Fbae Logo
Home | | Support Us | Contact Us
Goals & Objectives Our Position False Propaganda Special Topics Important Publications Important Links Events news Biosafety
Fbae Header Home




Comments on Mr. Devinder Sharma's Article

T. M. Manjunath 6/23/2008
It is amusing to read the dramatic statement of Mr. Devender Sharma ("A world beyond GM crops," Deccan Herald, 20th June 2008) that biotechnologists and scientists were stunned to silence when he informed about growing crops without the use of GM seeds and chemical pesticides as they had never heard of it!! Mr. Sharma needs to grow up! The concept of Integrated Pest Management (IPM), emphasizing the use of biological control and other non-chemical and eco-friendly methods with minimum or no use of chemical pesticides, has been in vogue since the early 1960s and it has been strongly supported by Govt of India. Some of us have championed the cause of IPM from the early years and developed the IPM strategies for several crops. We know its strength and limitations. It
may be new to Mr. Sharma, but there is a world beyond himself!
Mr. Devendra Sharma has claimed that he has a traditional technology that automatically takes care of the dreaded insect pests and diseases, and that millions of farmers in almost all the districts of Andhra Pradesh, in an area extending to 7 million hectares, were able to get bumper harvests without the use of any modern technology like GM seeds or chemical pesticides and that the area under non-pesticides management (NPM) is likely to go up to 12 million hectares this year, and reach a
staggering 25 million hectares in a couple of years from now. Excellent! If he has such a wonderful natural technology that can keep the crops free of pests and diseases, sustain crop health and guarantee bumper harvests, who would not welcome it? We certainly do as selectively quoted by him, but he seems to have missed the hidden challenge! Our farmers are willing to accept any technology that is beneficial to them as demonstrated by the overwhelming adoption of Bt-cotton. If Mr. Sharma's technology is more effective and beneficial, they will jump at it and he will be their Pied Piper. What is he waiting for? If he is so confident, let him take up contract farming on a huge scale, assuring
profit for farmers as well as for himself. Since he is so critical of Bt-cotton, I suggest that he takes up cotton crop, to start with, to prove the efficacy of his own method to control bollworms and other
pests. This will be a more productive effort than indulging in condemning Green Revolution, agricultural scientists, policy makers, regulatory system, GM technology, biotech companies, chemical pesticides and what not! Perhaps this exercise will also enable to learn the difference between creating and criticizing!

Devinder Sharma Wrote:

Sustainable Agriculture: A World Beyond GM Crops

Deccan Herald

Indian scientists do not promote sustainable technologies because they are disconnected from the farming community.

There was a stunned silence. For a few minutes they didn’t know how to react. They stared blankly at me, not many of them believing my words. It looked as if the biotechnologists and scientists who do not fail to swear in the name of genetically modified (GM) crops at the drop of a hat were for a change caught on the wrong foot. They had in fact never heard of it.

Growing crops without the use of GM seeds and chemical pesticides and yet getting a bountiful harvest is something agricultural scientists have never been taught to believe. When I told a recently concluded National Summit on GM crops, organised at the Rajiv Gandhi Centre for Biotechnology at Thiruvanthapuram, Kerala, that if there is an alternative and sustainable way of reaping a plentiful harvest, wherein millions of small farmers cultivate a large number of crops without GM crops and chemical pesticides, they accused me of romanticising subsistence agriculture.

When told that millions of farmers in almost all the districts of Andhra Pradesh, in an area extending to 7 million hectares, were actually following sustainable farming systems that automatically takes control of dreaded insect pests and diseases, and does not result in any productivity fall, they began to see the point I was trying to make.

And when I said that the area under non-pesticides management (NPM) is likely to go up to 12 million hectares this year, and reach a staggering 25 million hectares in a couple of years from now, the resistance they were trying to offer broke down.

Dr P Ananda Kumar, director at the Plant Biotechnology Centre, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, was the first to break the ice. He said that if what I had narrated was correct he was willing to forgo GM crop research and work along with these farmers. Saying that “if a patient is healthy, there is no need for any medication”, Dr T M Manjunath, formerly director of research with the seed multinational Monsanto, which is on the forefront of introducing GM crops, also agreed. Several other scientists also came forward to promote such healthy farming systems.

What becomes abundantly clear is that those who talk of the immense potential of GM crops are not even aware that the same objectives are being achieved without harming the environment and playing havoc with human, animal and plant health. If all what the GM crops assure by way of diseases and pest control (as of now) can be insured by low-external input sustainable agricultural practices (LEISA) that is being practiced by several million farmers not only in AP but throughout the country, why should scientists not accept it as an economically viable and environmentally sustainable option?

Technology does not merely come as a branded product. If Monsanto’s Bt-cotton is a technology, so are the time-tested traditional technologies that farmers have perfected over the years. Why cannot scientists promote safe, reliable, sustainable and healthy technologies?

Just because these traditional technologies do not come with project funding and foreign travel does not mean that these have to be ignored. Already the technologies pioneered by the green revolution have poisoned the land, the underground water and contaminated the environment to such unsustainable levels that they are difficult to resurrect. How much more does modern science intends to pollute the environment and the human body?

It is in this context that the ongoing effort to seek stake-holders’ approval for a single-window clearance for GM crops, in the form of a National Biotechnology Regulatory Authority (NBRA), assumes significance. The entire exercise is being conducted by the Biotechnology Consortium, which is an association of the biotechnology industry. The invitees for these stake-holders dialogue are mainly from the industry and from amongst the plant biotechnologists. For the sake of justifying diverse opinion, a few NGOs and farmers are invited.

There is no need to conduct such stake-holder dialogues when the outcome of the entire exercise is known. Already the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC), the apex body for approving and regulating GM crops, is over-laden with pro-biotechnology scientists that the entire exercise has turned into a farce. The GEAC is in fact a rubber stamp for the biotechnology industry. The proposed NBRA is essentially “of the biotechnology industry, by the biotechnology industry and for the biotechnology industry.”

Isn’t it strange that while there is so much excitement and interest among the scientific community in India to provide a single-window clearance to one of the riskiest technologies that mankind has ever evolved, the US – the Mecca for GM crops – has set up three regulatory bodies?

Even then, there are questions being asked about the credibility of the US regulatory process. Why does India on the other hand want to hasten the process of introduction of GM crops and foods at a time when the majority world is questioning its safety?  

The fundamental question still remains. Why don’t Indian scientists promote sustainable technologies and ecologically viable farming systems instead? The answer is simple. Over the years, they have disconnected themselves from the farming community.

They are unaware of a silent revolution that is sweeping the country. If only the science and technology minister, Kapil Sibal, were to promote the Andhra Pradesh model of NPM cultivation instead of blindly pushing for GM crops, India could easily turn into a global model for sustainable agriculture and healthy living. 


Related News Articles

Bt-corn does not harm biodiversity

Countering insect resistance with designer Bt toxins

ICGEB receives grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to strengthen and expand biosafety systems in sub-Saharan Africa

Policy on the transfer of Genetically Improved Farmed Tilapia (GIFT) from Asia to Africa by the WorldFish Center

Rules on marketing GM produce face review

EU ministers to debate Bayer's GM cotton, soybeans

EU's legal labyrinth of GMO legislation


The latest issue of Plant Physiology (July 2008; Volume 147, Issue 3) has a special section on next generation of biotech crops especially on nutritional improvement.  These papers can
be downloaded free!

Influence of Transgenosis on the Plant-Insect- Relationships, in Particular on Chemically       Mediated Interactions

Effect of Transgenes Conferring Enhanced Pathogen Resistance on the Interaction with Symbiotic        Fungi in Rice

Impact on the Soil Ecosystem through Natural and Genetically Engineered Organisms:
      Effects, Methods and Definition of Damage as Contribution to Risk Assessment

The Decomposition of Bt-Corn on the Fields and its Impact on Earthworms and on other        Macroorganisms in the Soil

Environmental Post-market Monitoring of Bt-maize:
       Approaches to Detect Potential Effects on Butterflies and Natural Enemies

Columns by Dan Gardner

Against the Grains: 'The Terminator Hoax '

Decisions taken in the 84th Meeting of the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee

Brazilian Health Biotech: Fostering Crosstalk Between Public and Private Sectors

Biotechnology Related Article Appeared on 'Samyukta Karnataka' ( Regional Language )
June 12, 2008.

Nothing Left to the Imagination

The Politics of GM Food
Kirit S Javali

Hi-tech seed factories: Sowing Seeds of Success

"Indian Seed Industry is Well Placed to Serve Both Domestic and International Markets"
Dr MK Sharma,
Managing Director,
Mahyco Monsanto

"If we Facilitate Seed Industry, we Facilitate Growth in Agriculture"
Dr Govind Garg,
Krishidhan Seeds

Metagenomics: Window to the Microbial Universe

Few Checks to Prevent Entry of GM Food

Gene Campaign Criticises India’s ‘Silence’ at Global Bio-Safety Meet

An Enforceable International Compact for Infectious Diseases

"Indian Science in Genomics has been Able to Place Itself on the Global Map"

Indian Gene Decoded

The Development of RNAi as a Therapeutic Strategy

FAO E-Conference on Biotechnologies and Water Scarcity

Genetic Landscape

Biotechnology in Food and Agriculture

RH Nature Reviews Genetics 08- Opposition to Transgenic Technologies

Germany: Discussion Paper of German Ag-Industry about EU Biotech Policy Implications

Bt maize performance in Spain

Arsenic speciation varies with type of rice

Why I Am Bothered by Neo-Colonialist NGOs

China experts identify gene for yield, height in rice

The French government has called for a debate on the review of the EU
The World Trade Organisation (WTO) has also repeatedly criticised the EU for "undue delays" in the authorisation of GMOs. See the latest WTO ruling:

The legal bans are in France, Austria, Poland, Hungary and Greece.

EU delays decision on approving more GM crops

UCR Geneticist Plays Scientific Advisor to Movie about “Love, Adventure and ... Genetically Modified Rice”

Gujrat worst-hit by illegal Bt cotton production

Farmers seek ban on GM crops

Call for policing
Ijaz Ahmed Rao discusses the virtues of a bio-safety framework for genetically modified crops, now that they have become farmers’ favourite

Stem cells: The 3-billion-dollar question

Genes as the solution

Food crisis spurs research spending

Global Food Crisis / UN / Bilingual Transcript of Statements by Secretary-General, Heads of Concerned Agencies, and Response to Questions at Press Conference on Global Food CrisisGM Crops, A World View

Mass Protests against GM Crops in IndiaInterference at the EPA

Open letter to Robert B. Zoellick, President, World BankNew BT variety may push short staple cotton output.

The future of agricultural biotechnology: Creative, destruction, adoption, or irrelevance? ICABR Conference 2008

Soaring food prices and global grain shortages are bringing new pressures on governments, food companies and consumers to relax their longstanding resistance to genetically engineered crops.

Prof. Kameswara Rao and Dr. T.M. Manjunath's Participation in 2008 Biotech Activities

Scrutinizing Industry-Funded Science: The Crusade Against Conflicts of Interest

LEADER: Nurturing nanotech

Center for Indigenous Knowledge for Agriculture and Rural Development

Scientists find potential schistosomiasis treatment

Islamic conference boosts S&T with new resolutions

Mexico publishes GM approval guidelines

Uganda 'close to stamping out Hib meningitis'

New method 'prevents spread of GM plants'

Social factors 'help women with post-tsunami stress'

Women scientists celebrated in new charter

Sub-Saharan Africa news in brief: 13–25 March

Brazil creates US$18 million fund for young scientists

Health weeks 'powerful tools' for deworming children

Rotavirus vaccine, not treatment, 'cheaper for Panama'