Present The Facts On GMOs [opinion]

Genetically modified organisms (GMO). Why do those three words strike fear in the hearts of some consumers? We know those fears are not founded. I have listened to researchers who have said the technology
is safe. In fact, genetic modification has  been widely used throughout agriculture for more than 15 years.

So how do we get the message to consumers that using this technology is not only safe, it is necessary? How do we explain its advantages?

For you, the potential benefits are fewer applications of pesticides (which will save you money), an increase in yield, and better quality produce that will command a higher price.

Rosemary Gordon

Rosemary Gordon

For the consumer, however, the benefits aren’t the same. Plus, those opposing GMOs have been very vocal, bending the collective ear of the consuming public.

Top Articles
A New Biopesticide in the Making To Fight Spotted Wing Drosophila

It’s our turn now. We need to have our voices heard. While at the Great Lakes Fruit, Vegetable & Farm Market Expo in Grand Rapids, MI, last month, I had an opportunity to listen to Michele Payn-Knoper, who has worked with farmers in more than 25 countries and founded the weekly online Twitter conversations, AgChat and FoodChat. Payn-Knoper’s presentation focused on how to be the voice of agriculture and tell your story. One thing she said that really stuck with me is when discussing ag with consumers, avoid using farm lingo. Authenticity and language really matter, she said.

So, how do we begin? As an industry, we need to present a united front, and instead of using words such as “silencing a gene” or other scientific and farm terms, let’s focus on the consumer benefits and move away from the negativity and misinformation that surrounds this topic.

If we take the advice of Payn-Knoper, we will go to consumers and let them know that this technology is safe and will lead to higher quality fresh produce.

If we don’t take this opportunity and explain the need for GMOs, the result may be the elimination of an important tool. For example, the technology may help citrus growers fight HLB (Huanglongbing), which has been a huge issue the last few years. We certainly don’t want to doom an entire industry based on unfounded fears.

To help make sure that doesn’t happen, this year American Vegetable Grower will be leading a discussion on the topic, providing details about the safety of GMOs and information on the facts and myths surrounding the technology. We will also point out why genetically modified crops are sustainable, and why implementing this technology is the responsible thing to do.

Stay tuned for more details in the coming months.

0

Leave a Reply

Avatar for Matt Matt says:

“As an industry, we need to present a united front.” This assumes that all of the agricultural producers agree on the GMO topic, which we do not. In fact their are more opportunities for profit in the Organic and Natural segments than the conventional segment. Organic industry growth has been steady every year for the past two decades. It has outpaced the conventional industry in profits for about the same time. Almost 80% of the American public now buys at least one Organic item weekly.

GMO’s, which for most people means transgenic modification of an organism or genetic manipulation of an organism that could not be accomplished using sexual reproduction. Technically, transferring genetic material from a radish to broccoli (CMS traits) is GMO technology that is banned everywhere in organics except the US. In any event, consumers view GMOs with Monsanto and other big seed breeder who have tainted track records when it comes to public health (DDT, Agent Organge, etc.), . This is one big reason why people will dismiss GMOs just due to their association with Monsanto.

GMOs are NOT necessary for our industry to survive or be profitable. They are NOT needed to feed a hungry world (EVERY test I have seen will show conventional crops will outperform their GMO counterparts if proper cultural practices are adhered to.). The only people who benefit from GMOs are the breeders. Even the farmer pays more in technology fees. We spray more Herbicide now that at any time in the history of the planet due to GMOs. Is that a good thing? BT toxins are present in almost all of the corn based products in the US not to mention being washed into our streams, rivers and lakes from crop matter left on fields. So while we might spray fewer pesticides the overall ecological burden is NOT improved and we are consuming MORE pesticides in the form of GMOs that we have at any time in human history.

The future of Biotechnology will be in marker based selection used in breeding, not in transgenic modification of organisms. The first works with nature to determine IF a trait can be transferred natural, and then guiding that traits transfer naturally (Selecting only those children that have the necessary traits transferred by testing their DNA and protein markers and selecting them for improvement). This technology is already being ramped up and used by almost all seed breeders.

I am sure that MANY of your readers will disagree with your assumption, I do! Many of us will continue to champion GMO free, responsible, locally produced produce. It is what our markets want. It is where the money is. Why would I want to spend my time and energy producing a crop that most of my consumers have a negative perception of when I can produce one they want AND get a premium for it?