Green Genes

Genetic engineering has fine public health potential; fix the profit-driven patent system instead
By Christina Barry

No, I don't work for Monsanto company. Big companies have too much wealth and power, and we should not be allowing them to make the decisions about how and when new technologies should be used. The American public pays billions of dollars every year for basic research, and the fruits of that research should be used to benefit people and the environment, not to generate corporate profits. In order to make this possible, ordinary people need to learn more science and become better informed, and scientists who have a conscience need to speak up.

I am concerned, however, that if people decide to reject all genetic engineering of crop plants, it's possible that we could miss out on something important.

Young children who don't get enough vitamin A can go blind. Worldwide, more than 200 million preschoolers are at risk for blinding disease, and 3.1 million are already damaged by the most common vitamin deficiency in the world, because they don't get enough B-Carotene. Recently, some scientists in Switzerland created a new kind of rice, which is yellow (It looks like saffron rice) because it contains B-Carotene. The pathway for making B-Carotene was inserted into rice, by splicing two genes from a bacterium, and two daffodil genes into the DNA of a rice plant (Science, Aug.13, 1999).

The Swiss group has also genetically engineered a strain of rice which may help to combat iron deficiency, the number-one mineral deficiency in the world. An estimated two billion people, mostly women and children, suffer from iron deficiency, or anemia, which means they are likely to be weak, tired, and susceptible to childbirth complications. Vegetarians are at risk for anemia, because most iron found in plants naturally, such as that in spinach, is poorly absorbed by the human body.

Of course the real problem is that so many people are simply too poor to afford a balanced diet which includes meat, fish, and vegetables. A more equal distribution of wealth, land and other resources would go a long way towards solving the problem. In the meantime, a little iron and Vitamin A couldn't hurt, and who knows, it might give people the strength to fight for justice.

Regarding the genetically modified crops which are currently being marketed, there are some legitimate safety issues which should be addressed. Realistic fears about the potential for some crop plants to cross-fertilize with weeds or accelerate the evolution of pesticide-resistant insects should be separated from irrational fears of anything that is new. In general, there is probably little danger to consumers who eat plants which contain harmless foreign genes.

However, American corporations have been rushing like mad, trying to beat out potential competitors (mainly European), in their quest for control of the genetically modified agriculture market, and are neglecting some safety issues in the process. But the fact that there are safety problems does not mean that they are insoluble. Many objections which have been raised are actually technical problems, that could probably be tackled with a little ingenuity.

It is rather the patent system for genetically modified products that is currently insane. Aside from functioning as an employment program for lawyers, it allows corporations to swallow up new discoveries that churn out of universities and research institutes. A patent allows a company to monopolize a discovery for 20 years or so. Biologists complain that this system interferes with their ability to do research, since the gene they might need for their experiment, or the experiment itself, may be patented or tied up in secret patent negotiations. Meanwhile, some of these same scientists willingly help their institutions fill out patent applications, and share in the monetary rewards. Seed companies and drug companies charge essentially whatever they want for new products, since so long as they hold the patent, they have a monopoly.

A notorious example is the Hepatitis B vaccine, an early product of genetic engineering. The company which holds the patent has charged such a high price that remarkably few people have received the vaccine during the past 15 years, even though it is produced quite cheaply. Meanwhile, more than two billion people have become infected with the virus, and a million people die of Hepatitis B each year globally.

The solution is not to turn away from modern science. Molecular biology will not solve all our problems, and there are many types of knowledge, which should be appreciated and utilized. There is, however, a huge advantage in gaining a basic understanding of how molecules work inside plants and animals. It's the difference between groping around in the dark, and switching the light on. If you want to breed a plant or cure a disease, it helps to have a clear idea of what you're doing. Genetic engineering is unnatural, but so is farming. Domestic animals and plants are far different from their wild counterparts because humans have been driving their evolution for thousands of years. Even without Bovine Growth Hormone, dairy cows make far more milk than any wild cow could probably stand.

The problem is not so much science, as it is the system which allows new knowledge to be privatized, and too often fails to use that knowledge for the benefit of humanity and the world. The solution is to change the system to encourage scientists and engineers to work in the public interest, and to discourage greed. Likewise the public needs to become better informed and participate in decision-making.

The author is a local progressive activist with educational and professional experience in genetic engineering. The Free Press prints this article as part of its commitment to presenting various points of view. --Editor