Some statements dese-rve to be ridiculed. Earlier this week, the honorable Federal Minister for Food Security made one such comment. Remarking on the recent increase in the price of poultry products, the minister pleaded that the public should stop consuming poultry products, as the birds are raised on feed that is poisonous and causes cancer.
The food security minister’s war of nerves with the solvent extraction industry has been well documented in this space. Readers interested in the background developments may review three research stories by BR Research over the last month: “Banning nutrition: one GMO at a time”, published on Dec 06, 2022. “Soybean ban: follow the science”, published on Dec 07, 2022. and,“Soybean cargo: an unfortunate hack”, published on Dec 12, 2022”. Today’s comment, thus, will not review the way in which a commercial activity occurring in legal vacuum has been mishandled by those involved. Instead, it would focus on the minister’sirresponsible statement, and its far-reaching consequences.
In his media talk, the food security minister noted that “he does not consume poultry meat – nay, meat of any kind". And the public should do so too”. If the minister believes that the public should celebrate his decision to go vegan, he has another thing coming.
In case the minister does not realize, he is the supreme policymaker on food security and safety of the country, not a pundit sitting on a morning show. Any comment made by a federal minister of a country on matters of food security is by definition a policy statement.
In a developed society, it would be presumed that a minister would make such statements after reviewing mountains of incontrovertible evidence. If a minister has sufficient cause to believe that poultry meat and farm eggs cause cancer, then mere ‘suggestions’ are not enough. He has the power to – and must – ban all poultry meat immediately. Unless of course you do not live in a developed society, where it is possible – nay, likely – that a minister could make such comments based on mere hearsay.
At the risk of repeating ad nauseum, if genetically modified foods are bad, don’t just demonize the poultry feed made from soybean and canola. Ban the import of soybean and canola edible oil. Ban the dairy and cattle feed made from cottonseeds, which are also GMO. Ban also the imported sweet and pop corns, soy sauce, potato chips. Ban also the imported beef steaks, and fish – all raised on a healthy GMO diet.
Unless of course the ministry has no such advisory from the food safety experts. Surely, the thousand strong workforce commanded under the National Food Security and Research division can produce one research study (or even a study of studies) documenting evidence that genetically modified food poses risks to human or animal health. If the ministry is not up to the task, it could employ service of private sector researchers from reputed organizations such as Aga Khan University and others to show any correlation – let alone causation – between genetically modified feed/food and spread of cancer. Instead, the ministry has not even invited comments from experts, let alone organized a dialogue to debate the matter in a constructive and unbiased manner.
(An even easier way to go about it would be to conduct a survey of whether research hospitals and universities source their chicken and eggs from non-GMO sources. Surely, research hospitals and institutions that discourage use of formula milk for babies would not want to feed cancerous food to their staff and patients!)
Unfortunately, the safety of GMO based foods is not the only thing the federal minister seems to be misguided about. Poultry meat is the unsung hero that has made affordable protein possible, allowing significant improvement in national nutritional outcomes over the last decade.
Since FY13, poultry meat prices have risen less than any other protein source in the CPI food basket, as a result of massive improvements in productivity due to availability of cheap feed mix – made of biotech soybean and maize. In fact, it is the only source of protein where the rise in output has outpaced the rise in prices across country. Compare this to price and output trends in fresh milk, beef, daal chana (gram) – primary protein substitutes – and the miracle of cheap poultry would become apparent. To discourage public from consuming poultry is to leave the nation nutritionally impoverished. Whether this happens as a result of poor knowledge or personal vendetta is irrelevant.
One would imagine that the passionate pleas made by the solvent extraction and poultry industries’ associations would have already reached the prime minister and other members of federal cabinet. Unfortunately, it is also evident that the federal government is held hostage by the food security minister’s pride on the matter, given that he holds key votes that could bring down the government. But there is a way forward.
Rather than forgoing potential past errors made by the solvent extraction industry by importing commercial cargoes that may not have been permissible under the strictest interpretation of the law, legislate for the future. Consult with experts on the matter, even if only those professionals that are employed by the various research institutes run by the ministry, and issue a ruling on the long pending applications for import of genetically modified seeds for food and feed processing. Review regulations followed on genetically modified organisms and their human consumption by other countries, such as Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia and UAE, and arrive at a decision based on science.
Instead of offering medically unsound advice to the public, find honorable ways to resolve the crisis. During times of extreme price inflation, the public deserves better than being robbed off the only affordable protein source. The prime minister must pay heed.
