On the Side of Science
– Editorial, The Financial Express (India), Feb 16, 2010 http://www.financialexpress.com
It’s been almost a week since environment minister Jairam Ramesh announced his decision to put a moratorium on the cultivation of Bt brinjal. The minister cited adverse public opinion and the lack of sufficient scientific research in support of genetically modified brinjal (particularly the effects of its consumption on humans) to defend his decision. However, it is increasingly getting clear that a number of his ministerial colleagues do not share his opinion. Agriculture minister Sharad Pawar has, of course, been a long time supporter of GM food.
Now Kapil Sibal, minister for HRD, and a former science and technology minister, has come out in favour of such decisions being left to the scientific community. And the minister of science and technology, Prithviraj Chavan, has strongly defended not just the safety of Bt brinjal, but also the rigour of the scientific process that was used to arrive at that conclusion of safety. On evidence, it then seems that Jairam Ramesh is a lot more isolated within the government on this issue than he might otherwise claim.
Of course, Ramesh will claim the support of public opinion, but as we have argued before what he heard as public opinion were the shrillest voices of NGOs and other activists, not the consumers and farmers who stand to benefit from Bt brinjal. And, surely, his ministerial colleagues are not disconnected from the voice of public opinion.
The entire controversy has now put renewed focus on setting up a National Biotechnology Regulatory Authority for genetically engineered items. There is talk that a relevant Bill may be introduced in Parliament’s budget session. But even if this comes to pass, the treatment lately meted out to the GEAC by Ramesh raises questions about the value of such a development. GEAC is made up of eminent experts from across India.
After many years of testing and deliberations, it approved a Bt brinjal strain as “effective in controlling target pests, safe to the environment, non-toxic as determined by toxicity and animal feeding tests, non-allergenic” and with the potential to benefit farmers.
But Ramesh declared that approval by GEAC experts was simply not enough-the minister would seek “a broader consensus”. In theory, nothing prevents him from doing something similar to a new biotechnology regulatory authority. The problem is the minister’s apparent disdain for scientific process, opinion and institutions and supreme faith in his, a single individual’s, ability to make the right decision on what is a complex scientific exercise. That isn’t good either for institutions or for decision-making.
=============
Another Minister Speaks Up, CSIR Chief Says Bt Brinjal 100% Safe
– Indian Express, Feb 15, 2010 http://www.indianexpress.com
Joining the growing number of voices within the government that are uncomfortable with the decision to put the introduction of Bt brinjal on indefinite hold, Science and Technology Minister Prithviraj Chavan today said it was important to ensure that “slogan shouting and protests” do not cloud the scientific vision of the country.
Sources in Krishi Bhavan said Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar too has made his displeasure with the decision, made by Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh on February 9, clear. Though he has refrained from attacking Ramesh publicly, Pawar is learnt to have urged the agricultural scientist community not to be disheartened, and to continue its work in the field. Sources said he has asked scientists and officials to gather evidence to counter the claims of those trying to run down Bt Brinjal through slogan-shouting and orchestrated protests against transgenic food crop technology.
Chavan, who has in the past supported the introduction of Bt brinjal, stressed that new technologies like genetic engineering should not be postponed indefinitely merely for lack of scientific consensus. “Let there be a reasoned scientific debate. If more tests are required, those certainly should be carried out. But if there is still no unanimity within the scientific community, the government has little option but to go by the majority and dominant scientific opinion,” Chavan told The Indian Express. “But slogan-shouting and protests cannot be allowed to cloud our scientific vision,” he said.
Chavan is the second Minister to have expressed unease with Ramesh’s decision, which overruled the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC), the technical body authorized to decide on such matters. HRD Minister Kapil Sibal, Chavan’s predecessor in the Science and Technology Ministry, had earlier expressed his discomfiture with Ramesh’s decision.
The divide is likely to push the government into expediting the long-pending proposal for the creation of a National Biotechnology Regulatory Authority (NBRA). Chavan revealed that the bill, which would allow for the setting up of a regulatory framework for genetically engineered items, might be introduced in Parliament’s budget session.
The authority would take over the functions of GEAC and the Review Committee on Genetic Modification (RCGM), a similar body under the Department of Biotechnology, as well as some responsibilities of the Drug Controller General of India, under the Health Ministry.
It would be responsible for all kinds of research, manufacture, import and use of biotechnology products, including genetically-engineered plants and organisms. The bill has been in the works for a very long time, and is now being readied for Cabinet clearance ahead of its introduction in Parliament.
Meanwhile, allaying fears expressed by critics, over the effect of Bt brinjal on human health, the director general of the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), Dr Samir Kumar Brahmachari, said he was “100 per cent” certain that the Bt gene was not going to enter the human body. “If Bt had to enter humans, it probably already has. We have been eating soya and corn imported from the United States which has introduced Bt genes in these crops. Some of these fears are unfounded,” said the eminent bio-physicist.
Brahmachari said he supported the setting up of a regulator for biotechnology similar to the one for telecom “as soon as possible”. “The regulatory framework has to be established as soon as possible. An effective body like the TRAI (Telecom Regulatory Authority of India) is needed that can also address concerns of monopolies in the biotechnology sector,” he said.
Brahmachari said GM food was about giving the option to consumers and farmers to decide what was best for them. His predecessor at CSIR, Dr R A Mashelkar, expressed similar views. “In areas of genetic engineering, a principle of precaution is understandable but at the same time it has to be promotional as well. We cannot stop the juggernaut of new technology,” Mashelkar said from Australia.
(Reproduced in the public interest)
Pundit’s thoughts
Let’s see. Environmental activists basing their actions on ” lack of consensus in scientific community”. Now if this were another issue, say, climate change, would they go with the strong, informed and deliberative consensus, or cherry -pick advice that suits their politics?
And wait a minute. There are dissenters from the Environment Minister’s decision. The other Ministers can also overide his decision and he cannot consistently claim they done the wrong thing by taking a “broader view”.
