08/01/2023
If your father is poor it is your destiny, if you have a poor father in law it was your mistake. In light of the situation at present, you will for the next five years have to endure the awkward mannerisms of a poor father in law and his uncultured, foul mouthed kin. Confused? Worry not, I’ll elaborate.
Almost six months since our rather tumultuous wedding to the hustlers at the high court, our “poor” father in law and his band of uncultured cognates have grown tired the charade. Abandoning the plastic smiles and borrowed manners that hallmarked the steamy romance in the courtship, one of the drunk uncles is now openly farting in the living room and with no apologies. Like the venomous utterances of a wicked step mother, his remarks have been as nonchalant as “mkule msikule GMO bado mtakufa tu”.
Certain that by now you’ve probably connected the dots, the debate has since been raging on following the directive from the office of the president to drop the ban on genetically modified foods in the country. According to the report by Gilles Eric Seralini that formed the basis of the ban on GMOs, it was found that a majority of studies on the latter barely gave a holistic representation of the facts. With rats and mice as the main test subjects, an intricate analysis of the research showed significant changes in liver and kidney function which Seralini argued pointed to the early onset of chronic toxicity. Several months after the 90 day trial phase, almost all test subjects developed chronic organ failure and ultimately died.
Fed on the NK603 genetically modified maize developed by American agrochemical and biotech company Monsanto, all the test subjects recorded an increase in tumor incidence, especially mammary tumors in female animals. The first female death occurred in the 22% GM maize feeding group and resulted from a mammary fibroadenoma 246 days before the first control female death. The maximum difference in males was five times more deaths occurring by the 17th month in the group consuming 11% GM maize and in females six times greater mortality by the 21st month on the 22% GM maize diet.
Confronted with the findings of this study Monsanto rubbished the results alleging they were not biologically useful. Well I’m no biotech engineer but common sense dictates that a two year study provides a much more conclusive report as compared to a 90 day trial period. Despite the luck of consensus amongst scientists as regards the safety of GM foods, there have been several studies that have raised serious questions over the same and why a majority of biotech engineering companies remain silent about the potentially disastrous effects of consuming genetically modified foods in the long term. I am of the opinion however that a close observation the mortality rates, the growing prevalence of antibiotic resistance, cancers and malignant tumours - especially in Europe and the United States - gives a more representative outlook on the potential effects of consuming GM (Genetically Modified) products.
To begin with, Africa accounts for only 4% of global cancer infections, that is in perhaps the only continent where food production is not largely dependent on biotech engineering to improve yield and pest control. Despite the technological advancements in medicine in the EU, it is estimated that close to 1.2 million cancer related deaths are set to be recorded this year and close to 1.6 million deaths in the United States. This is down from close to 6 million deaths recorded in 1988 just six years after the FDA (Food and Drug Association) approved the use of the first ever GMO in 1982.
A closer observation of cancer infection rates across the continent revealed that out of the 57 states, those that have adapted the growth of genetically modified foods continue to record the highest cancer prevalence rates. Egypt has the highest rate of incidence in the region at 134, 632 and recorded an average mortality rate of 89, 042 per year. The irony is however that Egypt prohibits the growth and importation of genetically modified foods but permits the importation of GM-produced soybeans and maize that have been approved from the country of origin, especially from the United States. Kenya is currently ranked eighth overall with an average of 42, 116 cases of incidence and a mortality of 27, 092. But here’s the catch.
Drought resistant crops were introduced into the country early 2008 by a company financed by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation dubbed WEMA(Water Efficient Maize for Africa). By this time cancer infection rates in the country stood at a cumulative 8,982 for the period between 2004-2008. Just four years later in 2012 the country recorded 37, 000 new cases of cancer infections and 47,887 by 2018. By all intents and purposes “Kwa ghafla WEMA ulibadilika UOVU.”
It is incredibly naive, for anyone to argue therefore that GM products bear no long term side effects and or that there’s no correlation between the sharp increase in cancer rates and the introduction of the latter into our markets. As a matter of fact, the sole agenda behind the adaptation of GM products especially in African states is a financial one. We must begin to question the motives behind the concerted efforts by companies like Monsanto and proxies financed by multibillion dollar foundations like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to convince African leaders that GM products are a solution to the current drought and famine in the region. These are also coincidentally some of the leading research institutions on palliative care and cancer treatment. How much money is to be made from a continent of near 2 billion strong riddled with cancer and related ailments is colossal.
The assertion that GM products are the solution to the on going environmental crisis is a fallacy. Africa apart from South America has some of the largest swathes of land and natural resources that are either untapped or over exploited. Ironically the biggest benefactors of these resources are the very same governments and international corporations that spend millions on foreign aid to address socio-economic, political and environmental issues that they instigated. Then again, how are GM products supposed to aid bridging the gap in food production when our environmental conservation standards continue to deteriorate?
Unless we’re going to be genetically modifying the rain in wheelbarrows at some point GM products cannot be touted as a solution to the on going environmental crisis. As we embrace science it is important we do so without forgetting or completely discarding our traditional and natural way of life. Most importantly we should always bear in mind that if you choose to make friendship with a pig you must be prepared to sleep in the mud.
