激情快播

The subject is touchy, to put it mildly. It stokes trepidation聽among writers and the foremost experts on the subject. And聽so, to introduce the topic of this story, we leave it to a rideshare聽driver: Anthony. He鈥檚 impartial, the product of an Italian聽upbringing and an American education. During a 10-minute聽ride he talks about Olympic sports, World War II, family, and the聽importance of patience when cooking pasta and eating it.

鈥淚n general, people in Europe are healthier because they eat聽slower,鈥� Anthony says, right before he drops the three-letter聽bomb. 鈥淭hey also don鈥檛 eat GMOs.鈥�

There. The driver said it first. GMOs. Genetically modified聽organisms. He admits he doesn鈥檛 know much about them,聽only that he鈥檚 heard they鈥檙e unhealthy. It鈥檚 an opening for his聽passenger.

鈥淚鈥檝e heard the same things,鈥� the passenger says. 鈥淏ut I鈥檝e聽heard other perspectives, too. Some say GMOs might be an聽answer for world hunger.鈥�

Anthony listens intently. The passenger asks what he thinks聽of the next-level science of clustered regularly interspaced short聽palindromic repeats.

鈥淣ever heard of it,鈥� Anthony says.

鈥淚t鈥檚 CRISPR. Have you heard of CRISPR?鈥澛爐he passenger says.

鈥淥h, that,鈥� Anthony says. 鈥淚t sounds scary,聽but I need to learn more.鈥�

We should be able to have open聽conversations like this outside Anthony鈥檚聽Camry, but the very mentions of GMOs聽and CRISPR often stir up emotions and聽resistance.

鈥淚t鈥檚 a complex topic,鈥� says Houman Sadri,聽associate professor of political science and聽founder of the 激情快播 Model United Nations聽program. He has an interesting family聽background and an open mind. 鈥淭he more聽I learn about GMOs and food, the more聽questions I have.鈥�

The questions often pivot to politics,聽ethics and the environment. While those are聽important discussions, something crucial is聽often missing from the discussion: science.聽If we鈥檙e to get anywhere meaningful, that鈥檚聽where this conversation needs to turn.

Mixing Science with Food

Take a breath, and digest this basic truth:聽Science has been at the heart of food聽production for as long as plants have grown聽from the ground. As plant biologists like to聽say, 鈥淪cience doesn鈥檛 make food less natural.鈥�

Food scientists are no more nefarious than聽people who鈥檝e been genetically enhancing聽plants on farms and in backyards without聽realizing it. If a vine produced good fruit,聽you鈥檇 remove the poor performers and聽surround the productive vine with more聽vines to phase in the best family traits. The聽banana is an oft-cited example. Its ancestors聽were green, hard and had to be cooked 鈥斅燽asically, plantains. A Jamaican farmer came聽upon yellow bananas growing on his land聽in the early 1800s. He found them sweet聽and easy to peel, so he turned an accidental聽mutant into a field of what we now eat by the聽billions worldwide.

Simply put, plants evolve. With bananas,聽it happened over time. Crossbreeding (a聽sweet orange + a pomelo = grapefruit)聽speeds up the process. Gene modification聽(nonbrowning apples) speeds it up聽even more. Now imagine using genetic聽modification for something more聽significant than developing bizarre fruits聽鈥� like, human survival.

鈥淲ith science, we can mine for聽meaningful information in the DNA聽and use it to increase yields with fewer聽external inputs,鈥� says 激情快播 Associate聽Professor of Biology Chase Mason.

Mason grew up in a small town聽surrounded by farms and classmates聽who qualified for reduced-cost lunches.聽He thinks about those students when he聽walks through a garden full of sunflowers聽that he calls 鈥渟ilent aliens.鈥� While聽he doesn鈥檛 conduct GMO or CRISPR聽research, he does use the flowers to聽explore the secrets of why they鈥檙e able聽to grow in ecosystems as diverse as sand聽dunes, wetlands and mountain forests.聽He might find tucked into their DNA a聽defense mechanism they鈥檝e developed to聽ward off beetles or fungi. Theoretically,聽if someone could replicate those聽mechanisms in food-bearing plants, then聽just think of the outcomes: Plants could聽produce through droughts, floods, climate聽change and armies of insects 鈥� without聽the need for irrigation or pesticides.

鈥淏ut you couldn鈥檛 crossbreed those聽traits from sunflowers to a different聽crop, like peppers,鈥� Mason says. 鈥淥ne聽would need to take the GMO or CRISPR聽approach.鈥�

Simply put, the GMO approach is聽adding or removing a gene to increase聽the likelihood of certain characteristics,聽like pest resistance, drought resilience聽or flavor. The CRISPR approach is more聽precise, where changing a single letter聽in the genetic code all but guarantees a聽desired result in a short amount of time.

One adjustment could allow an entire聽crop to survive an otherwise deadly聽disease.

Some plants have done this on their聽own. Lemons developed limonoids,聽which produce their strong scent as a聽mechanism to deter insects. Coffee beans聽use caffeine as an internal insecticide.

We can wait for plants to figure out聽their own schemes, perhaps for millennia,聽if at all. Or we can use the science that聽quite literally bears fruit right away.

Seed of Doubt

Sadri鈥檚 family moved around the world聽before settling in the U.S. in the 1970s. His聽father was an agricultural engineer for聽the Food and Agriculture Organization, a聽specialized agency of the United Nations聽tasked with providing member states聽with technical agricultural assistance to聽increase food production and decrease聽hunger.

鈥淲e had discussions about genetic聽engineering during family meals long聽before GMOs were commercialized in聽the 1990s,鈥� Sadri says. 鈥淢y father always聽said the human body is a biological聽machine and to treat it well. At the聽time, he worried about the unexpected聽consequences of GMOs. He was part聽of the generation of scientists who聽discovered that the pesticide DDT didn鈥檛聽break down in nature, which led to it聽being banned. He knew the possibilities聽with GMO technology, but he was divided聽because there hadn鈥檛 been enough lengthy聽studies on the health and environmental聽ramifications.鈥�

It didn鈥檛 help when genetically聽engineered plant food got off to a rough聽public start. The Flavr Savr tomato came聽to stores in 1994, with an extra gene聽that promised to inhibit rotting. The聽tomato disappeared three years later,聽reportedly because of high production聽and distribution costs. The FDA said the聽Flavr Savr posed no health danger and聽had the same nutritional content as a聽conventional tomato. The demand for the聽Flavor Savr was high, too. But its demise聽over basic economics opened the door for聽GMO pessimists to shape perceptions.

An English professor wrote a letter聽to The New York Times about his fear of聽鈥淔rankenfood,鈥� a term that spread. At a聽time when most people remained neutral聽in the GMO debate, a plant biologist in聽Britain claimed on national radio that聽genetically modified potatoes damaged聽the immune systems of rats. The research聽institute where he did his work suspended聽him for what they considered misleading聽statements, but a stigma had become聽rooted.

The dissent isn鈥檛 always peaceful. In聽September 2000, more than two dozen聽Greenpeace activists went into the聽countryside of Norfolk, England, and聽trampled, pulled and hacked a 15-acre聽field of genetically modified corn before聽the landowner鈥檚 family could stop them.

Self-proclaimed 鈥淕MO experts鈥� with聽no advanced education in science have聽grown followings by stimulating fear with聽books and documentaries. Consumers聽began to look for foods with 鈥渘o-GMO聽ingredients,鈥� and entire stores made it聽part of their mantra.

We can wait for plants to figure out聽their own schemes, perhaps for millennia,聽if at all. Or we can use the science that聽quite literally bears fruit right away.

With far less publicity, thousands of聽studies have been released showing no聽health risks from genetically engineered聽plant foods. The research has come聽from universities, the World Health聽Organization, the United Nations, the U.S.聽Food and Drug Administration (FDA),聽and the National Academies of Sciences,聽Engineering, and Medicine. The FDA聽is one of three agencies that regulate聽GMOs in the U.S. The EPA explores聽environmental impacts, the Department聽of Agriculture ensures GMO plants aren鈥檛聽harmful to other plants, and the FDA聽concludes if they鈥檙e safe to eat.

鈥淏ut remember,鈥� Sadri says, 鈥渢he U.S.聽in general advocates for biotechnology.聽In contrast, Europeans approach聽biotechnology with skepticism.鈥�

鈥淲hen you start from a position driven聽by something other than evidence, then no amount聽of evidence will change a person鈥檚 mind.鈥�

In 2015, each of the 27 countries in聽the European Union were allowed the聽option to ban or partially ban GMO聽crops. Nineteen countries chose to聽do so. Many scientists in Europe shut聽down their research programs because聽funding stopped and criticism of their聽work escalated. Farmers feared any聽connections with GMO studies would聽invite the destruction of their land and聽put their livelihoods at risk.

The science, in essence, became wary聽about being science.

鈥淲hen you start from a position driven聽by something other than evidence,鈥� says聽one plant researcher, 鈥渢hen no amount聽of evidence will change a person鈥檚 mind.聽Those opposed to GMOs would have聽looked at the science and come around聽by now.鈥�

If most farmers, scientists, regulators聽and those working to stem world hunger聽agree on the potential benefits of using聽GMOs and CRISPR, then where exactly is聽the strong opposition coming from?聽No one in this conversation is willing聽to guess.

---

---

Feeding Agendas

Agriculture and science have always聽worked hand in hand. Without the natural聽partnership, famines over the millennia聽could very well have wiped out the聽populations of entire continents. As one聽researcher points out, 鈥淧eople too easily聽forget what could have been.鈥�

Today we鈥檙e faced with 鈥渨hat could聽be.鈥� According to the U.N., between 702聽million and 828 million people globally聽face food insecurity, and the number of聽undernourished people is back on the聽rise. Worse, there鈥檚 only so much fertile聽land left to use. Forests have already聽become fields. Wetlands have become聽farmlands. Organic food growing has a聽nice aesthetic, but typically it requires聽more land and water to produce the same聽amount of food, and it鈥檚 vulnerable to聽climate extremes. For most consumers,聽especially those in the lower and middle聽income brackets, organic foods are also聽too expensive.

Another fact to consider: Organic food聽is a $61 billion industry. Its most vocal聽advocates are also the most open critics聽of GMO and CRISPR science. Some聽observers wonder, however, why they聽wouldn鈥檛 at least entertain conversations聽about technology that would allow聽farmers around the world to grow more聽nutritious foods on less land while聽using less fuel, less irrigation and fewer聽chemicals.

The U.S. Agency for International聽Development isn鈥檛 waiting for a public聽consensus. It鈥檚 already introduced聽genetically engineered staple crops聽in countries where food shortages are聽prevalent. Eggplant is now thriving聽in Bangladesh. Cassava, potatoes and聽black-eyed peas are reliable food sources聽in African nations.

Yet even those encouraging outcomes聽open more questions.

鈥淭here are a lot of players involved 鈥斅爂overnments, corporations and everyday聽citizens,鈥� Sadri says. 鈥淲hat are their聽motives?鈥�

From Farms to Whose Tables?

Beatriz Otero Jim茅nez doesn鈥檛 remember聽much of the sugarcane fields that once聽occupied so much of Puerto Rico鈥檚聽landscape. Her grandfather made a聽living from the cane harvests until聽companies moved production off island.聽Farming in general declined, and so did聽self-sustenance. Today, less than 15%聽of the food consumed in Puerto Rico is聽grown there.

鈥淚t concerns me,鈥� says Otero Jim茅nez,聽a postdoctoral scholar who teaches聽an honors seminar on food systems聽at 激情快播. 鈥淭he island is susceptible to聽a supply interruption, which could be聽catastrophic.鈥�

Otero Jim茅nez says there鈥檚 enough聽food being produced worldwide to meet聽the needs of the world population.聽She doesn鈥檛 question the science. She聽questions who controls it.

鈥淭he technology and the seeds聽developed from it are owned by a handful聽of companies,” Otero Jim茅nez says. “What鈥檚 their goal? Is it to聽make healthy food accessible to everyone?聽Is it to provide local farmers what they聽need to grow food locally? Or is it strictly聽to produce more cash crops for profit?鈥�

鈥淣ew technology should be available to聽all participants in the food chain, and not聽just corporations.鈥�

In the U.S. more than 90% of corn,聽soybeans and cotton are GMO crops.聽While grains account for most of our聽caloric needs, large-scale farms also reap聽government subsidies from the surplus聽that鈥檚 used for textiles, livestock feed, oils聽and ingredients to make processed foods.

鈥淭he technology doesn鈥檛 translate to聽better access to healthy food, like broccoli聽and squash,鈥� Otero Jim茅nez says. 鈥淟ike I聽said, we鈥檙e currently producing enough聽food. So why are people still hungry and聽getting chronically ill?”

Instead of pushing for GMOs to聽totally disappear, she鈥檇 like to see more聽transparency in the end game.

鈥淣ew technology should be available to聽all participants in the food chain, and not聽just corporations,鈥� Otero Jim茅nez says.聽鈥淩ight now, there are too many obstacles聽between the technology and the table.鈥�

Circling Back to the Garden

Even on cloudy days, a blossoming garden聽serves as a foreshadowing of bright.聽possibilities. A place where seeds of doubt聽are replaced by seeds of hope. Those seeds聽are in the hands of anyone with a massive聽field or a sliver of dirt. They鈥檙e distributed聽from Haines City, Florida, to Haiti, from聽Kansas to Kenya. From those seeds,聽healthy food grows with certainty. Pests聽and extreme weather are easy to combat.聽Every growing season is bountiful. Food聽insecurity around the world shrinks.聽Wetlands and forests expand.

In the U.S. more than 90% of corn,聽soybeans and cotton are GMO crops.

It鈥檚 a place where there鈥檚 a commingling聽of organic food, natural selection, GMOs聽and CRISPR.

鈥淲e can only get to a place like that聽with science,鈥� says one researcher.

Science begins with questions. So,聽let鈥檚 take a breath and end with two聽researchers, that if it were safe, would聽like to ask: Can we at least have truthful聽conversations? Let鈥檚 talk about organic聽foods, crossbreeding and GMOs. Because,聽really, what are we afraid of?