The US embassy recently hosted a workshop on Genetic Transformation Technology. Weekly speaks to Jane Morris, Independent Life Sciences consultant and former director of the African Centre for Gene Technologies in South Africa, who lead the workshop, on the controversy surrounding genetically-modified food and the likelihood of Mauritius adopting the practice.

You came to Mauritius to assist with amendments to the 2004 Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) Act. Why was this act implemented in the first place?

It was put in place because Mauritius is a party to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, which is an internationally binding protocol and governs the trans-boundary movement of GMOs. But within the context of that protocol, each country is required to put in place their own legislation. So it was largely in response to being a party to that protocol that the legislation came about.

What is the protocol about in layman’s terms?

It makes sure that countries are informed about the movement of GMO products across boundaries, so that when there is import and export of GMOs, countries are actually informed in advance and decide whether to accept GMOs from another country. So they are not just being traded in the country without anybody being aware.

Is there anything that, as consumers, we should be worried about?

As consumers, you don’t need to be concerned about safety, because safety issues are dealt with prior to release. There is a very stringent process. Every individual product or organism would go through a very stringent risk assessment process and be assured for safety. But at the same time, there is a concern that individual countries should be able to make their own decisions, so the idea of the protocol was to ensure safety but also to make sure that countries make their own decisions as well. That they don’t have things foisted on them without them being aware.

There are a lot of concerns around GMOs. Are they justified or based on ignorance?

There is a lot of ignorance going around. We can look back at the history of the introduction of GMOs. They have been on the market for more than 20 years without a single instance of negative impact being recorded .

Has there been enough research done?

There has been a lot of research and the vast majority of research shows that it’s safe. There are one or two publications where people have implied that things might not be safe, but those publications have been discredited. There was one French researcher who said that GMO products were found to have caused tumours in mice or something like that…

A French study showed that mice who ate genetically-modified corn sprayed with weed killer were more likely to develop tumours, organ damage and die early. Lead author Gilles-Eric Seralini confirmed to the Washington Post that "After one year, there was a high increase in the number of tumours". How do you react to that?

That research has been discredited and his publication has been revoked.

In Mauritius, there is not so much concern about GMOs yet. The real concern is about the amount of pesticides and herbicides used in our agricultural products. How does this tie in with GMOs?

I think it’s a common problem with agriculture around the world. It’s nothing that’s unique to Mauritius but the advantage of the introduction of GMOs is that they can actually contribute to environmental sustainability.

How?

If you’ve got a pest resistant plant, then you don’t need to spray pesticides on it. The pest resistance in plants is shown to be safe, environment friendly and you are not spraying toxic pesticides on it. When it comes to herbicides, there are many herbicides in common use that are toxic, that stay in the groundwater for a long time. I know maize is not such a big crop in this country but in South Africa, where I have got a lot of experience, maize is a big crop and they were using Atrazine, which is a herbicide that stays in the groundwater for up to five years, which can contaminate the groundwater very significantly. So, by introducing some crops that are tolerant to different herbicides, they can use herbicides that are much more environmentally friendly.

Are there no risks when we start meddling with nature?

Effectively, we’ve been meddling with nature for thousands of years. All of the crops that we grow are nothing like what you might originally find.

What do you mean? Wheat is the same. Rice is the same.

None of these crops are the same as the original ones. The classic example to go back to maize again, if you look at the progenitor of maize, it’s a wild grass called Teosinte, which looks nothing like the maize that’s grown today. Even the sugarcane that you grow so much here has origins that are wild grasses and are nothing like the sugarcane that you grow now. Man has been interfering with nature for thousands of years and we would not be where we are if we were not developing and improving the crops that we grow.

Does that mean that we should go even further and modify nature?

The predictions are that the world population is going to grow to over nine billion people by the year 2050. That is going to involve at least a 70% increase in food production around the world if you are going to feed the population. There is no way we can do that without using all the technologies that we have at our disposal.

Coming back to Mauritius, how advanced are we in the implementation of this technology as things stand today?

There is a capability to use the technology in the country but right now it’s not being done because of the lack of a legislative framework.

Is it just that? How about research?

Research is going on. I have seen the sugarcane research and there is the capacity to use the technology if it’s being promoted as part of the policy.

So, today, do we produce or import any GMOs?

I think there are some products that have been imported that are derived from GMOs. There is nothing that is being developed here in Mauritius at the moment but if there was the framework to enable that, it could contribute to food security. Given that Mauritius imports 75% of its food supply, this could seriously contribute to a better supply for the country and increase the food production. 

Without any risks whatsoever for the consumer?

Yes, absolutely, because everything that is approved and goes out into the market place has an extremely stringent process of risk assessment, much more so than for conventional crops in fact.

Where does bio agriculture fit into this?

It depends how you define bio agriculture. It has many definitions, and I don’t know what the definition is that you specifically would want to use in Mauritius.

My definition is a way of growing food which keeps to a minimum the number and quantity of chemicals and move more toward biological control and integrated pest management.

Certainly, the opportunity developed through genetic modification can contribute to that and certainly reduce the number of chemicals, definitely.

How far are you prepared to go? I mean there is talk now about meat cloning in laboratories. Is that the way humanity should go?

Well, that’s not what we are talking about developing at the moment. Let’s take one step at a time and really become comfortable. I think the general public need to become comfortable where we are already before we start getting too far-fetched.

But, should we be heading that way?

If you are talking about meat, I think, in general, we just need to reduce our meat consumption. There is no requirement for us to eat so much meat. So, perhaps, if we modified our habits, we wouldn’t need to start talking about growing meat in laboratories.

But, you and I know we won’t.

I think maybe circumstances will force us in that direction because if we are going to be able to feed the world, we can’t simply continue on the trajectory that we are currently headed.

What exactly is going to change in the law?

I think that it’s still subject to some discussions. The changes are not entirely in my hands. But in general, the aim is to have an act that would facilitate the development of biotechnology within safe parameters.

If everything goes well, what impact will that have on Mauritius?

I think it could have a very significant impact in terms of stimulating the development of crops in particular that could be of benefit to Mauritian agriculture. You need these kinds of laws in place so that a biotechnology institute could apply itself to developing things that are going to be of real use to Mauritius. It’s no good to just rely on technology that has been developed elsewhere and apply it here. You need to have things that are relevant to the country.

Do you mean research?

Both research and implementation need to be relevant to Mauritius, Mauritian agriculture and the Mauritian climate. You can’t just take something that someone else has developed and say it will be fine for us. It won’t necessarily be.

How advanced is the UK when it comes to the implementation of GM technology?

The UK has been held back by the European position. There have been parliamentary commissions in the UK that have strongly advocated to move ahead and introduce GM technology. But, the European Commission has been somewhat in limbo in terms of actually making decisions.

Why is there resistance at the level of the European Union?

Because there is a strong influence from political lobbyists. Whereas scientific opinion has unilaterally felt that the science was safe and should move forward, the politicians have not taken cognizance of that. They have taken cognizance of the political lobbyists.

But why would people lobby against something you seem to present as a win-win situation? If you can feed your own people, you would be more popular as a politician.

I wish it was as simple as that. To be honest, I think the lobbyists have their own vested interests. They need to make a living from the political lobbying. But you should bear in mind that even the original instigator of Greenpeace, who was a major anti GMO campaigner, Mark Lynas, has now recognised the error of his ways. He is now actively lobbying in favour of GMOs.

So what will happen now that the UK is out of the European Union?

I think that England specifically could well decide to move forward with GMOs. Scotland has taken a somewhat different position, but England I think will certainly move ahead.

What about South Africa where you were working before?

South Africa has been a major adopter of GM crops. It’s the leader of the African continent. They first introduced GM crops in 1997 and have never looked back. The farmers have unequivocally seen benefits and have moved forward with the technology.

How do you think Mauritius will react to this?

It’s important that there should be good communication so it’s not something that is forced on consumers. The public in general understands what this is all about. There needs to be a two-way communication so it’s not just top down. There needs to be a lot of discussions so that the benefits can be understood.

You know how traditional we are as a society. Do you expect any hurdles on the way?

You say that you’re a traditional society. It’s my first visit to Mauritius but from what I’ve seen, there is a rapid adaption of technology. I don’t foresee the reaction to this technology to be any different!

For more views and in-depth analysis of current issues, subscribe to Weekly for as little as Rs110 a month. Free delivery to your door. Contact us: touria.prayag@lexpress.mu(link sends e-mail)(link sends e-mail)