<B>GENETICALLY</B> modified crops are spreading so rapidly that it has become almost impossible for consumers to avoid them, according to agricultural experts. The Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) Bill was voted in the National Assembly despite much controversy. This law aims at regulating the arrival of GMOs in Mauritius, controlling their use and imposing precautionary principles.

The deputy prime minister and minister of Finance, as a supporter of the Bill, expressed his convictions. ?Thanks to this bill, Mauritius will be able to use biotechnology to improve its agricultural efficiency, but it will, above all, allow better protection for the consumers, environment and biodiversity.? The opposition however was more cautious. For them, the government should be very careful on the issue. The Verts agreed with them on one point: the country does not have enough scientific and human resources for the bill to be effective.

A Genetically Modified Organism is the result of direct manipulation of the genetic makeup of a living organism in order to modify its properties. When people speak of GMOs, they commonly refer to crop plants created for human or animal consumption using the latest molecular biology techniques. Biologists are working on such techniques to give specific characteristics to plants and improve their resistance and nutritional content.

<B>European boycott </B>

Actually, some experts would like to extend genetic engineering because this method allows the creation of plants with the exact desired traits in a precise and rapid way. They transfer genes from one plant to another, but they can as well use genes, which do not exist in any plant - organism.The labelling of products that contain GMOs remains one of the strengths of the recent bill. Actually, many products we already consume contain GMOs but we are not aware of this. With this new bill, consumers will have to be informed on the packaging if a product contains GMOs so that they can choose, which is not possible at the moment.

All over the world, there is controversy on the explicit implementation of GMOs in daily life. In Europe, for instance, there has been a prolonged boycott of US (biggest producer of GMOs) products. However, the adoption by the European Parliament of legislation on labelling and traceability of GMOs has facilitated their introduction on the market. It is exactly the same in Mauritius. A law aimed at regulating GMOs use should prevent any problems.

Of course, GMOs are totally new and it is not absurd at all to favour caution. But this is precisely the aim of the Bill. GMOs could present some disadvantages. Risks are related to three concerns: environmental hazards, human health risks and economic concerns.

In a letter to the prime minister, ACIM (Consumers? Association of Mauritius) took a stand on GMOs and explained the psychological perception, ?Mauritius as a GMO sugar island could do untold damage to our economy both in the agricultural and tourist sectors. » It adds, ?Incidentally, José Bové hinted on his last visit to Mauritius that they would launch a consumer boycott of Mauritian sugar once it is known that this sugar could penetrate the European market.?

However, GMO defendants highlight all the advantages that the whole world could reap from the new products. Two main positive aspects are: the strong resistance of modified crops and the possible advantages for poorer countries. (see inset)

The debate over GMOs could be never-ending. However, there is one certainty: we are already eating GMOs without knowing it. The Bill will allow us to be informed, which is a positive spin-off.

<B>Debate over genetic manipulation: pros and cons</B>

The potential risks for human health are numerous: allergies, interaction with other genes, resistance to antibiotics. There are no advanced studies on these risks, which should lead us to adopt precautions. However, according to most scientists, eating GM food is not hazardous to human health. Only a few researchers have expressed doubts about these products.

As far as the environment is concerned, biodiversity could be threatened. An improved variety of one plant could replace the traditional one that would thus rapidly disappear.

Moreover, bringing GM food on the market is a lengthy and costly process and agri-biotech companies wish to ensure profitable returns on investment. Consumer advocates are worried that patenting new plant varieties may raise the price of seeds so high that small farmers could not afford seeds for GM crops, thus widening the gap between the wealthy and the poor.

The crops would be much more resistant to herbicides and pesticides. Both products are known to damage plants and consumers are often unwilling to buy such plants. GM Foods (GMFs) should solve this problem, as they don?t need those products, or very little. Modified crops could also resist drought, cold or disease. All that is needed is to introduce the corresponding gene into the plant to make it resistant. But the strongest argument of GMO advocates is that they could be the solution to hunger. Many people suffer from malnutrition in third world countries and their diet often contains single components without all nutrients, which causes deficiency. This problem has led to the development of ?golden rice?; which has an unusually high amount of vitamin A. In poorer countries, many medicines or vaccines are lacking because of production and storage costs. Scientists are thus working to develop edible vaccines in tomatoes and potatoes.