Genetically engineered seeds and crops (GMOs) have unleashed seed wars and knowledge wars.
The only reason crops have been genetically engineered is to take patents on seeds and collect royalties. If during colonialism the concept of Terra Nullius (empty land or land belonging to no one) allowed the takeover of land and territories by the coloniser, a new concept of Bio Nullius (empty life) is being used to claim “intellectual property rights” on seeds, biodiversity and life forms. But life is not empty.
Seeds are not an invention. They embody millions of years of biological evolution and thousands of years of cultural evolution and farmers’ breeding.
When corporations claim patents, they basically “pirate” traits that nature and farmers have evolved. They pirate and patent the aroma of Basmati, the low gluten qualities of our native wheat, the salt tolerant, drought tolerant, flood tolerant traits of climate resilience our farmers have bred. This is not innovation and invention; it is biopiracy.
The only traits that the corporations have introduced into plants through genetic engineering are the toxic traits of Bt toxin and herbicide resistance. Besides being toxic, these traits have not reduced chemical use as has been repeatedly claimed. Navdanya’s studies in Vidarbha show a 13-fold increase in pesticide use since Bt cotton was introduced.
A report published in the journal Environmental Sciences Europe shows that genetically engineered crops have led to a 404 million-pound increase in overall pesticide use from the time they were introduced in 1996 through 2011. This amounts to an increase of about seven per cent over the last 16 years. The data on increased chemical use shows that the claim — that Bt toxin crops will reduce pesticide use and herbicide resistant crops will reduce herbicide use — is false.
The Navdanya report, The GMO Emperor has no Clothes, shows that genetically modified crops have led to resistance, both in weeds and pests, demanding higher use of pesticides and herbicides. More than two dozen weed species are now resistant to glyphosate — the primary ingredient in Monsanto’s broad-spectrum herbicide Roundup, and farmers are being asked to spray Agent Orange, which was used in the Vietnam War.
The only way corporations can push GMO seeds on farmers is by destroying alternatives. They do this by blocking public breeding. India’s premier cotton research institute in Nagpur has not released a single variety in Vidarbha since Monsanto entered the cotton seed market.
The second strategy is to lock local companies into licensing arrangements. Sixty Indian seed companies only sell Monsanto’s Bt cotton.
The third strategy is to make local seeds illegal through compulsory licensing and registration laws. This was attempted in 2004 with the Seed Act. It took a seed satyagraha organised by us across the country and a parliamentary committee to prevent it from coming into force.
But in Europe, seed laws are already criminalising biodiversity and farmers’ breeding. This is why we have joined together as a Global Citizens Alliance for Seed Freedom to call for no patents on seeds and no to seed laws that promote industrial seeds and make local, open pollinated varieties illegal.
The Global Citizens’ Report on Seed Freedom (www.seedfreedom.in) written jointly by more than 120 groups and individuals was released on October 1, 2012, in New Delhi.
Seed is the first link in the food chain. And seed wars are leading to food wars. The California ballot initiative on labelling of GMO foods is the most current contest between citizens’ right to know and choose and corporate rights to force feed GMOs.
Seed wars and food wars are becoming knowledge wars. Just before the California initiative, an article was planted in the media across the world arguing that organic foods have no health benefit. It turns out that the so-called scientists from Stanford had done similar work for Big Tobacco during the debate on smoking.
While fraud science is used to promote GMOs, independent public scientists — who do high-quality research on biosafety and health and environmental impact of GMOs — are attacked by an organised mafia working for the industry that often masquerades as scientists.
Dr Arpad Putzai of the UK was driven out of his job when the results of his study commissioned by the UK government showed that the brains of the rats in his feeding study had shrunk, the pancreas had expanded and the immunity had collapsed. More recently, a study published by Dr Seralini in the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology showed:
Death rates in rats fed the Roundup-Ready GM maize were 2-5 times that of the control group.
Female rats had a shockingly high incidence of mammary tumours.
Male rats suffered significant levels of liver and kidney damage.
Tumours were huge and many animals had three tumours by the time they died.
India’s Supreme Court set up a Technical Expert Committee to advise it on the gaps in the scientific biosafety assessment of GMOs. The committee recommended a moratorium on field trials of all GMO Bt crops, an assessment of the special problems of herbicide-tolerant crops and a ban on all trials of GMO crops, of which India is the centre of diversity.
The Supreme Court is supposed to ensure that the executive and the government functions constitutionally. The GMO lobby has written to the Prime Minister to try and undo the work of the Supreme Court and its technical committee. This is a subversion of our Constitution.
In August 2012, the parliamentary standing committee on agriculture tabled a report titled Cultivation of Genetically Modified Food Crops: Prospects and Effects. Releasing the report at a press conference, the chairperson of the committee, Basudeb Acharia said, “The committee has come to the conclusion that since concerns on the potential and actual impacts of GM crops to our food, farming, health and environment are valid, GM crops are just not the right solution for our country.”
Again the GMO lobby wrote to the Prime Minister to undo the recommendations of the parliamentary committee.
Since GMOs can only spread via seed monopolies and by destroying our democracy and integrity of science and knowledge, we are better off without them.

The writer is the executive director of the Navdanya Trust