Genetic Engineering: The Party's Fear of Progress

Enlarge image

Plants in the laboratory: the word "biotechnology" only appears once in the Social Democrats' "future program" - on the subject of arms control

Photo: Mint Images / imago images

UN Secretary General António Guterres will open a summit on the subject of »Food Systems« in September. At least for a moment, the world's attention will then turn to the fact that, in addition to the climate crisis and species extinction, we are stumbling into a third global crisis, so far without a plan: the world population will continue to grow until at least the middle of the millennium, already today Hundreds of millions of not enough to eat. Global warming, species extinction and the destruction of ecosystems will exacerbate these problems.

In an article published this week in Nature, the chairmen of an international association of experts called only the Scientific Group warn: “One in ten people is malnourished.

One in four is overweight.

More than a third of the world's population cannot afford a healthy diet. "The world's food system needs a reorganization:" Politically, institutionally, socially, economically and technologically. "

The last word in particular hides a dilemma for large parts of the German political landscape.

Because what is already very clear in the article: Only with small organic farms and organic farming you will not solve the food problem of mankind.

The recommendations are about avoiding food waste, supplementing social programs with healthier nutrition, renewable energies in agriculture and the food industry, sustainable packaging and the digitization of agricultural economics.

But also about irritating topics such as "nanomaterials or edible coatings that keep food fresher longer".

And it also says: "Genetic engineering and biotechnology should be used to increase the productivity, quality and resistance of crops to pests and droughts."

Political cash poison

Scientists have been grappling with the question of "How do you feed 10 billion people?" For a long time, but in the western industrialized nations the problem is largely ignored in everyday political life.

Which has a lot to do with the fact that some important solutions are political cash poison, especially in Germany.

According to the electoral manifesto, the left wants to "ban the cultivation, trade in and import of genetically modified plants," while the SPD remains "with no to genetically modified plants."

The word "biotechnology" appears only once in the Social Democrats' "future program": on the subject of arms control.

The CDU avoids terms like "genetic engineering" and speaks only briefly of "molecular biological breeding technologies", the use of which should be made possible "based on clear rules".

To do this, the European legal framework must be "modernized".

However, behind this brief note there is some explosive material.

Wash me but don't get me wet

The Greens want to "ensure the freedom of research on the one hand when dealing with old and new genetic engineering processes and on the other hand to exclude dangers to humans and the environment in their application", so obviously not to demonize genetic engineering as flatly as the Left and the SPD.

On the other hand, the program mentions “GMO-free” as part of the agricultural “model”.

That sounds like "wash me, but don't get me wet".

Only the FDP is clearly committed to "genetically modified crops" for which "current and scientifically based approval criteria should apply"; Side of the election manifesto, however, given more space).

Sensationally unpopular

There is a simple reason why all democratic parties except the FDP either clearly reject biotechnology for nutrition or talk about it as little as possible: "Genetic engineering" is sensationally unpopular in Germany. According to an international Ipsos study from 2018 (Pdf), well over half of Germans affirm the statement "I would never eat genetically modified food". In a Civey survey from 2019, 65 percent of those questioned wanted to prohibit or rather prohibit the cultivation of genetically modified plants in this country.

In a survey carried out in July 2021 on behalf of the Foods Without Genetic Engineering Association, two thirds again said "no" or "rather no" when asked whether the rules for "new genetic engineering such as CRISPR" should be relaxed.

Accordingly, this topic is particularly important to the potential voters of the Greens, but even among the FDP supporters, only 40 percent are in favor of easing the vote.

Crispr doesn't even appear

Incidentally, the abbreviation Crispr does not appear in a single German election manifesto, although this method for effectively changing the gene code, which was awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 2020, is part of a bundle of central future technologies that will change the world in the coming years and decades.

Whether the German voter thinks that is a good thing or not.

Above all, however, as a method of growing useful plants, Crispr is actually much more harmless than methods currently in use: It produces plant seeds that cannot be distinguished from those produced by natural mutation or breeding.

But it is much faster and more precise.

The plant gene code is constantly mutating - for example through exposure to sunlight.

Some breeds sometimes use x-rays or chemicals to create more mutations with potentially beneficial consequences.

Irrational and absurd

All of this is allowed, it is considered a "natural" breeding method.

Using the gene scissors CRISPR to make a cut at a point that is promising with regard to useful mutations - this is currently prohibited in Europe.

That is as irrational as it is absurd.

A success of decades of fear campaigns against »genetically modified« food.

advertisement

Christian Stocker

We are the experiment: Our world is changing so breathtakingly that we stagger from crisis to crisis.

We have to learn to manage this tremendous acceleration.

Publisher: Karl Blessing Verlag

Number of pages: 384

Publisher: Karl Blessing Verlag

Number of pages: 384

Buy for € 22.00

Price inquiry time

05.09.2021 6.17 p.m.

No guarantee

Order from Amazon

Order from Thalia

Product reviews are purely editorial and independent.

Via the so-called affiliate links above, we usually receive a commission from the dealer when making a purchase.

More information here

An international example of the dogmatic arrogance of Western genetic engineering enemies is the rejection of genetically engineered "golden rice" - it can save people, especially children, their eyesight or even their lives, but is bitterly fought against.

The Philippines are now growing it anyway.

In Great Britain, a first test run is just beginning for a wheat variety that is supposed to minimize the risk of cancer caused by the substance acrylamide, which is formed when it is heated.

Thanks to Brexit, the British are no longer bound by the Crispr ban issued by the European Court of Justice.

Ok in medication, please not in food

The Scientific Group's warning and wake-up call published in “Nature” demands that the “transformation to healthier, more sustainable, fairer and more resilient food systems” must be “accelerated” - also with the help of science and technology.

Indeed, with the interlocking of biotechnology and machine learning, humanity is on the threshold of a new technological age.

We also owe this development to the vaccines from Biontech and Moderna.

But what has long been accepted in medicine, Germans do not like when it comes to food.

Humanity is facing a daunting challenge, it has an ever-growing toolbox that can help overcome it. But two of the three parties in the race for the Chancellery prefer to have nothing or as little as possible to do with it. That is myopic and negligent.