An environmental activist and a public health advocate have questioned the transparency and effectiveness of Nigeria’s biosafety regulator’s oversight regarding the safety and regulation of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs).
The environmental and health experts, who both work with the Health of Mother Earth Foundation (HOMEF), say the regulatory framework overseen by the National Biosafety Management Agency (NBMA) has failed to adequately address fundamental issues surrounding the safety, environmental impact, and economic implications of genetically modified crops being introduced into Nigeria’s food system.
|
|
In a joint statement forwarded to PREMIUM TIMES on 9 March, the environmental activist, Nnimmo Bassey and the public health scientist, Joyce Brown, argued that the “growing scepticism” among Nigerians stems largely from what the duo described as a lack of transparency and independent scientific evidence supporting the safety of GMOs approved for use in the country.
Mr Bassey and Ms Brown said that while the regulator insists Nigeria is “regulating” GMOs rather than experimenting with them, the absence of publicly available peer-reviewed risk assessments raises fundamental questions about biosafety oversight.
|
|
|
|---|
“One of the key questions the Nigerian government, through the NBMA, is yet to answer is where the results of long-term and independent risk assessments, including feeding tests, are that confirm the safety of the approved GMO products,” the statement said.
Nigeria has approved several genetically engineered crops for commercial planting and others for food, feed and processing. But the critics argued that information about the scientific evidence used to justify these approvals is not publicly accessible.
They warned that the current approach risks turning Nigeria into a “laboratory,” where citizens unknowingly become test subjects for genetically engineered foods.
Debate over food security
Supporters of GMOs often argue that the technology is necessary to feed Nigeria’s rapidly growing population. However, Mr Bassey and Ms Brown said this claim ignores evidence suggesting that genetically engineered crops do not necessarily produce higher yields than conventional varieties grown under similar conditions.
They also questioned the economic motivations behind the push for biotechnology in agriculture, suggesting that multinational seed companies and other commercial interests may be driving policy decisions.
The debate has also drawn attention to the experiences of cotton farmers who adopted genetically engineered varieties.
According to the advocates, farmers who planted Bt cotton for several years reported in 2024 that the crop had not outperformed conventional varieties and had instead contributed to soil degradation.
Bt cotton is a genetically modified pest-resistant variety that produces its own insecticide. It is derived from the soil bacterium called Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt).
They attributed this to toxins produced by the genetically engineered plant, raising questions about the environmental sustainability of the technology.
Control of seeds
Another issue fuelling mistrust, the duo said, is the control of genetically modified seeds and intellectual property rights associated with them.
They warned that genetically engineered crops could contaminate indigenous seed varieties through cross-pollination, potentially threatening Nigeria’s biodiversity and farmers’ ability to save and reuse seeds.
Mr Bassey and Ms Brown argued that Nigeria, which they say is a centre of origin for cowpea, should adopt restrictions on genetically engineered crops, as in 2024, when a court in Mexico imposed an indefinite ban on genetically engineered corn, citing risks of “imminent harm to the environment.”
The advocates also criticised the lack of mandatory labelling for foods produced from genetically modified ingredients.
They said the absence of clear labels prevents consumers from exercising their right to choose what they eat and undermines accountability in the food system.
The duo said a survey conducted by HOMEF between 2018 and 2023 identified more than 50 processed food brands on Nigerian supermarket shelves that could contain genetically modified ingredients, including cereals, vegetable oils and cake mixes.
ALSO READ: What Nigerians need to know about GMO foods – NAFDAC DG
They urged the government to halt the approval of new genetically engineered crops until an independent review of existing approvals is conducted.
They also called for stronger investment in agriculture, including improved extension services, better infrastructure and enhanced support for smallholder farmers.
According to them, addressing insecurity, low agricultural funding and poor rural infrastructure would be more effective in tackling food shortages than relying heavily on genetically engineered crops.
They advocated a shift toward agroecology — a farming approach that emphasises ecological sustainability, indigenous knowledge and shorter food supply chains.
“GMOs attempt to address the symptoms of deeper problems in our food system. The ecological, health and economic risks may ultimately outweigh the benefits,” they said.
Discover more from Premium Times Nigeria
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
