A group of more than 100 Nobel Laureates have publicly declared Greenpeace’s anti-GMO campaign a crime against humanity. These men and women say the science is clear – the world needs GMOs, and objecting to the production of genetically modified foods both denies scientific evidence and exacerbates the suffering of the world’s poor.
Organized by Precision Agriculture, a pro-GMO advocacy group, the Nobel-winning scientists demonstrated their support last month by signing a letter addressed to Greenpeace leaders. In it, they implore the environmental group to abandon their position on genetically modified foods, hoping to end the misinformation and confusion perpetuated by Greenpeace.
The letter specifically focused on Golden Rice, a genetically modified strain of rice that has the ability to eliminate Vitamin A deficiency (VAD) in Southeast Asia and Africa. Precision Agriculture states that UNICEF estimates there are one to two million preventable deaths due to VAD annually, and the World Health Organization reports 40 percent of children under five in the developing world suffer from VAD, making Golden Rice an invaluable source of nutrients. Yet, Greenpeace and other regulatory agencies have protested its production and distribution.
“We call upon Greenpeace to cease and desist in its campaign against Golden Rice specifically, and crops and foods improved through biotechnology in general,” the laureates write.
Richard Roberts, the molecular biologist who spearheaded the campaign, said that mankind has been modifying food for centuries, and modern GMOs are only a continuation of this process. The letter urged Greenpeace to “re-examine the experience of farmers and consumers worldwide” to recognize that biotechnology is safely improving seeds, crops, and farming's environmental impact.
The written support of these 107 Nobel winners, the vast majority of their prizes awarded in chemistry, medicine, and physics should not come as a surprise. Hundreds of scientists and humanitarians have welcomed and advocated for the use of genetic modification for decades.
As awareness surrounding this issue grows, religious groups have entered the conversation, debating the use of genetic modification from a theological perspective. A number of liberal and progressive churches have voiced their opposition to the use of GMOs, often claiming that genetic engineering disrespects God’s wisdom and design for the sake of commercial gain.
Greenpeace quickly released a response to Precision Agriculture’s letter. The group said “accusations that anyone is blocking genetically engineered ‘Golden’ rice are false. ‘Golden’ rice has failed as a solution and isn’t currently for sale.” In its statement, Greenpeace blames corporations for “overhyping Golden rice” and claims that the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) has not proven that this rice actually addresses VAD. Yet, the IRRI released its own statement applauding the Nobel laureates, explaining the potential of Golden Rice, and reporting that the rice will indeed be released to certain countries after regulatory approvals are secured.
Golden Rice is only one example of a crop that dramatically improves human life through the use of genetic technology. Researchers have developed GMOs that can overcome drought, flooding, disease, and resist insect contamination. These conditions are most harshly experienced in impoverished areas of the world, and for decades have left many without the ability to feed their families or participate in simple agricultural trade. Not only does modern technology allow farmers to overcome these circumstances, but scientific evidence has proven that the use of GMOs has environmental benefits such as reducing carbon emissions and the use of pesticides, as well as requiring far less land than older techniques.
With such promising advances in farming, why do so many groups disapprove? As Precision Agriculture points out, opposition is often based on “emotion and dogma contradicted by data.” Greenpeace and other anti-GMO organizations operate from ideologies that value keeping our world “natural” more than they value human dignity and life. The organic food industry also has powerful incentive to preserve the myth that old farming techniques are healthier, safer, and better for the environment than drastically less expensive GM products. Unfortunately, their multibillion-dollar fear-mongering campaigns perpetuate hunger and poverty.
Resistance to GMOs is not always liberal or politicized, though. Joel Salatin, self-described “Christian-libertarian-environmentalist-capitalist-lunatic-Farmer,” spoke about sustainable farming and genetically modified foods in his plenary address at Acton University 2015. Salatin worries about the ability to patent GM products, saying it implies owning the “genetic code of life itself.” He said that biotechnology treats creation as if it was some sort of human invention and might ignore the boundaries God has given us.
In addition, Salatin is concerned with the property rights violations that result from GM crops contaminating neighboring fields, which overpower organic crops like his own. Salatin is certain there are better “creation, stewardship honoring” counterpart solutions to every one of the farming problems we solve with industrial mechanisms. Even so, he argues that the federal government has no authority to tell us what we can and cannot eat, and would like to see consumers self-educate and localize food production.
While it is important to consider these objections, the reality of extreme poverty demands that GMOs be deemed the best, if not the only way forward in nourishing and sustaining the growing global population. Advocating for the safe production of GMOs provides Christians the chance to effectively serve the poor and relieve suffering (James 2:15). Unfortunately rhetoric tends to distract from focusing the GMO discussion on poverty and well-being.
Genetically modified products not only give disadvantaged men and women the dignity of feeding themselves and their families, but can also create jobs and lead to participation in agriculture trading networks. Simple access to genetically modified seeds has the ability to empower a community, and can result in prosperity that goes beyond farming.
As the Precision Agriculture letter expresses, it is inexcusably immoral for the relatively wealthy and extremely comfortable of our world to restrict the poorest from access to a basic human right like food. Blinded by luxury, those who stand with Greenpeace stand in the way of sustainable development and human prosperity.
