The government, on the other hand, dismisses the criticism, saying the regulation actually aims to control the import of GMOs, which were previously brought into the country without any special inspection due to a lack of relevant laws and regulations. Analysts are at odds over the issue: some complain that a scientific debate has turned into an ideological debate while others talk about approaching these products without prejudice.Bugün’s Gülay Göktürk complains that GMO debates in Turkey and throughout the world have been overshadowed by the involved parties’ efforts to ensure their ideological dominance, noting that the problem is that science is becoming overwhelmingly influenced by political ideologies and a large proportion of people believe that GMOs will lead to the end of the world. “We ordinary people cannot know whether the ozone hole is getting larger, how quickly the icebergs melt, whether nuclear waste is being stored safely or the side effects of GMOs. Regarding these issues, we need to believe in science. But science cannot distance itself from populism, and we see that the ideological dominance of those who believe in the ‘Green God’ deeply influence scientists,” Göktürk says. She is open-minded about the possible benefits of GMOs and says humanity may benefit much from them as they could end the problem of hunger because GMO technology aims to produce cereals rich in protein, cheaper fruits and vegetables and foods with more flavor and better nutritional value. “This is an opportunity that could be easily missed. Before treating these foods as if they are poisonous, should we not stop for a while and think responsibly? Interestingly enough, those who create an uproar about the world’s hunger problem are the ones who have the biggest problem with GMOs,” says Göktürk.
Hürriyet’s Yalçın Doğan dwells on differing comments from scientists and agricultural experts regarding the new regulation, noting that what one scientist or agricultural expert says differs from what another one says. “Just as is the case with many other issues, we have turned this issue into an intricate problem,” complains Doğan. He also says GMOs should not be approached with prejudice because their use can have both good and bad results. “Here are two different examples for you: Many people in Africa are born with vision problems due to a vitamin A deficiency. Golden Rice is now generally consumed in Africa. Scientists in Switzerland merged ordinary rice with a plant that produces vitamin A [precursors] and created Golden Rice and sold this genetically modified rice to Africa. The rice is both golden in color and contains vitamin A [precursors]. The number of people with vision problems decreased in Africa. This means GMOs are good. In Brazil, soybean and chestnuts were combined in order to obtain soybeans with high nutritional value. This product led to allergies. This means GMOs are bad,” says Doğan.
Regarding the regulation, Akşam’s Ali Ulusoy says the banning of GMOs is a political matter, so if the government decided not to ban them completely, having some sort of supervision over their import is better than not having any supervision at all.
