Genetically Modified Organism (GMO) is a byproduct of biotechnology. In medicine, biotechnology existed many centuries ago as an innovation. Hitherto, biotechnology was a non-issue or, like any other technological breakthrough, until it widened its scope to include the latest globally controversial product: a genetically modified organism, GMO, or transgenic organism. This recent status brought biotechnology to its contemporary limelight with attendant hype and sensationalism and shot it to the global footing of a multilateral agenda. The first stage of biotechnology is breeding crops or animals. Traditionally, breeding plants and animals aim to tailor the plant or animal for a particular character or trait improvement. For example, a new crop variety might be bred for drought tolerance or disease resistance.
Traditional breeding involves using germplasm from the pool of ancestors with desirable traits of interest and crossing them with each other to make the progeny’s output carry through heritability and have the favorable traits from both parents. Since the progenies carry half-desired and undesired hereditary characteristics from the parents, they will be passed on. It takes several breeding cycles (backcrossing) to eliminate the undesired traits and build on the desired traits. This certainly takes time. The final new plant variety or breed of animal, after several years of selection, will have the desired characteristics. Thanks to Genetic engineering, which offers the means to breed crops with sexual incompatibility barriers. It also makes possible the transfer of genes within entirely unrelated organisms, such as bacteria, to plants. This cutting–edge technology allows scientists to silence genes in viruses, bacteria, or pests that attack plants or animals, thereby retarding growth and productivity or even ultimately killing such organisms. While this incredible innovation can advance the cause of human progress, it can potentially affect humanity adversely, which causes people to be concerned.
Those manipulating a gene from one organism to another can also introduce a harmful gene for ulterior motives. Nothing stops an insane from using this novel technology as biological warfare to wipe out certain people. The world must protect itself from this murderous insanity, not by shying away from using the technology but by adopting a foolproof strategy for the safe utilization of the technology. In line with this thinking, a biosafety international agreement called “Cartagena Protocol” was signed by 173 United Nations member countries to address the safe transfer, handling, and use of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) and their products. Thus, all GMO products in countries with a Biosafety law go through a series of stringent food toxicity and environmental safety tests that include assessment of homology to known allergens and toxins of the target genes, protein digestibility, acute oral gavage study toxicity (in mice), compositional analysis for unintended effects on carbohydrate, protein, and minerals, gene flow studies, and impact on non-target insects, etc., before they can be used commercially for food or feed.
Safety was the main reason for adopting the Cartagena Protocol. Nigeria, along with other countries that signed the protocol, was told to domesticate it for the sound protection of its citizens. The government has an absolute and unflinching responsibility to protect people against food poisoning, contamination, and adulteration. It is against this background that the question of Tela Maize’s safety is posed.
ALSO READ [VIEWPOINT] What’s the noise about GMO foods in Nigeria? By Prof. Ndubuisi Ekekwe
Tela maize is a product of intense collaborative research between Bayer Crop Science, Isando, South Africa, the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), AATF, Nairobi, Kenya, and Institute for Agricultural Research (IAR), Ahmadu Bello University Zaria. Scientists in IAR, led by Prof Rabiu Adamu, the Principal Investigator of Tela maize, had long ago identified key challenges against maize production in Nigeria. These are fall armyworm, stem borer, leaf blight, and drought, which cause considerable maize yield losses and become very expensive to control in addition to environmental degradation. Bayer, a global enterprise with core competencies in genetic engineering for healthcare and agriculture, discovered the Tela’s introgression to resist fall armyworm worm and stem borers.
CIMMYT and IAR bred the hybrids, and IAR’s main role was hybrid characterization and adaptive research. The four TELA Maize varieties were released as Hybrids. The varieties are SAMMAZ 75T, SAMMAZ 74B, SAMMAZ 73T, and SAMMAZ 72T, with potential yields of between 10 tons per hectare to 10.7 tons per hectare against the normal hybrid maize of 8 tons per hectare and five times higher than the 1.8 tons per hectare national average yield of maize using traditional seeds. The combined tremendous yield increase and resistivity to the common maize diseases and pests – Tolerant to maize streak virus, rust, leaf blight, and curvularia leaf spot make the technology irresistible to farmers in Nigeria with the potential of tripling their productivity while saving the cost of pesticides. Still, how safe is the consumption of Tela maize?
The PI of Tela Maize, Professor Adamu, said, “No harmful elements were introduced as confirmed by the technology regulator NBMA in Nigeria. The GMO Maize does not harm the soil. We have grown repeatedly in our research fields for more than five years and farmers field for more than three with no effect.” He added, “We have submitted a food dossier on the compositional analysis and did not differ in any elements found in the conventional hybrids. Also, the allergenic tests that were conducted came out negative. Local people and our research have made various food recipes from it and consumed them without any allergenic reaction.”
Furthermore, he said, “The TELA Maize has passed all the known International and National Biosafety regulations. It has grown for more than ten years in several American and African countries. I, myself, have been consuming it.” This is from the horse’s mouth; no sane person like Prof. Adamu could consume poisonous food knowingly. Furthermore, NBMA’s Boss, Dr. Ebegba, stated that the application for the maize, which was modified for insect resistance and drought tolerance, was rigorously examined by two committees, after which their recommendations were made to the Agency. He said proper risk assessment and analysis were carried and the NBMA also carried out its internal review to ensure that the product was safe for human health and the environment before the permit was granted.
Similarly, the NBMA constituted two committees—the National Biosafety Committee and the National Biosafety Technical Subcommittee—to conduct an in-depth review of Tela Maize’s application. They did it and submitted their recommendations to the Agency for approval. The report presented the product’s nutritional composition and risk assessment, especially regarding the maize’s environmental exposure. There was no negative impact on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity.
Still, there were public outcries of blue murder- Executive Director of HOMEF, Nnimmo Bassey, “It is unacceptable that in the name of food sufficiency, the country is exposing its citizens to products of risky technologies without adequate, independent and long-term assessment on their impacts on human and environmental health. He further claimed, “So far, GMOs have been linked to cancers, diseases, allergies, and all sorts of health challenges due to environmental implications because of their dependency on toxic pesticides and the destruction of biodiversity and nutritional diversity. We are also concerned that there is no way to label or inform our farmers that they are planting GMO maize. To deny Nigerians the right of choice is highly objectionable and wicked.”
GMOs are a product of science and technology. They may not be entirely risk-free, but most of the associated adversities are unproven. Many of us, knowingly or unknowingly, continue to consume GMO foods, especially those of us traveling overseas.
Last note: Nigeria is blessed with brilliant scientists who could excel in genetic engineering, develop GMO crops, and help Africa benefit from this edge-cutting technology. However, they need financial backing as the cost of research and development of the GMO crop averages 13 years and $130 million of unrelenting work from the laboratory to the dining table. Can Tinubu’s administration support this technological breakthrough?
