A prominent farmer leader, Rakesh Tikait, has expressed strong opposition to the recent development of genome-edited (GE) rice varieties by the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR). In a letter addressed to Union Agriculture Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan, Tikait stated that the Bharatiya Kisan Union (BKU) fundamentally objects to the introduction of these GE rice strains.
Tikait warned that if necessary, the BKU would protest these new rice varieties both on the streets and in the fields. He expressed his belief that the Agriculture Minister has been misinformed about the safety of gene editing technology. The farmer leader highlighted that the BKU has been vocal about the potential dangers and adverse effects of Genetically Modified (GM) crops for many decades. While acknowledging the Minister’s past stance against GM crops, Tikait contested the notion that GM crops inherently lead to higher yields.
He cited examples such as GM mustard, pointing out that non-GM varieties with higher yields still exist in India. Similarly, for crops like cotton and soybeans, he noted that many countries with higher yields than India use non-GM varieties. Tikait referred to studies by researchers like Dharm Pal Ji and Dr. Richhariya, suggesting that traditional seed varieties can offer superior yields.
Tikait’s letter detailed several concerns regarding GE rice:
1. **Use of Foreign Genes:** He argued that gene editing, like traditional GM technology, involves the use of genes from external sources. In the case of GE rice, genes from foreign viruses and bacteria have reportedly been used. Tikait questioned how it can be assumed that these genes have no impact or that their traces are completely removed.
2. **Risk to Indigenous Varieties:** Similar to the impact of Bt cotton on indigenous cotton varieties, Tikait warned that GE rice could contaminate local and wild rice strains, posing a threat to India’s rich rice biodiversity. He stated that this kind of damage has already occurred to India’s cotton varieties due to GM cotton.
3. **Unintended Consequences:** Tikait pointed out that GE crops, like GM crops, may suffer from unintended genetic side effects and off-target modifications. Global research, he mentioned, indicates that gene editing is not always a precise technology, leading to unforeseen outcomes.
4. **Cultural Significance:** He added a cultural dimension, noting that rice is considered ‘akshat’ (unbroken) in Indian culture and is used in various rituals. Tikait expressed concern that the ‘broken’ or modified genes in GE rice might render it unsuitable for such traditional uses.
Tikait acknowledged that GE rice is being developed for traits like drought and salinity tolerance, and increased yield. However, he asserted that numerous indigenous rice varieties already possess these qualities and should be promoted by the government and ICAR instead. He also raised questions about intellectual property rights related to these developments.
He concluded by stating that these concerns have been raised by independent, retired scientists. Tikait urged the Minister and ICAR scientists to publicly disclose all biosafety data and documentation related to GE technology in rice and other crops if they are confident in its safety.
