With the dual challenges of climate change and a global population expected to reach 10 billion by 2050, it can be argued that an honest, science-based presentation of the pros and cons of biotechnology as a key tool in protecting food security is not just advisable but essential. But given the sound and fury of ethically charged debate surrounding the subject, is it possible?
Enter, stage left, gene editing – the genomic technique that has recharged the debate for a new generation.
Proponents of gene editing
The environmental argument
Wider use of the technology leads to a significant reduction in pesticide use. As the genetic change is designed to make crops more resistant to pests, the reliance on chemicals is reduced. Similarly, increasing yields will reduce land, water and fertiliser use. Less chemical use in production reduces the risk of eutrophication through chemicals leaching from the soil into water courses. As the fertiliser industry relies on fossil fuel, the additional benefit is in the reduction of carbon emissions.
The economic argument
Crops can be edited to become more resistant to climate change and disease, and increase yields. Overall production costs will reduce, allowing for more affordable food for consumers. Gene editing is a simpler technology than genetic modification, which will enable developing countries to enjoy advantages in crop production without reliance on multinational companies who dominate the GM market.
…
The opposing corner
The regulatory avoidance argument
In some countries gene editing is considered as equivalent to existing plant breeding techniques, thus it is not regulated or monitored to identify issues of safety to the public or the environment. There are risks to both in commercialisation without comprehensive mandatory safety assessment and oversight.
The chemical addiction argument
The number of herbicide-tolerant gene-edited plant proposals put forward implies that gene editing applications will simply entrench the reliance on chemicals in agriculture. Previous genetic modifications have been made specifically to make plants resistant to pesticides (eg, Roundup Ready) and advantages of pesticide reduction in pro gene‑edited research are overestimated.
This is an excerpt. Read the original post here.
