To ease your site search, article categories are at bottom of page.

August 15, 2007

Kenya should be wary of those pushing GMO agenda

by John Mbaria*

As we all sit glued to the melodramatic antics of politicians, another very determined lot has been working tirelessly to ensure that the genetically modified organisms (GMOs) they have patented get a foothold in the country.

In a subtle manner, giant biotechnology companies have been telling everyone that theirs is only a novel undertaking to ensure that hunger and famines are wiped out from the country. They have targeted underpaid scientists and gung-ho politicians ready to do their binding without raising a question.

Even before MPs had come to back a haphazardly drafted Biosafety Bill,they were taken on a trip to Makatini, South Africa's GM-capital,in May. And ever since, they have been waxing lyrical about GM products, with two MPs publicly vowing to ensure GM crops are not only raised but also become part of Kenya's commercial agriculture.

But why should these MPs be careful of publicly supporting GM crops?

For one, most of us are not even aware of what GM crops are, nor are scientists sure of their safety. Our MPs ought to seek to understand not only actual and possible implications of planting and eating these crops, but also the hidden agenda of the giant biotechnology companies which jealously guard patents on them.

Pro-GM scientists say no food is 100 per cent safe, and that because of the heated reactions they have been attracting throughout the world, GM foods have now undergone thorough testing and are, therefore, probably safer than traditional foods. While Kenya does not have evidence to counter that assertion, it is curious that most countries in the EU are not keen to embrace GM foods.

The US and Canada may be growing these crops, but there, GM maize is not cultivated to be milled for ugali but to feed livestock, besides generating bio-fuels. Further, it remains unclear why the West is never keen to support the cultivation of GM wheat, which is a major staple there.

Those who have followed the matter closely say the Biosafety Bill is a product of a "boardroom" process rather than an all-inclusive one involving farmers, scientists, civil society and other interested Kenyans.

Scientists and MPs have not told the country who sponsored both the drafting process and the trip the MPs took to South Africa in May, and how all these activities fit in the ongoing developments fit in with Kenya's seed market.

It is of utmost importance that we treat the Biosafety Bill with the seriousness it deserves. I am not saying everything in the Bill is awful. For one, it introduces the National Biosafety Authority, charging it with a host of regulative responsibilities. It also sets up a biosafety committee to be peopled by some of the best scientific brains in the country.

But it is fashioned as if the question of whether or not the country ought to embrace GM foods is no longer a consideration. Further, it is silent on such biosafety issues as how to handle outbreaks of viruses leading to the foot-and-mouth disease or bird flu that have recently led to total annihilation of millions of cattle and chicken in Europe, Asia and elsewhere.

It is also silent on how to deal with the safety of imported pharmaceutical products, or on whether the National Biosafety Authority ought to investigate the safety of food and seed aid to Kenya.

Lastly, there is evidence that companies eager to manufacture vaccines and other drugs have been testing them in Africa. Although this has proved disastrous, the Bill offers no solution.

This is dangerous. The Nigerian government has taken Pfizer, one of the world's largest pharmaceutical companies, to court over the deaths of an unspecified number of children following the 1996 trials of Trovan, an unapproved anti-meningitis drug in the Kano area.

Who will save us from such evils if our MPs and scientists rush to embrace laws that are not suited to our welfare?

*John Mbaria writes on the environment for The EastAfrican.

Article Categories

AGRA agribusiness agrochemicals agroforestry aid Algeria aloe vera Angola aquaculture banana barley beans beef bees Benin biodiesel biodiversity biof biofuel biosafety biotechnology Botswana Brazil Burkina Faso Burundi CAADP Cameroon capacity building cashew cassava cattle Central African Republic cereals certification CGIAR Chad China CIMMYT climate change cocoa coffee COMESA commercial farming Congo Republic conservation agriculture cotton cow pea dairy desertification development disease diversification DRCongo drought ECOWAS Egypt Equatorial Guinea Ethiopia EU EUREPGAP events/meetings expo exports fa fair trade FAO fertilizer finance fisheries floods flowers food security fruit Gabon Gambia gender issues Ghana GM crops grain green revolution groundnuts Guinea Bissau Guinea Conakry HIV/AIDS honey hoodia horticulture hydroponics ICIPE ICRAF ICRISAT IFAD IITA imports India infrastructure innovation inputs investment irrigation Ivory Coast jatropha kenaf keny Kenya khat land deals land management land reform Lesotho Liberia Libya livestock macadamia Madagascar maiz maize Malawi Mali mango marijuana markets Mauritania Mauritius mechanization millet Morocco Mozambique mushroom Namibia NEPAD Niger Nigeria organic agriculture palm oil pastoralism pea pest control pesticides pineapple plantain policy issues potato poultry processing productivity Project pyrethrum rai rain reforestation research rice rivers rubber Rwanda SADC Sao Tome and Principe seed seeds Senegal sesame Seychelles shea butter Sierra Leone sisal soil erosion soil fertility Somalia sorghum South Africa South Sudan Southern Africa spices standards subsidies Sudan sugar sugar cane sustainable farming Swaziland sweet potato Tanzania tariffs tea tef tobacco Togo tomato trade training Tunisia Uganda UNCTAD urban farming value addition value-addition vanilla vegetables water management weeds West Africa wheat World Bank WTO yam Zambia Zanzibar zero tillage Zimbabwe

  © 2007 Africa News Network design by Ourblogtemplates.com

Back to TOP