering of species in a lab by modifying the DNA, which has started in the 1970s. It is this definition which is usually referenced when talking about GMOs.

Krish Ashok mentioned the artificial selection of wolves + dogs and mustard + brassica in his recent reel. But he did not mention the difference between artificial selection and genetically engineered organisms (in a lab) for which there is a lot of resistance. He engaged in the definist fallacy and fallacy of omission; which is extremely surprising because he claims to add nuance to discussions. Over-simplication is all he did in this reel, as usual.

The most common use of genetic engineered crops has been carried out for 2 reasons : Bt and HT

1. Pest resistance using Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) : The insertion of Cry protein into species such as Corn, Soybean, Cotton has improved the pest resistance to corn borers, bollworm etc. But, this has been approved by the Indian Government in only cotton 2 decades ago, given that it is a non-food crop. There doesn’t seem to be any knock off effect on other species because the protein targets the specific pests. But pink bollworm seems to be developing some resistance to this technique, more due to crop management practices and growing seasons, than genetic reasons. The technique to counter the resistance developed by pests to increase the amount of protein. But the most sustainable strategy for pest resistance is to use a diverse set of techniques.

2. Herbicide Tolerance : Several weeds (herbs) have the potential to impact the productivity of . Broad spectrum herbicides such as Glyphosate and Glufosinate are used to kill weeds. Broad spectrum means that it will kill all plants. To prevent the crop that is being planted from being killed, genetic engineering is carried out in the seed so that the sensitivity of the plant to the herbicide is developed.

Glyphosate is one of the widely used herbicides in the world. It is suspected to be a carcinogen; and, therefore its use is totally banned like in Europe or restricted in several countries. It’s use is not restricted in India right now. So, while glyphosate is being used in India now, it is not widely used because HT GMO is not yet approved in India.

In the case of Indian Mustard, the variety in question is called DMH-11. This is why GMO / Genetic Engineering Technology is in the news right now. There are 2 transgenic technologies used in its development. One is the use of barnase – barstar bacterial protein complex to allow cross pollination in the otherwise self-pollinated mustard plant. The other is the use of the bar gene to allow herbicide tolerance (HT) to the plant for Glufosinate. Glufosinate is approved for use across the world except Europe.

The most common selling point used for promoting herbicide tolerant product is that it reduces the need for tillage. Reduction of tillage reduces soil erosion and helps in keeping carbon in the soil. But herbicides universally are known to have a detrimental impact on soil microbiology and therefore organic carbon reducing the capacity of the soil to act as a carbon sink. Reduced tillage with mulch or live ground cover acts as a much better strategy to host beneficial insects which carry out pest control. Mulch and compost are better and more ecologically sustainable ways to provide nutrients to the crop.

Weed management in India is mostly done by women and is a source of livelihood for millions of women in India. In a patriarchal society, it contributes towards a sense of financial independence and gender equality. Housework is not yet given the due respect and valued in home economics. Approving Herbicide Tolerance species will sound a death knell for the employment opportunities that agriculture provides for Indian women workforce.

Physical labour is increasingly being seen as inefficient and primitive in an increasingly mechanized world driven by the fossil fuels. For a heavily populous country like India, agriculture and allied industries are the best employment generators.

Genetic Engineering technology has emerged from the Global North which has low population densities and high meat consumption. Most of the GMO crops in use in the world currently is consumed by animals as fodder. A handful of seed companies control the production of Bt and HT varieties. We can throw whatever little is left of farmer-controlled seed sovereignty out of the window, if India were to adopt Genetic Engineering for food crops.

I wish people of Krish Ashok’s stature read enough from diverse and Indian sources about agriculture and the resultant social systems before posting half-takes on such important matters. Dismissing the concerns on GMO is extremely irresponsible. Short form content conflating artificial selection by humans with Genetic Engineering is even more ill-considered.

Regards

Sudhakar

This is the video to which this post is a response.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Krish Ashok (@_masalalab)