Subscribe in a reader
Follow La Vida Locavore on Twitter - Read La Vida Locavore on Kindle

A New Frankenfood to the Rescue?

by: Jill Richardson

Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 21:01:51 PM PDT

Our friends in the biotech industry just came up with a new "quick fix" to global malnutrition: GM corn. It's kind of like golden rice, except it's corn. In addition to elevated levels of beta-carotene (the precursor of vitamin A), the corn has extra vitamin C and folate.

I'm a skeptic about this. I'd be very interested in two bits of information before I pass judgment. First, how much corn do you need to eat per day to get your recommended amounts of these nutrients? Second, how does the nutrient profile of this new GM corn compare to that of the three sisters, eaten together.

Here's why I ask. The three sisters, corn, beans, and squash, grow well together (the beans provide the nitrogen the corn needs, for example) and provide complimentary nutrients to those who eat them. Corn grown alone sucks up a lot of nitrogen. So if we've already got a system to grow corn as one of the three sisters that provides needed nutrients, why do we need a special new GM corn (that might give humans lots of nutrients when eaten alone but does not grow in a sustainable manner all by itself) to replace it?

Also, I think we need to look into why people in the developing world are malnourished to begin with. Is it lack of variety in their diets, or just plain old lack of FOOD in their diets? Because if they can't afford food now, they won't be able to afford GM corn. And if we're gonna give them the GM corn for free, well then why can't we give them the foods they need for a varied, healthy diet for free instead?

As the article notes, presumably new GM superfoods like this are intended to save the starving people of Africa, but many African countries ban GMOs. I'd like to know: Why are we so intent on helping Africans in the exact way that they do NOT want to be helped? First of all, it's paternalistic and insulting that we think we know what's good for them better than they do. Second of all, there are obviously other ways to help the hungry besides GMOs, methods that exist now and don't require 10 years to develop (as the article noted this new corn requires). If Africans don't want GMOs and we are spending 10 years to create GMOs to "help Africans" while letting a decade of Africans die of starvation, doesn't that prove that we aren't really doing any of this "for Africa" after all? My take on this: If it's not for profit, it's a PR stunt.

Jill Richardson :: A New Frankenfood to the Rescue?

Tags: Biotechnology, GMOs, corn, (All Tags)

Print Friendly View

Send As Email

A New Frankenfood to the Rescue? | 2 comments

Hmm . . . (4.00 / 1)

if they are crossing plant breeds? Not really GMO in my book. I reserve that for the other stuff they do just to keep them sep in my brain :) This is just f***ing with nature ;)

The team inserted five genes from other organisms -- including rice and Escherichia coli -- into a popular South African white corn variety called M37W that Christou said is "completely devoid of vitamins."

Why would they be using a corn devoid of vitamins as a starter/host? (blank canvas perhaps? but still!) Doesn't SA have a natural corn that grows there. An heirloom corn(s)? And what about the corns that are more "colorful"? And do we really want them messing with E-coli in a corn strain in this day and age? We have "native" breeds of corn here that have plenty of color, so I would [ahem] assume they might have more nutrients than the whiter corns. I mean, my blue potatoes and red fleshed apples do. and I'm guessing my lovely blood carrots have an extra nutrient kick to them also (haven't checked into that one) along with other heirloom fruits and veggies.

I'm with you on the 3 sisters and any other crops that would be "natural"/adaptable to the land there. There seems to be this unusual fascination with corn crops, lol!~ Let's use corn for everything!!! I do think it is for profit though, not PR. Remember those world food orgs ($$$$$) etc. Connect the dots. 10yrs isn't that far off and this is just an attempt to add another corner of the market to the big Ag pile. Along with more control.

Ever feel like you're in the twilight zone with Big Ag? One day we will have nothing but corn . . . .

by: nycstray @ Fri May 01, 2009 at 08:29:18 AM UTC

I think (0.00 / 0)

the most important part of this post is the questio: why are people in the developing world malnourished/hungry/food insecure?

it has a lot to do with the fact that in a lot of these countries, in africa, in asia, in south america, instead of growing gardens with mixed plants, people must grow cash crops to access the market. crops like cocoa, coffee, cotton that you can't eat, or corn, rice, wheat that you can but that isn't sufficient for a nutritious diet. if their crop fails or if the global price of the commodity is low, then the farmer won't make enough to buy the food she/he needs. this leads to malnutrition.

providing these families with GMO corn WILL NOT solve this problem. RESTRUCTURING global agriculture, with reforms in trade, subsidies, pricing, market access, etc, may not SOLVE it, but will go a LONG way in creating a more beneficial situation for people in developing countries.

by: Emily Best @ Fri May 01, 2009 at 17:05:34 PM UTC