The safety of Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) has been controversial for many years. Critics believe GMOs are unsafe and could have adverse health effects, while others argue they are safe and can help ensure greater global food security.
The recent approval of 14 genetically modified organisms (GMOs) by Ghana’s National Biosafety Authority (NBA) has reignited the debate and controversy in Ghana.
While there have been concerns about potential health risks, environmental impact, and economic consequences for local farmers, the West Africa Centre for Crop Improvement (WACCI) argues in favour of GMOs as a solution to the continent’s food and nutrition insecurity challenges.
Critics of GMOs argue that there is not enough long-term research on the health effects of consuming GMOs and that further studies should be conducted to fully understand the potential risks. Some also raise concerns about the environmental impact of GMOs, such as the potential for cross-contamination with non-GMO crops and the development of superweeds and superbugs resistant to GMO crops.
Amidst the cacophony of voices and clash of perspectives, it is imperative to understand the facts and dispel any misconceptions.
History of GMOs
According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), over 90% of crops harvested in the U.S. have been genetically modified. The story of GMOs starts in the 1930s when Russian scientist Andrei Nikolaevitch Belozersky discovered DNA.
From then, nothing significant happened for the next forty years until the early 1970s, when geneticist Stanley Cohen and biochemist Herbert Boyer worked together to create the very first man-made DNA, which was given the name rDNA.
Then, in the 1990s, GMO foods were put on the shelves of grocery stores across America, and soon to follow was a required label that shows which foods contain GMOs. Today, the majority of crops in the U.S. are genetically modified, and people are pushing to lower that number. More info about the rise in GMO popularity can be found here.
Civil Society Actions Against Approval of GMOs in Ghana
Food Sovereignty Ghana, on April 16, 2024, joined forces with 28 other civil society organisations to call upon citizens to oppose the National Biosafety Authority’s (NBA) recent approval of 14 genetically modified organisms (GMOs).
The coalition expressed concerns regarding the potential health risks, environmental ramifications, and economic implications for Ghanaian farmers who predominantly cultivate organic crops.
Mr Edwin Baffour, the Communications Director of FSG, said a nationwide education campaign was needed before integrating GMOs into the food system.
In a joint statement signed by various civil society organisations, including PFAG, GAWU, CIKOD, ActionAid Ghana, Rastafari Council of Ghana (RCG), and the Vegetarian Association of Ghana, Mr Baffour explained that Ghanaians needed to comprehend the potential consequences of consuming GMO foods.
“We feel the people do not deserve to be eating GMOs, regardless of whether it is grown in Ghana or imported,” stated Mr Baffour, stressing the need for transparency in the approval process.
The coalition’s demands include the NBA’s disclosure of comprehensive details of the approval process and engagement with the public in discussions on GMOs.
Mr Baffour urged the Authority to prioritise public participation in food sovereignty and agricultural policies.
Peasant Farmers pick sides
On April 10, the Peasant Farmers Association of Ghana (PFAG) expressed disappointment and concern over what they saw as a capitulation to the interests of multinational seed corporations. They pointed out that the commercialisation of GMOs primarily benefits companies like Bayer, Corteva, Syngenta, and Group Limagrain, which wield considerable power in the global seed market.
PFAG’s fears may not be unfounded. By ceding control of seed production to multinational corporations, the concern is that Ghana risks compromising its food sovereignty and public health. According to the peasant farmers, this approval sets a dangerous precedent, marking the beginning of the erosion of Ghana’s autonomy over its agricultural systems.
The associations say that the lessons from the recent global crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine conflict, should serve as stark reminders of the importance of maintaining control over national production systems.
National Biosafety Authority confirms safety, but…
The National Biosafety Authority (NBA) has refuted claims suggesting these products are intended for cultivation.
Instead, it explained in a statement that they have been designated for direct use as food, feed, or processing, emphasising their safety for consumption.
According to the NBA, the assessment revealed no adverse findings and no demonstrable history of biosafety concerns.
“Under Section 13 of the Biosafety Act, 2011 (Act 831) and Regulation 15 of the Biosafety (Management of Biotechnology) Regulations, 2019 (LI 2383), the NBA conducted thorough evaluations and risk assessments before approval. These processes adhered to established procedures and international best practices, ensuring that approved GM products meet stringent safety standards.”
Reputable entities such as Bayer West-Central Africa S.A. and Syngenta South Africa submitted the products in question, along with a Bt Cowpea from the Savanna Agricultural Research Institute (SARI).
Importantly, the NBA requires any entity seeking to import these approved products to obtain a permit, ensuring regulatory oversight and accountability.
The belief of Ghanaian scientists
Professor Eric Danquah, the Founding Director of the West Africa Centre for Crop Improvement (WACCI) at the University of Ghana, advocates cultivating and using genetically modified crops as a viable solution to the pressing issues of food and nutrition insecurity.
In May 2022, Prof Danquah spoke at a communication workshop in Accra and said,
“It’s been 27 years since the first commercial GMOs were released, and I am not aware of a single credible food/feed problem on the safety of GMOs. On the contrary, there is a very strong scientific consensus globally on GMOs just as scientists are on climate change.”
Citing a plethora of reputable scientific organisations, including the World Health Organization, the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) of the United Nations, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Prof Danquah underscored the wealth of official scientific reports attesting to the safety and benefits of GMOs.
He explained that his confidence in GMOs stemmed from decades of immersion in the science behind the technology, dating back to his training at Cambridge University in 1986.
“As a properly trained scientist and a parent, the safety of these products is of concern. I want to be trusted, and I dream about the health of the next generation and generations yet unborn,” Prof Danquah affirmed. “I shall not compromise my conscience by speaking so confidently about this subject if I do not understand the issues at stake.”
What is WHO saying?
According to the World Health Organization (WHO), GMOs are considered safe for consumption. The organisation states they are rigorously tested and regulated to ensure their safety for human consumption and the environment.
Overall, the safety or otherwise of GMOs remains a complex issue that scientists, policymakers, and the general public are still debating. While evidence suggests that GMOs are safe for consumption, more research may be needed to fully understand their long-term effects on human health and the environment. In the meantime, consumers need to stay informed and make their own decisions about whether or not to consume GMO products.
Our fellow produced this media literacy as part of the requirements of the DUBAWA 2024 Kwame KariKari Fellowship in partnership with Asaase Radio, Ghana.
