We, the official representative and members of various professional groupings of the Philippine scientific community, have noted with dismay the
increasing stridency of the issues being raised against genetically
modified organisms (GMOs), their introduction and commercial availability
in Philippines crops or in local or imported products for human food and
Very Briefly, these issues concern the following:
Safety of GMOs for human intake and for the environment and
safety in the consumption of livestock that have been fed GMO-derived
feeds; The role (or non-role) of GMOs in increasing productivity,
and consequently, in reduction and relief of human hunger and
poverty. An apparent well-funded campaign to muddle public perception
on GMOs; and Linking of other issues totally unrelated to GMOs,
to add to the scare and confusion.
GMOs (transgenic, genetically modified or engineered organisms)
are new varieties of plants or strains of animals or microbes
develop by transferring through laboratory means (procedures
collectively called genetic engineering) a useful quality to
an existing popular variety of plant or strain of animal/microbe.
As with any new idea, discovery technology or newfangled item
of human knowledge, the advent of GMOs has been met with public
trepidation and a general fear of the unknown.
While we understand this tendency, we note with concern that
it can only cause confusion and needless delay in the advancement
of efforts to resolve not a few problems that have to do with
human life itself.
Especially in our country, not least of such problems is how
to feed our increasing population and how to marshal and sustain
the resources necessary to combat the hunger and poverty that
come with populations pressure.
With all humility, but with the authority and currency of knowledge
that our training and practice as members of the practice as
members of the scientific community afford us, allow us there
for to help shed light on these issues.
I. ARE GMOs SAFE FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION AND THE ENVIRONMENT?
- All commercially released GMOs like Bt corn and Herbcide
resistant soybean have undergone thorough testing for toxicity,
allergenicity and nutritional food and feed values.
- Several international agencies such as the FAO, the European
Commision, the Third World Academy of Sciences and the national
academies of science and technology of several countries have
declared that the abovementioned genetically modified (GM)
foodcrops are as safe as any conventionally bred crop and
pose no additional threat to humans and the environment. Hence,
the Philippine Department of Health treats GMO-derived food
like any other food and has no need to test for or detect
- The property of a GMO depends upon the new gene it has received.
Different GMOs must be treated depending upon this new property.
- The Philippine Department of Agriculture has always been
vigilant in protecting the Filipino consumer from the entry
of dioxin-laced meat from Belgium and the entry of European
meat imports that could carry the Mad Cow infectious agent.
On the other hand, the Department has no basis to declare
GMOs unsafe and has no need to test for its presence.
- The Department of Agriculture, in line with the biotechnology
provision of the Agriculture and fisheries Modernization Act
(AFMA), is well-informed about the issues on GMOs. It supports
risk, assessment and other research projects and is drafting
guidelines on the commercialisation of the GMOs.
- Bt crops such as Bt corn reduce the exposure of farmers
and the environment to pesticides as well as the contamination
of the corn grain with aflatoxin.
- Results of a 10-year study show that cultivated crops, whether
Gm or conventionally-bred do not survive in the wild and do
not become weedy.
- Like any other new technology, the possible effect of GM
crops on other organisms in the environment need to be systematically
evaluated to develop mitigating measure to reduce any risk.
II. IS THERE ANY ROLE FOR GMOs IN INCREASING PRODUCTIVITY
AND FIGHTING HUNGER?
- Philippine agriculture is beset with numerous problems,
some requiring the use of new technologies to attain an increased
and sustainable productivity that maintains environmental
integrity. Experience in other countries clearly show that
these objectives are attainable with GMOs.
- There are planted to GMOs in many parts of the world is
increasing. In year 2000, the total world area is 44.2 million
hectares, representing an increase of 11% from 1999. China
planted more than 5000,000 has, this year. In world market,
the available soybean contains more than 50% GMO whereas available
corn contains more than 16% GMO. Europe, Japan and the ASEAN
countries like the Philippines annually import this commodities.
There is no telling how the availability of this new technology
has helped increase production in this countries or how much
it has helped feed countless hungry mouths in both the producing
and the importing countries.
- No less than the Pontificial Academy of the Vatican has
given its nod, though qualified, to GMO technology. While
giving a resounding no to human cloning, it has given a prudent
yes to GMO technology provided that it should help prevent
- Economic studies show that farmers, consumers, patent holders
and seed producers are benefiting form GMO technology and
that small farmers gain more than big commercial farmers.
- Alternative to GM. It is, however, a labor-intensive farming
system suited to supplying food to the affluent.
III. THE SCARE CAMPAIGN AGAINST GMOs
An apparent well-funded campaign launched by foreign interest
groups has raised and muddled several issues and has only served
to sow fear in the public mind. Again, allow us to clarify them,
GMO“contamination” in food.
The presence of ingredients derived from GMOs in food and in
bulk commodities is referred to as “contamination” to imply
adverse effect on health. There is no basis for this implication.
The deliberate use of the term is a scare tactic. In the USA,
up to 60% of processed food contain GMO in the US, is due to
non-compliance with a regulation. No adverse effect on human
health has been observed with Starlink corn.
GMO “contamination/pollution” in food production.
Again, mere presence of an element or substance, and one
that has been observe to have no adverse effect on humans, is
not “contamination “ or “pollution.” This is mere natural transfer
of genes among varieties of corn planted close to each other,
a normal occurrence among plants. Gene flow is easily prevented
by planting different varieties at different times or isolating
“Accumulation of the GM product in the body or in the environment
may have adverse effects in the long term.”
The new products in a GM crop is a small piece of DNA, and two
to three new proteins, common substances found in all foods that
are usually digested or ejected from the body. These substances
are easily degraded or broken down by soil microbes.There is no
danger of accumulating GM products in the body or in the soil.
“Too little Vitamin A in ‘Golden Rice’ to matter;
Vit A can be derived from other food sources.”
The Vit A in golden rice has been increased so that a normal daily
intake can supply about 40% of the daily requirement. In many
poor households, rice with salt or sugar is all the food the family
can afford in most days. Thus, the Vit A in golden rice can help
reduce Vit A deficiency which is the prevalent cause of night
blindness or even death. More than 30% of young Filipinos are
afflicted with Vit A deficiency.
“Antibiotic resistance in GM crops may lead to antibiotic-resistant disease
The antibiotic resistance genes in GM crops may transfer to
disease-causing microbes and make this microbes difficult to manage,
Although no experiment in more than years of study shows
that this can happen, new GM crops no longer contain any antibiotic
“The Puzstai rat experiments prove that GM foods are unsafe.”
Puzstai fed his rats with raw potatoes engineered to have high
amounts of a substance toxic to mammals like rats and men. Fortunately,
this GM potato and any similar GM plant will never be available
“GMOs like the soybean with Brazil nut protein cause allergies.”
This particular GM soybean with Brazil nut protein has not been commercially produced precisely because of this property.
However, a person normally allergic to soybean has been engineered
not to cause allergenicity. Removal of allergenicity in rice is
an on-going research.
“A GMO released in the environment cannot be recalled.”
All one has to do is not plant the variety again, which is what
happened IR*, the first HYV (High yielding variety) rice.
IV. TOTALLY UNRELATED ISSUES LINKED TO GMOs
The anti-GMO campaign often includes non-GMO issues
which further confuse and scare the public, as follows:
Mad cow Disease. There is no link between mad cow disease
and GMOs. On the other hand, importation of GMOs by the EU is expected to substitute for cow-derived feed/food
ingredient which are the main source contamination with mad cow
Toxin-laced Tryptophan. The toxin associated with this from the process of production and not from
Nuclear power. This has absolutely nothing to do with nuclear radiation has been used to improved
more than 15 done some 20 years ago. Before the advent of GM.
Bgh. This is a hormone that increase milk the
same effect whether it is GMO-derived or not. Its cows similar
to the misuse of the flowering-induces cow injected with recombinant
Bgh has developed.
Golden Kuhol. This is not a GMO.
In conclusion…our Excellency, the foregoing are, to the best of
our knowledge, our contribution to clarifying the issues raised
We submit that instead of surrendering to our fear of the unknown, we must welcome with
enlightened courage the opportunities we find at every new frontier of
knowledge. This is the only way we can benefit from science.
Filipino farmers are faced with different challenges as they fill the soil to
produce food for our rapidly growing population.
We submit that they should be allowed the freedom to choose the technologies suited to
their situation. So must they be educated , trained and enlightened as to these choices- to
improve their own lot as much as to feed our people safe food in a safe
and sustainable environment.
We submit that consumers be allowed the same choice. However, labeling should not place
an additional burden to the poor whose only choice is what they can
We submit that GM crops resistant to disease, pests and drought are needed by Filipino
We submit that GM crops that improve consumer health such as Vit A rice, protein-rich
staples, cholesterol-lowering food are needed by our rapidly growing
It is therefore imperative that Government strengthen the capacity of the scientific community in genetic
engineering technology and support the speedy transfer of appropriate GMOs
Further, the government must strengthen our regulatory agencies and equip them to
evaluate new product and technologies using sound scientific methods to
ensure affordable and safe foods.
The National Committee on Biosafety of the Philippines (NCPB) must continue to safeguard the public and the environment from
harmful genetic engineering experiment but must relax its too stringent
rules to enable the appropriate experiment to flourish.
Finally, we the scientific community, mindful of our obligation to share the fruits of
the practice of our profession towards the improvement of our national
life, welcome the pronouncement of the Secretary of Agriculture enjoining
us to develop and strengthen our local capability on Biotechnology.
Association of Scientist in the Philippines: Saturnina
Biotech Program, Institute of Plant Breeding, UPLB: Evelyn
Mae T. Mendoza, Coordinator
Women Inventors Association of the Philippines, Inc: Dina
B. Masa, President
Women in Science and Technology Development Foundation, Inc:
Lydia M. Joson, President
Philippine Association for the Advancement of Science and Technology,
Lydia G. Tansinsin, President
Foundation for the Advancement of Science and Technology: Sonia
Y. de Leon, President
Institute of Biology, College of Science, UP Diliman: Nellie
C. Lopez, Director
Natural Science Research Institute, UP Diliman: Emeica
P. Cao, Director
Crop Science Society of the Philippines: Leocadio Sebastian,
National Institute of Molecular Biology & Biotechnology,
UP Manila: Nina G. Barzaga, Director
National Institute of Health, UP Manila: Mario Festin,
Executive Director & Vice Chancellor for Research
Biochemical Society of the Philippines: Dr. Rhodora
R. Aldemita, President
Institute of Plant Breeding, UPLB: Dr. Violeta N. Villegas,
National Institute of Molecular Biology & Biotechnology,
UP Diliman: Dr. Virginia Monje, Director
Pest Management Council of the Philippines: Erdie Malveda,