The above statements suggest that GMOs are naturally conditioned. It is useful in biomedical field besides agriculture. The GMOs should address the questions of equity, sustainability, conservation, environment, etc. Moreover, these modifications have been occurring in nature for several years. Similarly science modifies plant for better production and use.
conducted during 2002-2006, it faced a moratorium in 2010 due to huge public protest.
Research trials were conducted in multi-location which showed that Bt brinjal can reduce the uses of insecticides by 77 per cent.
The transformation of Bt brinjal first began in 2000 by MAHYCO in India under a partnership with Monsanto and using its cry1Ac gene which was already in use in India. The case of Bt brinjal is highly debatable and there is huge public protest on its commercial release in India. The moratorium on Bt brinjal in 2010, due to huge public protests has created a state of chaos, disillusion on the part of scientific community, and they are under the state of confusion. The ban on the release of Bt brinjal was mainly on the ground of risks associated with it. This poses a critical question on the safety and sustainability of Indian agriculture, with probable effect on human and animal species.
This has also changed the scientists’s choices of research problem. Scientists explain this problem with common example of cell phone where there is some evidence of hazard but no proof of hazard and still used by everyone. Similar is the case of GM crops.
In the case of risks associated with Bt brinjal, international networks also played a critical role in producing a claim to oppose Bt brinjal in compliance with international norms of food safety testing. A paper indicating a specific Bt food hazard, by Professor Gilles-Eric Seralini of Caen university, France concluded: ‘the risk on human and mammalian health is too high for authorities to take the decision to commercialize this GM brinjal (MOEF 2010). Bt eggplant was declared unsafe by Professor Seralini in 2008. He specified hazards to humans in consuming cry Bt proteins as ‘organic toxicity’
and risk of organ failure, potentially resulting in death. The finding of Professor Seralini became critical in subsequent controversy because it was the only evidence cited with respect to potential food hazards. Let us put this in the words of a scientist from MS Swaminathan Research Foundation (MSSRF), Chennai:
A lot of students are under disillusion and even funding agency asks what the use of this technology? So, people should come out and discuss. 30-year long term effect is not feasible practically because then nothing will be in the market. It is very unfortunate that agriculture is being targeted. We are consuming GM medicine and they are already in market. If I have to choose between GM brinjal and non-GM brinjal, then definitely I will choose GM, as it is with less pesticide.
Bt brinjal is engineered in such a way that it can be of resistance to several pests and thus will reduce the use of pesticides. It is in this context scientists argue that Bt brinjal will be used with less pesticide and hence better than conventional brinjal with pesticides. Public awareness of GM technology would be helpful in minimizing the public fear pertaining to new technologies such as GM technology. If a field trial is conducted for a long term say 30 years, then it will make a technology obsolete and thus it is not feasible. Decision on GM crops should be based solely on scientific basis is an argument made by the scientific community which ignores the fact that science on its own cannot determine policy decisions. There is a mixed response from the scientific community on the release of Bt brinjal. According to a scientist from ICGEB, New Delhi:
As far as the case of Bt brinjal is considered it should not be banned if all the test is performed. When law is clear than why it is banned. We should not reduce the research and trials for coming years and subsequent field trials have been conducted and moreover Bt brinjal case study passed all the test and guidelines then why it is not allowed.
The above statement suggests that the research and trials related to Bt brinjal have been completed. Despite this, it is not allowed for the commercial release in India. One of the drawbacks in the case of science and policymaking in India is that the reports pertaining to field test of GM crops are not made public. This adds to the lack of trust in public with respect to GM crops. This suggests how fate of new technology is embedded with social, political, institutional and policy factors rather than the scientific factors. The moratorium on Bt brinjal is not affecting MNCs rather than Indian scientists who are
ready with more than a dozen of GM crops such as chickpea, rice, wheat, mustard, etc.
The MNCs like Monsanto are moving to other developing countries like Bangladesh and Pakistan for commercializing GM crops like Bt brinjal, Bt corn and Bt potato. It is argued that Bt brinjal can kill pests. It is a food crop, if consumed, it will have adverse effects on human and animal health. Thus, it is not safe to consume Bt food crop. But this claim is explained in scientific term by a scientist of Osmania University, Hyderabad, who is working on Bt eggplants since 1997:
Genetically modified crops are high yielding as well as resistance to adverse conditions. It is completely safe to consume GM foods. Bt brinjal… where the pest resistance against lepidopteran insects is provided by the crystal protein Cry1Ac of bacillus thuringiensis, but the protein is friendly to crop friendly insects and other species.
The above statement suggests that Bt brinjal kills lepidopteran insects but does not harm crop-friendly insects or other species. Since, Bangladesh is already cultivating Bt brinjal, it can act as a testing ground for Bt brinjal. Again, cultivation of Bt brinjal in Bangladesh is protested by the civil society organizations of India due to its possible contamination to an indigenous variety of brinjal in India as Bangladesh is a neighbouring country of India.
The GEAC was the institutional locus of regulatory science for genetic engineering in agriculture with approving germplasm transformation, mandating field trials, assessing results and approving over a thousand cotton hybrid varieties. The discovery of double- helix model by Watson and Crick allowed manipulation of the Deoxyribonucelic Acid (DNA) which can come from different species (plant, bacterium, virus and animal). This helps in creating desirable traits such as pest-resistance or vitamin A (Venkat 2016).
Controversies over the approval of Bt brinjal successfully challenged its scientific conclusions and diminished its authority. According to a senior scientist of University of
Agricultural Sciences, Bengaluru, “We are not ready for Bt brinjal, as rules and regulation to test Bt brinjal is not ready. Let them test it for 3 to 4 years.”
This shows a lack of communication among actors that impedes technological innovations. Scientists who are working or actually performing the research on Bt brinjal or any other GM crops and scientists who are not working on GM crops differ on their opinions on this variety. In India settled authoritative knowledge about genetic engineering often guides the political trajectory of GM technology (Herring 2015b).