BioVoice News October 2016 Issue 6 Volume 1 | Page 23

infected by chikungunya. There is near unanimity over the need to replace age-old techniques of fogging and spraying pesticides with new approaches that could include even GM. Such openness to GM for addressing problems of urban India is, however, in marked contrast to the outright hostility when it comes to application of GM technology in crops grown by farmers in rural areas. We are seeing this currently in GM mustard, a technology developed indigenously by a team of scientists at Delhi University’s Centre for Genetic Manipulation of Crop Plants. This technology not only promises higher yields through crossing of Indian and East European mustard lines, but also allows for introduction of new traits relating to quality (oil with zero erucic acid content) or resistance to disease (alternaria blight and stem rot). There are limits to achieving these through conventional breeding. Today, India has roughly six million mustard farmers with commercial yields averaging 1.2 tonnes per hectare – one-third that of Canada and Australia. Mustard accounts for over a quarter of domestic edible oil production. A doubling of yields will not only benefit our mustard growers, but also help cut the country’s 16 million tonnes edible oil imports costing it $10.5 billion a year. It is strange, then, to find the same politicians, so gung ho about introducing GM mosquitoes in cities, being totally opposed to planting of GM mustard by six million farmers. This, despite the former being based on ‘videshi’ technology and the latter developed by ‘desi’ scientists. On October 2, Mahatma Gandhi’s birthday, the AAP government in Delhi held a ‘Jashn-e-Sarson’ fair in support of so-called organic mustard that few farmers anyway grow. The party has even sought to make GM mustard an issue in the forthcoming Punjab Assembly elections, with one its ministers Kapil Mishra claiming that it was a “direct attack on the identity of Punjab”. AAP’s not alone. The Swadeshi Jagran Manch and Bharatiya Kisan Sangh — affiliates of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh that has a powerful influence on the ruling government at the Centre — have also thrown their full weight behind opposing clearance for commercial cultivation of GM mustard. This, even after a subcommittee of experts constituted by the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee — the apex government regulator that approves proposals relating to trials and commercialisation of GM organisms — found the technology to be “safe for human and animal health” and unlike to “pose any risk to biodiversity and the agro-ecosystem”. Again, consider the irony. Here, we have ‘swadeshis’ opposing a GM mustard technology indigenously developed by Delhi University, unmindful of the fact that doing so will only increase India’s dependence on imported edible oils (a significant part of which is GM anyway!). Surprisingly, the same politicians have no issues with GM mosquitoes even if the technology is borrowed from Oxford University or China. Note: The views expressed by the authors are their own and the BioVoice may not necessarily agree with all aspects of their opinion. DR BHAGIRATH CHAUDHARY Dr Bhagirath Chaudhary, Founder Director, South Asia Biotechnology Centre (SABC). Dr Chaudhary has rich experience in both research as well as the review of various aspects related to the plant biotechnology. He is also the Faculty of Bioscience Engineering of Gent University since June, 2013 besides being an honorary member of public Research & Regulation Initiative (PRRI) since October 2012. DR ANIL RAM CHAUHAN Dr Anil Ram Chauhan, Senior AdvisorGovt Relations, Association of Biotechnology Led Enterprises (ABLE). Dr Chauhan is a known biosciences expert with deep understanding of administration and regulatory affairs. He is currently also a Steering Committee Member at EuroAid India HookVac Partnership (HIP) - EuroAid India HookVac Partnership. In the near past, he has also served as Senior Vice President of Operations at Avesthagen Limited. BIOVOICENEWS.COM 23