Native Hawaiian Perspectives on Genetically Modified Food - Essay Example

Native Hawaiian Perspectives on Genetically Modified Food Introduction Hawaii stands out as a unique archipelago of islands in the vast sea with complex ecosystems that have slowly evolved over centuries (Gibson 2013). The region is rich in biodiversity and consists of many species of both endangered animal and plants than any place on the entire earth. However, the beautiful ecosystem is under siege owing to the increased development, expanding population and climate change that poses imminent pressure to the rich biodiversity (Pulitano 318). Alien species are overtaking the island, posting a significant challenge to the native species thus erasing the peoples opportunity of interacting with their natural surroundings. The challenge of increased ecosystem disturbance or destruction is causing food crises, and this explains the prevalent issue of genetically modified food is becoming common among the Hawaiians (Gibson 2013). Therefore, the issues of GMO is a serious matter as some groups against the genetically modified food cite health and safety issues while those in support argue that the move is a way of addressing the raging food shortage in the region. A point to note is that Hawaii is has been many times referred to as the GMO testing laboratory of the world where in only ten years, around 2000 field test have been carried on the genetically engineered food in close to 6000 locations (Pulitano 318) . Therefore, it is imperative to identify the public perspective on the genetically modified food and to highlight if the Hawaiians are ready for the GMOs or not. When addressing the issue of the native Hawaiians perspectives on genetically modified foods, there are many stakeholders to consider. For instance, the educated natives believe that these crops are the remedy to environmental protection, and conservation helps the economy and secure jobs for the agricultural workers or farmers (Gibson 2013). The implication is that the educated natives support the GMOs for the contribution they are having on the country’s employment sector, food security, and economic income. In fact, major institutions like the University of Hawaii are support efforts for genetic engineering and even have projects of their own to experiment the gene engineering of various crop species (Pulitano 318). Interestingly, the educated natives, just like other portion of the public, believe that there should be a restriction on the genetic engineering process (Gibson 2013). For instance, they only support GM crops development procedures where cross-pollination with the non-genetically modified crops does not take place. The implication is that the cross-pollination can further dilute the conventional crops gene pool thus causing resistance to the target species and also developing traits that could be harmful to human consumption. In support of the Genetically Modified Food, the University of Hawaii is currently engineering seeds for the disease resistance bananas as variety from the cross-breeding of papaya variety and the Spanish lime as a safe plant (Pulitano 318). On the other hand, the institutions in the state support the GMO seeds that have been developed over time, approximately nine years where tests have been carried out, and potential health and safety risks identified if any. Nonetheless, institutions believe that the move to ban the GMO products may prevent them from using scientific knowledge to address the current food crisis in the world because climate change is eminent and agricultural biotechnology is the only way to finding remedies to the situation. Quite a handful of native Hawaiians believe that GMOs may not have any potential harm to the health and safety of the individuals, after all (Nelson 203). They argue that there has not been any evidence associating the GMOs to health risks and dangerous for consumption. On the other hand, one fact emerges from this group of GMO supporters that not all the genetically-engineered crops are the same. The implication is that every plant that comes from the genetic technology has some gone through a different alteration or modification. The group supporting the use of consumption of the GMO foods suggest that everyone should have freedom to choose what they eat and that labelling of the foods should be done so that no one lays a blame for consuming what he or she considers harmful. Besides, labelling is quite necessary for the consumers since they can choose what they perceive to be healthy and avoid the ones they are suspicious about (Pulitano 315). Therefore, those in support of GMO food argue against any potential health risks but also recommend that labelling would help people choose what they believe are not harmful. A section of the Hawaiians is more cautious about the effects and possible impacts of consuming the genetically modified food. They have enough information to question the allegations on the immune system and allergic responses from the biopharmaceutical crops both to the human health and the islands endangered species, in general (Nelson 203). Conversely, there is sufficient research to ascertain that GM crops are responsible for allergies. According to Smith (1), genetically modified soy has the potential of increasing the natural allergens in the crops. In this case, the genetic transformation increases the trypsin inhibitor in soy, and this can cause allergies to individuals. Therefore, the section of Hawaiians objecting the consumption of genetically-engineered foods might as well be relevant given that more studies are confirming the potential side effects of transforming some crop species. Nonetheless, the objection to the GMOs is because the public believes that their native crops are at the danger of contamination especially the common staple food crops like taro, coffee, papaya, and corn (Nelson 203). The implication is that there are a growing number of the genetically modified versions of the crops thus posing a threat to indigenous species that risk extinction in the near future. The environmental lobby groups, as part of the Hawaii’s native public insists that genetically modified crop species, especially the ones developed to withstand or resist pest infestations may soon transform into resistant traits that will soon spread through various forms of pollination. There is a growing concern for Bt or Bacillus thuringiensis that was engineered to kill pests and has been in the use for a long a decade (Nelson 203). However, the crop, though not confirmed, has been showing some elements of producing resistant traits and instead offering protection against pests, is producing traits that could be harmful to the entire ecosystem. In this case, the native lobby groups are of the opinion that genetically modified foods are good in that they have provided farmers with the alternative of controlling pests and other crop-killer diseases (Pulitano 318). However, with time, the crop species develop resistant traits whose effects might be harmful to the environment, human health as well as becoming alien species that can overtake the entire ecosystem. At one time, the Hawaii County residents took to the ballot to vote for or against GM foods and the result was a ban on the genetically-engineered foods (Gibson 213). However, there was mixed reactions from the sections of the residents as the long-time island dwellers believed that it was the visitors or the newcomers who voted massively for the ban (Nelson 203). Many of the long-time residents have been living on the island for years since the genetic engineering began. In fact, they attribute the success of their farmlands to genetic modification that has seen the development of varieties of papayas since the 1990s. On the other hand, the original Hawaii residents confess that they have consumed the papayas for quite a long time and have never witnessed any health risks. In this case, the Hawaiians are divided as the natives believe that genetic modification is the main reason as to why they are successful in farming but the newcomers might have joined the wave of opposing the GMO foods citing health and safety concerns. There is the religious community with their stance about using biotechnology for agriculture. Hawaii, just like other states, is Christianity dominated, but the members of faith have lived to see the GM foods becoming frequent in the islands. However, the question on the religious perception of the genetically modified foods was addressed almost 15 years when different faiths gathered to give their verdict on the issue (Nelson 203). The religious debate is still at large though most religions of the world have accepted the consumption of the genetically modified foods. On the other hand, one challenge remains for the various religions and cultures especially on the criteria to use in evaluating methods of technologies of developing the genetically modified foods. It is also evident that most religions are not arguing based on their true values but have rather joined the current anti-GMO bandwagon that opposes the foods without weighing the costs and benefits of using the GMO products (Pulitano 314). Conclusion In summary, Hawaiians voted against genetically modified foods and this has been attributed to the newcomers in the islands despite the natives admitting that they have dependent of genetic modification to improve their crop yields without side effects. It is also evident that Hawaii’s public as mixed views on the use of GM foods where some cite health and safety concerns while others decry the effects the move has on the countrys ecosystem. The educated believe that genetic modification is the only solution to the imminent food crisis while the religion has not shown any strong objection to using genetic modification to address food crisis. Works Cited Gibson, Daylin-Rose. "Remembering the" Big Five": Hawaiis Constitutional Obligation to Regulate the Genetic Engineering Industry." Asian-Pacific L. & Poly J. 15 (2013): 213-213. Nelson, Melissa K. "Protecting the Sanctity of Native Foods." State of the World 2013. Island Press/Center for Resource Economics, 2013. 201-209. Pulitano, Elvira. Indigenous Rights in the Age of the UN declaration. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. Smith Jeffrey, M. Genetically Modified Foods Unsafe? GM Foods and Allergies. May 13, 2014. Web. 31 March, 2015. . Read More