By Katy Salmon

NAIROBI

Hungry countries around the world are facing a difficult ethical dilemma as a result of the widespread use of genetically modified (GM) crops.

As Francis Nthuku of Biotechnology Trust Africa puts it: ''Do you prefer to die of hunger now or eat and die later?

''A hungry country does not have a choice at times. A hungry country will eat GM organisms,'' he says.

The recent stand-off between Zimbabwe and the United States over the use of GM food aid has brought this issue into sharp focus.

Zimbabwe has a long-standing policy against GM food on the grounds of human safety and the potential threat that GM crop contamination could pose for the local environment. But with over 6 million of its people facing famine, the Zimbabwean government has agreed to accept GM maize from the United States on the condition it is milled.

Dr. Ellie Osir works with the International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (ICIPE) in Nairobi, Kenya, studying the impact of GM crops. He explains the risks that poor countries are exposing themselves to when they accept GM food aid.

''African farmers don't buy new seeds every season. They simply recycle. If food aid comes in as grain, people are actually going to plant these grains,'' he says.

''Once you plant it, you have introduced it without doing the all the necessary studies,'' he explains.

ICIPE are currently testing a GM crop called BT maize, produced by Monsanto. The maize has been genetically altered to produce the bacillus thuringiensis (BT) bacteria, a toxin which kills insects.

Traditionally BT was sprayed on crops, like a pesticide. When the BT gene is put inside the plant, it continuously produces the toxin itself. BT maize has long been used in the United States and, more recently, in South Africa.

But that does not mean it is safe for Kenya, where it must first win approval from the National Bio-safety Committee.

Because BT maize continuously produces the toxin, unlike with spraying where it is soon washed off, insects linked to the plant can rapidly develop resistance to the toxin.

''It means that, for example in Kenya, if you introduce BT maize, within six to 10 years resistance will have spread almost everywhere. A product that was useful when sprayed in the traditional way becomes completely useless,'' explains Osir.

In the developed world, many strategies are used to delay resistance, such as interspersing GM crops with normal ones. But the farming systems in Africa are totally different, with millions of small-scale farmers tilling just a quarter of an acre of land.

''You cannot tell them to plant this field with GM crops, the next field to leave GM crops out,'' says Osir.

Under laboratory conditions, ICIPE have already found resistance developing in insects over a few generations. This does not take long as insects only live for a matter of months.

Ideally, these risk assessment studies should be carried out under field conditions, but it is too dangerous.

''We cannot use the real thing because of the potential risks of it escaping. If you do it in the field, it's gone; you can't call it back. It will be too late,'' Osir explains.

Another worry is that BT maize might kill beneficial insects other than the specific pests that it is targeting.

''If it kills the natural enemies of the pests for which it is intended then you have a problem because BT could interfere with the food chain,'' says Osir.

It is important that each country tests GM crops itself because some effects are locale specific.

''You have to look at a particular ecological zone. A lot of studies have been done in the US. In Africa there's hardly anything. I think a lot of studies are required in Africa under different ecological areas to really see whether there's a risk,'' suggests Osir.

''I think in Africa there's not that much awareness about this issue. A lot needs to be done. People have to make informed choices,'' he says.

Genetic pollution is another risk, where pollen travels by wind and fertilises neighbouring crops.

A group of Canadian organic farmers have launched a lawsuit against biotech giants Monsanto and Aventis seeking compensation for damages caused by genetically modified 'canola' they say is blowing into their fields, contaminating their crops and their seed supply, and driving away premium-paying customers, most of whom are in Europe.

One reason Zimbabwe is so scared of GM maize is because the grain could jeopardise its own crops and its European export market where GM food is strictly controlled.

Zimbabwe is also concerned that the GM maize could contain a terminator gene, which could pollute natural varieties. This means that seeds cannot germinate and be recycled. New seeds have to be bought.

For small-scale farmers this is another potential drawback of GM crops.

''Resource-poor farmers will have a problem. They will have to have the money to go and buy this. Seed technology is commercially driven. It is not intended to be given for free. Somebody will need to recoup their investment.

''There is always that risk that the whole seed industry is controlled by just a few companies and they could fix prices. They could do whatever they want,'' warns Osir.

Despite the risks, farmers cannot afford to ignore the potential benefits of GM crops.

Stem borers can destroy up to 50 percent of maize crops in Kenya. If BT maize is introduced, farmers could double their yields.

Tissue culture bananas and sweet potatoes have proven a great success with Kenyan farmers because of their high yields. The University of Nairobi has also used tissue culture technology - where crops are cleaned of disease and yield improved - to produce disease-free citrus.

''Like any new technology, people will always be uncertain about the possible dangers. There's no technology that is absolutely risk free. Biotechnology could have risks,'' says Francis Nanga'ayo, a scientist with Kenya Agricultural Research Institution (KARI).

''The way to address this is not to go into hysterical debate where people say, 'biotechnology is bad', period. It's good for people to talk in a balanced way, where people can see the science of it and the ethics of it, '' he advises.

''Once there is scientific capacity to find out whether GMOs are dangerous, I see no problem. Scientists should be allowed to investigate and then tell the consumers,'' he says.

Kenya has guidelines for the production of genetically modified materials which were drawn up by the government, the National Council of Science and Technology and other stakeholders. These guidelines are implemented by the National Bio-safety Committee made up of experts in various fields.

A bio-safety bill has been drafted and is pending to go into parliament.

Other African countries are at a similar stage - finding themselves ill-equipped to deal with the GM issue.

''The government has yet to finalise the policy on GM organisms in the country vis-a-vis imports or growing of such materials, Zambian permanent secretary for information, David Kashweka, told UN Integrated Regional Information Network (IRIN).

''Our position on genetically modified foods is that they should not be allowed to be consumed in the country without knowing fully the implications and consequences thereof,'' he said.

’’Unfortunately, when your people are starving, there is little choice.’’