Pardon the pun but when it comes to biotechnology, corn (Zea mays Linn.) ranks second to none when eaters and non-eaters alike consider the pros and cons of Bt corn.

It's like counting the pluses and the minuses of irradiated food. The only difference lies in that Bt corn isn't subjected to ionizing radiation of say, Cobalt 60 or Cesium 137.

Rather, our favorite food and feed crop is raised using an ordinary soil bacterium called Bacillus thuringiensis. This bacterium can produce can produce a protein that can paralyze caterpillars of certain bad insects like the Asian corn borer, ACB (Ostrinia furnacalis Guenee).

ACB belongs to the Order Lepidoptera such as butterflies and moths. Its most voracious and therefore, destructive stage is the caterpillar or larva that attacks the corn plants' leaves and stalks, including the ear.

With Bt technique, insect-shielded Bt corn is an alternative insect pest-resistance technology with specific and 'season-long' protection against damaging insect pests. There would be less use, if not elimination of insecticide spray, which means higher net income for corn farmers.

But anti-Bt corn advocates think otherwise.

One protesting group, the Ecological Society of the Philippines urges government to stop field testing of Bt corn, claiming the threat of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is as real as cancer.

Its outspoken head says "engineered corn" has more frightening results, producing side effects and ailments that could manifest years after.

ESP elevated its case to the High Tribunal but due to a technicality, its cause against GMO went down the drain.

Despite the Supreme Court's action, those who oppose went on to say investments in genetic engineering of plants aren't focused on increasing production or nutritional quality but rather on improving resistance of commercial crops to herbicides - "a fact," they added "that gives rise to safety and environmental concerns." They said most crops being genetically modified aren't staple crops of poor nations but are export commodities of developed countries.

ESP's perception of the controversial grain produced via biotech pushed its leader to call on the nation's officials, food producers and consumers, as well, to be more vigilant with the entry of GMOs and genetically-altered foods to the country.

"Reasons behind our crusade concern human health, food security, environment and biodiversity, including consumers' rights and legal and moral questions," the ESP president told media. Even some writers coined such words as 'Frankenfoods' and 'monster of frankenscorn' to dramatize certain groups' perceived fear of a product of non-traditional breeding.

Sonny P. Tababa, Biotechnology Information Center (BIC) network administrator based at SEARCA/SEAMEO, College, Laguna disputed the claims of anti-GMO camps. She described these published and broadcast reports as "false and misleading."

"Contrary to statements issued by the anti-GMO movements, genetically-modified staple food crops have been and are being developed to address environmental, nutritional, health, and low yield concerns of developing and poor countries," she countered.

Dr. Saturnina C. Halos, a DNA laboratory analyst and expert on biotech from UP Diliman explains that the only drawback known about Bt insecticide is that it can cause allergenic reaction in some people handling it. On the other hand, the unintentional transfer of genes from the GM-plant to another variety or related species is not "genetic pollution" as claimed by those opposing GMOs but merely a 'breakdown' in the regulatory process of segregating corn varieties.

She assures there's no proof that antibiotic markers in GM plants are a cause for alarm. Besides, she adds, new generation of GM crops will no longer contain any antibiotic resistance genes. While the Monarch butterfly controversy is now a thing of the past, there's no need to study the environmental effect(s) of GM crops in the Philippines on a case by case basis since novel genes confer different traits and their effect(s) in a tropical environment like ours is/are yet to be studied.

Off-the-cuff, she says with confidence that for corn and rice - the two most important grains/cereals here and in many parts of the tropical world, especially Asia, producing "super weeds" from their wild relatives will not occur naturally.

Critics of modern biotech ought to consider that this technique isn't new. It's been with us since the 16th century and our fathers' forefathers have been using it in preparing their drinks like "basi" from sugarcane, "tuba" from coconut and other palm trees, and "tapuy" (the Pilipino version of Japanese 'sake' or rice wine). Beer --- branded or generic - is a product of biotech. And so are 'patis' (fish sauce), 'suka' (vinegar), 'bagoong', cheese (white or otherwise) and other products of fermentation. Of late, beer from Philippine rice has made the news - a scientific and technological breakthrough.

Dr. Evelyn Mae Tecson-Mendoza of UP Los Banos (UPLB) Institute of Plant Breeding (IPB) says biotechnology's scope is far and wide. The old or classical ways include techniques like fermentation and biological nitrogen (N) fixation. Modern methods apply to tissue and cell culture, recombinant diagnostics and genetically engineered (or genetically modified or transgenic) microorganisms, animals and plants. Contemporary biotech got off the ground in the 1970s and is often equated to processes involving genetic engineering or recombinant deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) technology.

Genetic engineering is the transfer of specific gene(s) into an organism. Already, the private-led Philippine Sugar Research Institute Foundation, Inc. (Philsurin) has set the pace as one of a growing number of Science and Technology-oriented entities that have adopted biotech to improve agriculture, food and industrial production.

Along with Indonesia, Bangladesh, Malaysia, and Thailand, the Philippines spearheads a varietal improvement project using tissue culture for micro-propagating and fingerprinting of the different sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum) varieties and hybrids utilizing molecular markers.

Through tissue culture, many seeds are produced which will grow into uniform and disease-free plants. Shoot tips, the most active growing points of the plant are used as initial material. These are cultured on synthetic media in small glass containers for further multiplication. Then, the cycle to produce clean, uniform tissue cultured plantlets is that they are easier and safer to transport. One advantage of plantlets is that they are easier and safer to transport.

The second technique calls for fingerprinting each of the varieties and hybrids of sugarcane in the gene bank using molecular markers. With modern S&T, it is now possible to get the fingerprint or identifying marks of individuals (humans and plants, included) using patterns of the genetic material called DNA. Each variety or hybrid will show differences not only in traits that can be visualized but also in the patterns of some of their DNA. Such distinctive patterns are called molecular markers, just like the fingerprint of a person.

For one, IPB has developed an immunological test kit that screens the presence of the ratoon stunting disease or RSD of sugarcane. With this specific gadget, scientists can pinpoint seed pieces that are contaminated or free from RSD.

If DNA profiling is to fighting or solving crimes, DNA molecular markers are for improvement of food and agriculture production. To date, more than 44.2 million hectares are planted to genetically modified crops worldwide. As expected, the United States leading in terms of land area devoted to GM crops - some 30.3 million has. Argentina, Canada and China follow, in that order.

While the Philippines is yet field-testing its studies on transgenic corn hybrids against ACB, many countries are now reaping their fruits from commercialized biotech.

At a symposium on Bt corn technology held last March at the SEARCA auditorium, College, Laguna, some of the reactions tend to impute that supporters of the Bt corn technology are being given 'favors' (in cash or in kind) by firms involved in the project(s).

As a spectator, it was enough to see (and therefore, believe) that there was practically no damage on the leaves and stalks of the Bt corn compared to the non-Bt.

Plant pathologists and microbiologists tell us further that whether you are in South Cotabato or in Ilagan, Isabela, Bt insecticide can't and won't kill humans. Why? Because unlike chemical-based pesticides, Bt insecticides are very specific and they kill only their 'target' insects and their relatives, not insects of other families which are usually the friendly ones.