Zamfara Lead Poisoning Epidemic and Socio-Technological Intervention of Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria II

Zamfara Lead Poisoning Epidemic and Socio-Technological Intervention of Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria II

           

Cleaning the Bagega lead poisoning was an arduous task that needs to be accomplished on sustainable manner. ENACTUS (Entrepreneurship Action and Us) branch of Ahmadu Bello University accorded high level of seriousness to the Begega Lead poisoning cleaning project. The first activity of the project was the conduct of needs assessment of the Bagega community, to inspect and ascertain the level of damage done by the Lead poisoning in the area.

Consequently, ENSCTUS involved experts within the university to develop a project, which should be promising, cost – effective, sustainable and inclusive of the beneficiaries. The aim of the project is not only to clean the environment but also filter the water, which is the medium for conveying the lead into the bodies of animals and human beings. This means that the solution should remove the lead trace from the soil as well as from the water. One of the promising technologies is the use of Jatropha plants to remove the traces of lead from the soil. Thus, the ENACTUS team developed a Jatropha Energy Scheme in the area. Jatropha plant has many uses in today's world. Each and every part of the plant is useful in some ways. Even the seed cake produced as a by-product is used as an excellent organic fertilizer. Some parts of the plant are used for medical purposes. The most common known use of Jatropha is biofuel as an alternative to the diesel oil. The jatropha oil has advantageous physicochemical with unique characteristic similar to the fossil diesel. So vehicles can use this oil with little change in their design. Fortunately, Jatropha plant being a drought - tolerant crop is commonly found in northern Nigeria grown as shrubs or fenced crops. The plant is able to survive on degraded land, often poor and fragile soils. Jatropha has the ability to facilitate sequestration, uptake, translocation, and detoxification of pollutants. It has the ability of extracting heavy metals, like Lead, from the soil. And in recent times, Jatropha has been used in mine tailing, which is used to begin a more natural process of remediation of contaminated soils. It is this discovery that made the team to explore the use of Jatropha to clean the land from lead toxicity, which was and is still affecting the people through plant consumption. 

 Jatrropha plants were massively planted in the affected areas where they gradually and effectively clean the land from lead contamination. While this was going on, the team begins to create solution to the problem on contaminated water as well as creating job alternatives to discourage the habitants from involvement in unprofessional and illegal mining, which brings lead contamination in the environment. Similarly, people were discouraged from farming activities in contaminated land until it is completely cleaned by the Jatropha Energy Scheme.

The Team created a biotech-filter for solving the lead poisoning challenge and provided clean portable drinking water to the growing population. How was this done? Removal of lead from industrial processes can be classified into several categories. Some of the most effective methods to remove lead from contaminated water are precipitation, stabilization ion exchange and adsorption. The most important characteristics of water filters are strength, precision, efficiency, clean-ability and longevity, which make them unique to perform their designed functions. The biotech filters acquire these characteristics in addition to the ability to combine three types of filtering system; physical, chemical and activated carbon. Imagine how wastewater is filtered. The common system permits wastewater drips down from the tank at the top, passes through vegetation, which removes nutrients, organic matter, some kinds of pollution, and some bacteria, before dripping down through sand, charcoal, and gravel filters. The cleaner water is collected for reuse in another tank at the bottom of the filtering system.

ABU ENACTUS biotech filter was designed based on using activated charcoal, produced from charcoal and coconut shell, as an adsorbent medium for heavy metals such as lead, through filtration. The filter is made up of three basic layers; activated charcoal (carbon), dechlorine and zeolites for the purification of water. The activated charcoal was obtained from the dehydration and carbonization of coconut shells, in an airtight furnace to burn at a temperature of 950^oC to expand the pores of surface of the coconut shells. Dechlorine was used in adding lost nutrients that might be extracted during this whole process and also to kill bacteria found in the water. Zeolites are more of the same as Bio balls but aid more in enhancing the chemical filtration of the water. Zeolites are large group of minerals consisting of hydrated aluminosilicates of sodium, potassium, calcium, and barium. They can be readily dehydrated and rehydrated and are used as cation exchangers and molecular sieves. Zeolites can be naturally found, however dechlorane were produced in laboratories. How the biotech filter works?

Water is passed through the filter capsule, firstly through the dechlorine layer to act on bacteria, then it moves on to the activated charcoal layer where it would attract heavy metal contaminants and biological agents. Then it goes finally to the zeolite where the final action takes place. These filters were tested to effectively removed of heavy metal contaminants from water, which the water safe for domestic uses as well as for irrigation purposes.  What is the post – project activities that will prevent the inhabitants engaging in mining?

 The post – project activities were sourcing better income generating enterprises than mining. Thus, the Team was able developed an aquaponic system This is a system which allows integration of aquaculture (growing of fresh fish) and cultivation of plants using a nutrient rich solution and artificial UltraViolet light (UV light) without the use of soil. The crops produced were fresh tomatoes, cucumber and hot pepper while growing fish simultaneously in the same environment. This aquaponic system was done in collaboration with the National Bio-Technological Development Agency (NBDC). NBDC provided a Resource person and technical support for the building of the aquaphonic system while the United for Climate Change (UCC) provided building materials for the green house farm where the team planted tomato, pepper and cucumber crops and started growing over 150 catfish juveniles.

The system creates a robust agro-allied enterprise among the people thereby upgrading subsistent farming activities. This new enterprise in the community subsequently reduced poverty, unemployment, and hunger while generating additional income to the people. In addition, an awareness campaign was mounted alongside a sensitization workshop from Health organizations, and safer mining policy formulation with Federal and State Mining Corporations and legal entities, which further reduced the frequency of lead poisoning cases, providing a greener environment for life within the community.

The project was concluded with production and distribution of Biotech filters to over 50 families in the community to have qualitative and safe water for domestic purposes, which was free from heavy metal contaminants. The team then went ahead to build a Rural Water Hub with the Bio-Filter put in place to filter the water to provide clean and portable water for more members of the Begega community of Zamfara State.

Despite the prodigious challenges common with large universities like ABU Zaria, the university was able to make a gigantic intervention to lead poisoning epidemic in Zamfara state through ENACTUS. The result of this intervention clearly demonstrates the ability of the ABU Zaria to effectively address the societal problems when and wherever such problems exist. The project made ABU ENACTUS Team to win the 2017 ENACTUS National Championship in Lagos, before the world-class judges. Similarly, the project won the LEKOIL most Environmentally Sustainable Project challenge. The ENACTUS ABU team represented Nigeria at the ENACTUS World Cup in London, UK in September 2017 with fruitful outcome.

In conclusion, to make the ABU Zaria intervention more beneficial to the affected people of Zamfara state, it is pertinent that government and other relevant agencies should upscale the pilot project of Begega to other communities. Certainly, ABU Zaria is always a willing partner in venture.

 

Zamfara Lead Poisoning Epidemic and Socio-Technological Intervention of Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria

Zamfara Lead Poisoning Epidemic and Socio-Technological Intervention of Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria

On Friday, 9^th and 16^th October 2015, readers may recall that this Column published part one and two of an article titled “Technological Strides of Ahmadu Bello University Zaria”. As a corollary to that article, three years after, Ahmadu Bello University (ABU) Zaria has recorded gargantuan strides in both technological and social endeavors warranting another series of article. This will update readers on ABU contributions to nation technological and community development and inspire similar organizations to follow similar pattern.

ABU Zaria as one of the first generation Nigerian Universities is no doubt an icon of nation building considering its giant contributions since establishment over fifty years ago. The University with two campuses, occupying over 7,000 hectares of land has grown to become the largest in the nation and indeed in the West African Sub-region, and the most influential and diverse in the country. Current record indicates that almost all the 747 LGAs in the country have sons and daughters either as students or staff or both studying and working/living in ABU Zaria in addition to citizens of other countries. This diversity makes ABU unique among the tertiary institution of learning in Nigeria.

One of the cardinal objectives of university is community service aimed at solving community problems. The administration of ABU under the leadership of indefatigable Geology Professor, Ibrahim Garba achieves this objective through the “town – gown” policy. At the inception of Garba’s administration, the major societal challenge within the university’s catchment area was lead poisoning epidemic in Zamfara state, about 150 kilometer away from the university’s main campus in Samaru. The catastrophic lead poisoning incident claimed 1000s lives of rural populous especially children and vulnerable groups. For instance, the record of Federal Ministry of Health recorded 163 deaths due to lead poisoning between the month of March and June 2010 in the state. This is in addition to the several unreported death cases among the rural areas of the state. The ugly incident continued to ravage the affected communities in spite of concerted efforts by authorities and international organizations. In 2017, News Agency of Nigeria reported a traditional ruler, Emir of Bukkuyam, Alhaji Muhammadu Usman stating that over 300 children lost lives as a result of lead poisoning at Yar – Galma village of Bukkuyam LGA. This was just one village in one local government area. Certainly, the death cases due to lead were unprecedented, calamitous and in deed need to be addressed squarely. The concern on finding solution to the problem of lead poisoning was a single motivation to this citadel of learning, ABU Zaria. To comprehend the import of ABU socio-technological intervention on this dreadful incident, it is pertinent to know why the incidences of Lead poisoning occurred in Zamfara State. What brought the ugly episode? What are the consequences?

 Lead, one of the heavy metals is very poisonous to human beings. Even a tiny quantity amounting to micrograms in blood can be disastrous to health. Children absorb more lead than adults and are at a higher health risk. Medical experts consider lead to be the greatest environmental health risk to children as their immune systems are still in the developmental stages. Lead poisoning in Zamfara state was first noticed in the year 2010 when livestock especially ducks were noticed to be dying in multitudes, which was followed by multiple deaths of children. A team of medical experts was sent to one of the villages to find out the cause of the children’s deaths. The team members came from the Center for Disease Control (CDC)-Nigeria office in Abuja, the Nigerian Federal Ministry of Health, the Nigerian Field Epidemiology and Laboratory Training Program, the World Health Organization, and Doctors Without Borders. Dr. Lora Davis, a CDC Animal-Human Interface Officer in Nigeria, led the team. The team traveled to Zamfara State with principal aim of identifying the cause of the outbreak in two purposely-selected villages. In each village, residents reported that one-fourth of all the children in their communities had died in the past year. The team found unsafe levels of lead inside most of the homes, and water from the community wells also had high levels of lead. Children in both villages had dangerous levels of lead in their blood. What brought this calamity into these unfortunate communities?

Lead is a naturally occurring heavy metal, but it was unusual to find such high concentration of lead in these communities. Evidence showed that thousands of children had dangerous levels of lead in their blood, and hundreds of children and animals had died throughout the state. It was the largest known outbreak of lead poisoning in the history of Nigeria. Zamfara State is an agrarian region, and traditionally most villagers relied on farming for their livelihood. However, the state is endowed with many minerals resources including gold. In recent years, the price of gold had risen and many villagers abandoned farming, started mining gold to earn more money. The gold mining was illegally and unprofessionally done with high-risk of environmental contamination. The high level of poverty, craze for wealth, ignorance of high – risk and lackadaisical handling of the issue by the concerned authorities were the driving force for the illegal gold mining and thus, bringing calamity into the communities. That was the situation at the time ABU Zaria decided to swing into action. The action was channeled through one of the university’s academic department and the university’s based NGO, ENACTUS.

ENACTUS is an acronym for Entrepreneurship ACTion and US. It was hitherto called SIFE (STUDENTS IN FREE ENTERPRISE) up to 2010 when the name changed to ENACTUS. ENACTUS is an international non-profit organization, which brings together student, academic and business leaders who are committed to using the power of entrepreneurial action to improve the quality of life and standard of living for the needy people in the society. Guided by academic advisors and business experts, the student leaders of ENACTUS create and implement community empowerment projects around the globe. The experience not only transforms lives, it helps students develop the kind of talent and perspective that are essential to leadership in an ever-more complicated and challenging world. There are 36 countries participating in ENACTUS all over the world.

Ahmadu Bello University has been participating in the activities of the then SIFE since 2004. The ABU ENACTUS team has initiated and worked with similar teams in over 40 other Universities and Polytechnics across Nigeria. The team had developed several awards winning projects and won national recognition by the country office in Lagos. As ENACTUS since 2010, the team had continued to develop projects, which had impacted on various communities around the catchment area of the University. The projects were geared towards solving a particular problem identified within a community and at the end created a business enterprise around it for the survival of the people residing in the community. Thanks to ENACTUS for these novel innovations to address societal problems.

ABU ENACTUS team embanked on problems identification in Bagega village, a suburb in Anka LGA of Zamfara State, which was one of the worst hit by lead poisoning in Northern Nigeria. After a spike in the price of gold in the country, subsistence farmers who barely made $1 or $2 a day could suddenly make $10 or more daily through artisanal mining. This was enough inspiration for the young men to abandon their farming practices and immediately take up the mining profession to seek out for a better living, totally ignorant of the imminent danger that is associated with the activity. The Bagega Rising Project was therefore developed as a pilot project for cleaning the lead and reclaiming the contaminated land. Consequently, ENACTUS worked with the Department of Water Resources of the university to develop a suitable filter for cleaning and removing the toxics out of water for safe drinking. Staff adviser of ABU Zaria ENACTUS Team, Prof. Mohammed K. Aliyu, mni was quoted saying “The action, no doubt improved the living condition of the inhabitants of Bagega community through entrepreneurship; by restoring job and wealth creation, sustainable community growth and industry, in economically, socially and environmentally sustainable ways”. What are the impacts of this project to the Bagega and other communities? – To be continued next week

         

 

Food Security in Africa: Is Genetically Modified Technology a Pathway? III

Food Security in Africa: Is Genetically Modified Technology a Pathway? III

My last line of the part II of this article ended with two pertinent questions. Can Africa afford GMT? What is the viable strategy for Africa to benefit from cutting – edge technology? On cost of research and development of the GMT for a particular crop, GMO, averagely, GMO takes 13 years and $130 million of research and development before coming to market (https://gmoanswers.com/ask/). From another literature, “GMO Answers”, the cost of generating a new genetically modified crop is $136 million with an average of seven years duration. This is why in the developed countries; private sector is the major driving force for research investment to develop GMT. Thus, the Biotech Companies rely on patents to safeguard their investment. These patents are protected through the World Trade Organization (article 27), the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (also known as UPOV), and laws of the member nations. This staggering cost of research is certainly very difficult for individual African countries to invest. Again, this exorbitant cost of developing GMO sometimes makes one to wonder whether the investment is really worth the effort. However, according to an Expert, Prof. Graham Brookes, an agricultural economist at PG Economics Ltd., U.K., was quoted saying “the main reason why GM crops contribute to reducing the cost of food worldwide has to do with the very nature of the biotechnology involved, which helps farmers increase production thanks to herbicide and pesticide resistant crops”. In terms of productivity, Brookes says that new biotechnology has generated the equivalent of “an extra 122 million tons of soybeans, 237 million tons of corn, 18 million tons of cotton lint and 6.6 million tons of canola” between 1996 and 2012. This means that the increase in productivity goes hand in hand with savings on pesticides and fuel compared to conventional methods. “When added to the extra income arising from higher yields, the net farm income benefit from using GM technology has been equal to $116.6 billion during that same period”, according to the Expert. Ultimately, GMO crops, through their environmental sustainability, potential for nutritionally fortified foods, and increased productivity, actually play a key role in keeping the cost of food down and making the investment paying higher dividends.  

On the strategy for Africa to benefit from this cutting-edge technology, already some African countries such as South Africa, Egypt, Burkina Faso and Sudan have since released some GM crops at commercial level. However, these GMO crops were developed and brought into the continent by giant global seeds companies such as Monsanto for purely profit making. These companies have secured the patents of these crops making it difficult for African researchers to develop their commercially viable GMOs. Already, the companies have already secured patents for some GM crops such as maize, soya, cotton and golden rice. In addition, the countries where these companies originated are assiduously promoting the GMO crops through special support for enactment of biosafety laws in African countries. According to report by ‘Friends of the Earth International’ stated that “The US administration's strategy consists of assisting African nations to produce biosafety laws that promote agribusiness interests instead of protecting Africans from the potential threats of GM crops,” said Haidee Swanby from the African Centre for Biosafety, which authored the report commissioned by Friends of the Earth International. Unlike Europe and other regions where strong biosafety laws have been in place for years, most African countries still lack such laws. Only seven African countries currently have functional biosafety frameworks in place. “African governments must protect their citizens and our rights must be respected. We deserve the same level of biosafety protection that European citizens enjoy,” said Mariann Bassey Orovwuje from Friends of the Earth Nigeria. Globally, markets for GM crops have been severely curbed by biosafety laws and regulations in the past decade. Consumers in some countries were reported to have vehemently rejected GM foods and crops due to unfounded belief that GM foods may have adverse effect on human beings. It is this belief that produced a global agreement known as “the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety”. The Protocol came into force in September 2003 and it was developed to ensure “adequate safe use, handling and transfer” of GM organisms.

One major concern on the imported GMOs in addition to relatively high cost is the issue of possible infusing of  “terminator gene”, which makes it compulsory for farmers to purchase new seeds on seasonal basis. Terminator gene technology or “suicide seeds” is technically named “Genetic use restriction technology (GURT)”, which is a method of restricting the use of genetically modified plants by causing second-generation seeds to be sterile. The GURT technology was developed under a cooperative research and development agreement between the Agricultural Research Service of the United States Department of Agriculture and Delta and Pine Land Company in the 1990s, but it is yet to be commercially available. But why was it developed? This means that GURT produces sterile seeds, so the seed from this crop could not be used as seeds, but only for sale as food or fodder, which will force farmers to buy seeds from the seed Companies or Biotech Firms on seasonal basis. Use of GURT is seen to be largely beneficial to seed companies at the expense of farmers. This concern forced Monsanto, one of the International Biotech Companies known for the sales of GMO seeds to refute an allegation that it has commercialized the ‘terminator seeds’. “Monsanto has never commercialized a biotech trait that resulted in sterile – or “Terminator” – seeds. Sharing the concerns of small landholder farmers, Monsanto made a commitment in 1999 not to commercialize sterile seed technology in food crops. We stand firmly by this commitment, with no plans or research that would violate this commitment”, a statement quoted from the Company’s website; https://monsanto.com/company/media/statements/terminator-seeds-myth/ 

As the debate for and against GMO crops continue to rage globally, researchers of Biotechnology are certainly not resting, they have already developed “Gene Editing and Other New Breeding Techniques”. These new techniques are targeted to provide a ‘Second Chance’ for worldwide embrace of Genetically Engineered Crops, which will completely allay the fear of GMO crops not being “natural” or “messing with nature”. New Breeding Techniques (NBTs), particularly CRISPR gene editing, which mimics natural breeding, may provides a regulatory work-around to open the door for a new generation of biotech innovation in the US, Europe and developing countries for acceptability by the general public according news report. The report further stated, “NBTs offer scientists easier ways to do cisgenic breeding— involving no “foreign” DNA—allowing the development of new plant and animal varieties. NBTs like CRISPR/Cas9, TALENs and ZFN do not fit neatly into the GMO definitions crafted by the various regulatory agencies around the world. Its proponents believe gene editing is similar to but faster and more precise than mutagenesis (creating new varieties by using radiation or chemicals), which is not regulated; there are hundreds of mutagenized crops sold as organic. It’s also similar to what can naturally occur in nature”.

Still on the strategy for Africa to exponentially benefit from GMT, it is quite clear that an auspicious progress has been made on GMO/GMT in advanced countries with several patents recorded for individuals and organizations. Despite this progress, researchers in Africa have plenty of opportunities to develop GMO crops to address the peculiarity of natural challenges against agricultural productivity. However, the process of GMO crops development requires massive investment by governments and private sectors. Huge fund is needed for research, development, awareness creation, extension, advocacy and regulations to make achievement of food security in Africa a reality. In this regard, the recent concerted effort of National Agricultural Seed Council (NASC) in organizing SEEDCONNECT Conference and Expo 2018 is highly commendable. The conference was organized in Abuja between 5^th and 6^th June 2018. Some of the objectives of the conference were to    identify critical gaps and develop a strategic framework for scaling up delivery of high quality seed to farmers. At the end of the two days conference, part of the communiqué recommended massive public awareness creation on the GM technology, which should carry along all stakeholders. It further recommended adequate investment in the seed value chain; training of cooperative youth and women group to take advantage of the opportunities that abound in the seed sub-sector. More of these types of platforms are needed across the African continent to overcome the challenges of food insecurity as we move towards 2050 when the population estimate of Africa will reach 2.5 billion people.

  

Food Security in Africa: Is Genetically Modified Technology a Pathway? II

Food Security in Africa: Is Genetically Modified Technology a Pathway? II

Food security issues in Africa are major concern to both people of Africa and the entire world when one ruminates on the enormity of the problems. Paraphrasing the issues raised in the first part of this article last week, it is pertinent to bring out major food insecurity indicators that comprehensively measured food security in the world. Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) of United Nations presented these indicators in a report, titled “ 2017 The Situation of Food Security and Nutrition in the World”. The report presents two major indicators “Prevalence of undernourishment (PoU) and Food insecurity experience scale (FIES)” for measuring “Prevalence of severe food insecurity”. While the average PoU of North America and European Union from the year 2000 to 2016 was 2.5 percentage of their population, Africa recorded 24.3 percent in the year 2000, which reduced to 17.8 percentage in 2013 and then increased to 20.1 percent in 2016. The report indicated an urgent situation in Eastern Africa, a sub-region with one – third of the population estimated to be undernourished. Comparatively, Africa was found to have the highest levels of severe food insecurity reaching an average of 27.4 percent of the population, which was almost four times compared with other regions/continents in 2016. Thus, food insecurity in Africa is quite worrisome and needs concerted strategy to address it as the World marches to 2050 when the population in Africa is projected to double the current population estimate of 1.3 billion people. This brings the question posed in my last article; can GMT be a pathway for ending hunger and achievement of food security in Africa?

As explained in this column, genetically modified technology (GMT) is advance level of the traditional breeding, which is fast gaining popularity and acceptance globally.  The process of traditional breeding involves the use of germplasm from the pool of the ancestors with desirable traits of interest and crossing them with each other, to make the progenies output carry through heritability and have the favorable traits from both parents. Traditional breeding is a way of harnessing the genetic resources of an organism by selective breeding. With advent of Information and Communication Technology (ICT), advance knowledge of genome and gene, scientists have elevated the traditional breeding to GMT through an in-depth study of techniques of molecular biology. This cutting – edge technology allows scientists to silence genes in viruses, bacteria or pests, which attack plants or animals thereby retarding growth, productivity or event ultimately kill such organisms. How can GMT contribute to achieve food security in Africa?

GMT can contribute to achieve food security in Africa through increase productivity of agricultural land and yield increase. Although, Food production depends on many factors, such as the quantity, frequency and distribution of of rain on the cropping area, the quality of the soil, type and number of weeds competing for soil nutrients and moisture and the number of pests militating against the crop growth. Each weed that grows in a field takes soil nutrients and moisture away from a food plant. The more resources that are used by weeds, the less food that can be produced. GMT can adequately address the issue of weeds and insects, which are major pests retarding the crops productivity and significantly reducing yields. In a 2014 analysis of 147 published articles, Klümper and Qaim estimated the yield of GM crops as 22 percent higher than the yield of conventional crops (https://gmoanswers.com/ask/how-can-gmos-increase-amount-food). A similar study conducted in Institute of Life Sciences in Italy led by Elisa Pellegrino, which involved meta-analysis of 6,006 peer-reviewed studies from 1996 to 2016 on genetically engineered maize. The results showed that genetically engineered (GE) maize produced a greater yield ranging from 5.6 to 24.5 percent compared to non-GE maize. It resulted in lower concentrations of mycotoxins (−28.8 percent), fumonisin (−30.6 percent), and thricotecens (−36.5 percent). The former is toxic and carcinogenic in humans and animals. There were also no significant differences in grain quality, such as proteins, lipids, and fiber. “The results support the cultivation of GE maize, mainly due to enhanced grain quality and reduction of human exposure to mycotoxins,” the team wrote in their paper. This high level study made 11,699 observations of production, grain quality, and more. These yield increases resulted from fewer weeds and insects contribute to increased food production. Data for this study came from GMO corn that had been planted in the United States, Europe, South America, Asia, Africa, and Australia.

From the foregoing discussion, I can use Graham Brookes statement to conclude on the benefits of GM crops. He said “Where farmers have been given the choice of growing GM crops, the economic benefits realized are clear and amounted to an average of over $100/hectare in 2014, Two-thirds of these benefits derive from higher yields and extra production, with farmers in developing countries seeing the highest gains. The environment is also benefiting as farmers increasingly adopt conservation tillage practices, build their weed management practices around more benign herbicides and replace insecticide use with insect resistant GM crops.” Graham Brookes is the Director of PG Economics, co-author of a report GM Crops: “Global Socio-Economic and Environmental Impacts 1996-2014” released by PG Economics (https://www.bio.org/press).

In addition to yield increase and its environmental friendliness, GM crops could also be genetically engineered to mitigate natural challenges such as drought, flood, shorter production period and infuse specific vitamins or micro- nutritional values to crops for enhancing human/animal body growth and development. However, there are many fears - hiccups associated with the products of biotechnology; some of these fears constitute serious impediment to the use and acceptability of such products especially those developed using genetic engineering to produce genetically modified organisms popularly called GMO. What are the fears?

The first fear among people is the "unnatural way" the GMO are developed. It seems a little unnatural, and there’s a psychological tendency to desire among people for naturalness in food and avoid some forms of innovation in food. “It’s just not natural to take the gene from one species and put it in another. It’s just not natural!” This statement causes fear to some people. The second and most deadly fear is claim that GM crop causes cancer. Cancer is the most dreadful and most fearful ailment in the history of mankind, a mere mention of this terminal disease keeps people off and away permanently. Another fear was caused by an allegation by some scientists of detecting multiple toxins from GMOs in Maternal and Fetal Blood.

All these fears concerning health are baseless as explained in this Column two years ago. The safety of GM crops has been a top agenda of international organizations such as United Nations, regional organizations, advanced countries and food safety authorities. They all vehemently gave GMO a clean bill of health for public consumption.  The World Health Organization (WHO) was reported of not finding any risks associated with the consumption of GMO foods.  According to WHO, GM foods currently on the international market have passed risk assessments and are not likely to present risks for human health. In addition, the general population in the countries where they have been approved has showed no effects on human health as a result of the consumption of such foods. Another refutable organization, Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) has stated categorically that no adverse impact on human health have been shown as a result of the consumption of GMO foods by the general population in the countries where they have been approved. In African continent, African Union (AU) and NEPAD have all nodded their agreements for the use of GMOs and adopted the biosafety measures to safeguard likely health risks to the people: A body known as African Biosafety Network of Expertise (ABNE) has been established under the AU-NEPAD to assist member countries to develop the right biosafety expertise to effectively carry out biosafety regulation. This is to balance the adoption of biotechnology as a tool to advance the Continent by AU. Working under the UN, 54 African nations signed the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, which requires countries to domesticate the Cartagena Protocol having their own respective Biosafety Laws. Authorities of many countries in Africa and other regions are strongly united to ensure safety and environmentally friendly of the GM crops. Still, GM technologies are not for grapping easily without much sweat. Can Africa afford GMT? What is the viable strategy for Africa to benefit from cutting – edge technology?  (To be continued next week)