[ad_1]
– Advertisement –
– Advertisement –
– Advertisement –
– Advertisement –
Dr. Rose Guidad.
The debate over the safety of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) continues to dominate public life, with activists becoming some of the most vocal opponents of their introduction.
Globally, organizations such as Greenpeace and Fairtrade International are leading the charge against GMOs, while in Nigeria organizations such as Mother Earth Foundation (HOMEF), GMO-Free Nigeria Alliance, and Organic Nigeria are leading the charge against GMOs. stands out to raise concerns.
These groups argue that GMOs pose health risks, environmental damage, and socio-economic challenges. They expressed concern about potential long-term impacts on ecosystems and human health, citing concerns such as contamination of conventional crops and wild plants, damage to wildlife, and uncertain health effects. are. Activists also criticize the dominance of large corporations in the GMO market, arguing that such monopolies can lead to dependence on external inputs, undermine local food systems, and undermine farmers’ autonomy. are. Furthermore, they argue that rather than promoting sustainable agricultural practices, GMOs encourage industrial agriculture, worsening climate change, soil degradation, and water pollution.
While some of these arguments may seem valid, it is important to emphasize that GMOs are not developed or used in an ethical vacuum. In Nigeria and other countries where GMOs are used, robust ethical and biosafety frameworks have been established to address concerns about genetic modification, privacy issues in genetic testing, and fair access to biotech innovations. I am. Ironically, these systems are often ignored as those opposed to this technology prefer to air their concerns through social media and the news.
This is in stark contrast to the rigorous scientific process that guides GMO development. GMOs undergo a series of globally recognized scientific procedures before being released. These include identifying and integrating the gene for the target trait into the host organism, followed by laboratory and greenhouse tests to assess the performance of the gene under controlled conditions. Products are then tested in limited field settings to assess environmental impact, followed by multi-site testing to assess suitability and performance under varying conditions.
On the regulatory side, developers must conduct risk assessments to evaluate potential impacts on human health and the environment. They will submit these assessments to the Nigerian National Biosecurity Management Agency (NBMA) for review. The NBMA’s evaluation determines whether GMOs are approved or denied for release into the environment.
It is important to note that Nigeria has a National Variety Release Committee (NVRC) which is responsible for registering, naming and publishing new crop varieties developed by research institutes, universities and the private sector. All GMOs released in Nigeria go through all these processes and these processes are transparently communicated to the public by the scientists and regulators involved.
Nevertheless, it is unfortunate that activists prefer to rely on social media and sympathetic news outlets to criticize GMOs. This amounts to an abuse of the freedom of expression that guides scientific debate. Moreover, many of the people behind the criticism are not scientists. The small number of scientists supporting the activists often lack sufficient knowledge of biotechnology and have exploited the public’s limited understanding of genetic modification to advance policies that undermine Nigeria’s agricultural growth.
To be clear, all GMO products launched in Nigeria are regulated by the NBMA. The law requires each GMO product to be labeled and traceable to ensure transparency and accountability. GMOs and related activities are guided by the National Biosafety Management Agency Act of 2015. National Biosafety Guidelines (2017) and GMO Regulations (2017). Internationally, Nigeria complies with the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, to which the country is a signatory.
Agencies such as the National Biosafety Management Authority (NBMA), the National Biotechnology Research and Development Authority (NBRDA), the Nigeria Agricultural Seeds Council (NASC), the National Agricultural Quarantine Service (NAQS), and the National Food and Drug Administration and Control Authority (NAFDAC); It is available to anyone seeking reliable information about GMOs. Nevertheless, activists continue to raise questions about the safety and effectiveness of GMOs through social media and targeted misinformation campaigns.
The sustained criticism of GMOs in Nigeria and the harassment of the scientists behind this globally recognized groundbreaking research amounts to a calculated prank. Fear-mongering efforts by anti-GMO activists appear aimed at derailing Nigeria’s efforts to ensure food security and agricultural sustainability.
Protecting the public from potential risks is essential, but allowing anti-scientific bias to dominate public consciousness will only hinder progress. GMOs are not a silver bullet to solve hunger or food insecurity, but they can be a powerful tool in broader efforts to achieve these goals. Research shows that GMOs can increase crop yields, improve drought tolerance, and enhance the nutritional content of crops. These characteristics are important in Nigeria’s pursuit of sustainable agricultural development.
Anti-GMO activists have raised concerns that merit consideration, but it is important to approach the debate from an evidence-based perspective. The development of GMOs follows strict ethical and scientific standards and their use has great potential to improve food security and agricultural resilience in Nigeria. Therefore, conversations about GMOs should be based on facts, not fear. By ignoring the contribution of GMOs, we risk slowing agricultural innovation and ultimately undermining national development goals.
Gidado is the director of NBRDA’s agricultural biotechnology division.
Something like this:
Like loading…
related
– Advertisement –
[ad_2]
Source link
