ARTICLE: Tim Durham: Please make sure my corn is GMO!

The following is an excerpt of a Op-Ed by Tim Durham, a farmer and assistant professor of agronomy and agricultural sciences at Ferrum College in Virginia, from the Richmond Times-Dispatch about the many benefits of GM corn. 

The film “Jerry Maguire” dropped a catchphrase so popular it needs no introduction — it’s assured a place in cinematic history. Scientists have a more principled and humble request: “Show us the data.”

Since the release of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), controversy has simmered over their effects on people and the planet — and their in-field performance.

Predictably, in a choreographed tie-in with Earth Month, the Non-GMO Project has challenged consumers to take a month-long siesta from “those” allegedly icky foods. Can’t have DNA in our diets after all!

Championed as a consumer-friendly, truth in labeling campaign, it’s really an audacious request to snub decades of convincing data — at your expense — and their enrichment.

Knowledge is power, except when it doesn’t endorse the worldview of these wannabe knights in shining armor. Ironically, a team of scientists recently released a meta-analysis (a study synthesizing many previous studies) of corn, examining factors like yield, quality, human health, target effects, and breakdown in the soil.

After comparing GMO varieties to their non-GMO kin, the long awaited verdict was clear — 20 years of data show that GMO corn is as people-, eco-, and farm-friendly as advertised.

***

But let’s back up a bit.

Despite what you’ve likely heard about these infamous “Frankenfoods,” there’s nothing jarring about genetically modified organisms.

Think of it as an aftermarket modification to a prized Harley, except that this mod allows corn to make a new protein — or in this case, two or more new proteins.

One is for herbicide tolerance (HT) that equips corn with the metabolic machinery to break down herbicides like Roundup. The other adds the ability to make a plant-incorporated-protectant (PIP) like bt — a biodegradable pesticide. Historically, a corn plant has had one or the other.

Now, both traits are often “stacked” on top of one another. A mod with the works.

But pesticides? Aren’t those the poster children of eco-savagery? Not quite. With herbicide tolerance, a farmer can spray a low impact material over the top, singing the weeds, and sparing the crop. It’s the perfect tool for no-till farming, which means farmers don’t have to mechanically gut (and erode) the soil to manage weeds.

A long-term underground ecosystem can flourish, like an old-growth forest of microbes.

With PIPs, the plant makes its own new pesticide, compliments of a gene from a soil bacterium called bt. This is the same one that farmers have been spraying as a whole spore formulation for decades. And its administration is tied to pest behavior.

The insect has to take a nibble to get a dose. Beneficial insects don’t feed on plants, so they’re unharmed. It’s also harmless to humans, as we have drastically different physiology. You wouldn’t think about giving Fido a piece of chocolate, but have no compunction about eating a whole chocolate layer cake yourself. Same idea.

***

On to the study: The appeal of meta-analyses is their ability to tease out relationships and draw more far-reaching conclusions than stand-alone studies.

To get started, the authors scoured the literature and found more than 6,000 prospects. They pared this number down to assemble a greatest hits anthology.

Far from cherry-picking, they used a transparent and stringent selection process.

For example, to keep it real, studies that weren’t conducted in-field, or GMO varieties that didn’t have a non-GMO equivalent for comparison were eliminated.

To read the entire article, please visit the Richmond Times-Dispatch.