Should there be any concern towards GE crops?

Arguments made in “The likelihood of pollen from GE cotton causing harm to the environment is about as likely as a poodle escaping into the wild” (11 November 2010) article by Pamela Ronald suggest many ideas about GE crops. The main idea stressed by Ronald is that GE crops are very unlikely to cause any harm to people or the environment and should be implemented whenever possible.

Ronald shares the idea that “developing-country farmers, scientists and other groups should continue to drive the process of application of GE technology in their own countries–and that priority needs to be a focus on the public good” (Ronald, 2010). In terms of support of this claim she gives “well-documented” examples but gives no detail or any studies done.

This article shows clear support of GE crops and little effort to research both sides of the argument. She makes comparisons of GE fruits to organic fruits but makes no attempt to support these ideas with any evidence or scientific research. Ronald supports GE crops such as golden rice, Bt corn, Bt cotton and other Bt crops.
Ronald lists many positive impacts of GE crops such as ”reduced insecticide use, a shift from toxic to more benign herbicides, fewer greenhouse gas emissions, reduced soil erosion, increased profit to small- and large-holder farmers, and enhanced farm-worker safety” (Ronald, 2010). She claims that there were 14 years of research and that there was no influence imposed by political or religious groups. There is no reference as to who did the study or studies that she claims to be true. I have seen no scientific evidence that GE crops are the appropriate solution for all situations.

Ronald disagrees with many people in that GE crops are still a variable in the future of world food production. She states that there is very little uncertainty in an unlikely event of problems with GE foods or contamination of non-GE crops. But many questions about allergies or sustainability towards the GE products have been raised by groups opposed to GE crops.

Claims of conventional ideas that world food production must increase considerably by 2030 are thrown into the article as facts but have no hint of evidence or support. In order to increase yields of crops the High yield varieties (HYV) of GE crops may be used to satisfy these increasing needs. There are many problems with these HYV strands of GE crops that could come from a sudden increase of production of crops. With the HYVs it is possible to get up to three crops in a season, but this high turn around rate could deplete the soils fertility three times faster. With the soil becoming less fertile, farmers would have to increase the amount of fertilizers used which would create many environmental problems not to mention the added cost of the fertilizers. The increased crop yield would mean an increase in water usage which could very well deplete the resource in some drier areas of the world.

The lack of support in Ronald’s claims leads me to believe that she found information on GE crops that satisfied her favourable views of GE crops. This was not well supported by her or any research of proven studies to support her ideas.