AFSA Open Letter Opposing Human Feeding Trials Involving GM Banana


The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Dr. Wendy S. White, Iowa State University

The Director, Human-Institutional Review Board, Iowa State University

Dear Sirs/Madam

We, the undersigned, representing diverse constituencies from across Africa and the world, working towards food sovereignty, are strongly opposed to the human feeding trials taking place at the Iowa State University involving the so called genetically modified (GM) ‘super banana’ – GM Matooke, Sweet and Roasting bananas.

These trials funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation are being carried out under the leadership of Dr. Wendy White of the Iowa State University, on 12 young students, with the intention of introducing the GM banana first in Uganda and later, to other countries in East Africa. The GM banana, currently undergoing field trials in Uganda, was developed by scientists at Queensland University of Technology in Australia, similarly also funded by the Gates Foundation.

Despite claims to the contrary from the promoters and developers of GM crops, and to reiterate what nearly three hundred global scientists have stated in an Open Letter in December 2013[i], there is no consensus that GM crops are safe for human consumption. Most of the research carried out by independent scientists on GM crops directly contradicts the results of biotech industry-sponsored studies that claim no evidence of risk or harm.

This so-called ‘Super-banana’, has been genetically modified to contain extra beta-carotene, a nutrient the human body uses to produce vitamin A. Unlike current GM crops in commercial production where agronomic traits have been altered, scientists have spliced genes into the GM banana to produce substances for humans to digest (extra beta carotene). The GM banana is a whole different ballgame, raising serious concerns about the risks to African communities who would be expected to consume it. Production of vitamin A in the body is complex and not fully understood. This raises important questions including inter alia, whether high levels of beta- carotene or vitamin A may carry risks and what the nature of those risks might be.  While a risk assessment is a pre-requisite for GM foods under many national jurisdictions, the need for specific and additional food safety assessment for nutritionally enhanced GM crops such as the GM banana is acknowledged by the Codex Alimentarius Commission, as genetic modifications result in a composition that may be significantly different from their conventional counterparts[ii].

We question what firm conclusions can be drawn from feeding trials of young people residing in the United States for poor rural farmers and consumers in Africa, given all the differences in lifestyle and diets between these two populations?

What other foods will these students be eating with the GM bananas, and how will these be eaten? Will the participants in the USA be eating this in the same way? Will it have the same color and same levels of water composition? Would cooking the GM bananas result in a loss of beta-carotene? Will participants be given portions of fats and oils (such as butter) to supplement the banana, as was the case in feeding trials with Golden Rice to facilitate the absorption of beta-carotene? If so, then the GM banana feeding studies may be of little relevance to rural Ugandans and other East Africans who prepare the Matooke variety simply by steaming and mashing.

Great strides have been made in the Philippines, another target country for Vitamin enhanced GM crops, through government programs that supply supplements and improve access to vitamin A rich foods, to overcome Vitamin A deficiencies. This is done without the enormous costs or unknown long- term impacts on health, the environment and farming systems that are entailed by using GM crops. And it is more completely in control of the user society.

Africa, the USA, and indeed the rest of the world, do not need GM crops. These crops divert resources away from more locally appropriate and controlled agricultural solutions to nutritional concerns. If indeed the aim of those involved in the promotion of the project is truly to combat Vitamin A deficiency then surely they should be advocating for the consumption of more diverse fruits and foods, such as sweet potatoes that are rich in Vitamin A and that are in abundance in Africa. Ironically, the promotion of a GM food staple high in Vitamin A, risks perpetuating monolithic diets, the very causes of Vitamin A deficiency in the first place.

This letter is in solidarity with farmers and communities in Africa and around the world, which have resisted the genetic modification of their staple foods- from Ghana, Kenya and Zambia- to Mexico, India and the Philippines. We will not stand by idly as attempts are made to systematically genetically modify Africa’s staple foods and in the process gain a massive positive public relations coup by claiming to have conquered health problems at the unnecessary risk to Africans.

Finally, we demand that the full contents of this open letter are shared with the human subjects of these trials in the USA.

Bridget Mugambe


Policy Advocate

Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA)

P.O.BOX 571,

Kampala, Uganda


Tel: 256 775 692499

[i] No Scientific Consensus on Safety of Genetically Modified Organisms – Scientists Release Statement as World Food Prize goes to Monsanto and Syngenta

[ii] See

Supported by:

  1. African Biodiversity Network  (Kenya)
  2. African Centre for Biosafety  (South Africa)
  3. Africa Europe Faith Justice Network (Belgium)
  4. African Network on the Right to Food (Togo)
  5. Agency for Integrated Rural Development (Uganda)
  6. AgriculturALMissions Inc (USA)
  7. AgriProfocus (Uganda)
  8. AGRA Watch/Community Alliance for Global Justice (USA)
  9. Alliance Against Hunger and Malnutrition (Nigeria)
  10. Alliance for Rural Advancement (South Africa)
  11. Biowatch (South Africa)
  12. Border Rural Committee (South Africa)
  13. Black Farmers and Agriculturalists Association (USA)
  14. Centre for Human Rights and Development (CEHURD) (Uganda)
  15. Centre for Information Policy in Africa (Uganda)
  16. Center for Indigenous Knowledge and Organizational Development (CIKOD) (Ghana)
  17. Centre for Participatory Research and Development (Uganda)
  18. Centro Internazionale (Italy)
  19. Civil Society Watch Project (Uganda)
  20. ‎Committee on Vital Environmental Resources (COVER) Nigeria
  21. Community to Community (USA)
  22. Community Development Resource Network (Uganda)
  23. Consumer Education Trust (Uganda)
  24. Commons for Eco Justice (Malawi)
  25. Comparing and Supporting Endogenous Development- Africa
  26. CNCD- 11.11.11 (Belgium)
  27. CICODEV Africa
  28. Earthlife Africa (South Africa)
  29. ECOTERRA Africa
  30. ECOTERRA Intl.
  31. ECOTERRA TRUST (Tanzania)
  32. Environmental Management and Livelihoods Improvement (Uganda)
  33. Entraide et Fraternite (Belgium)
  34. Eastern and Southern Africa Small Scale Farmers Forum (EASAFF-regional network)
  35. FAHAMU (Senegal)
  36. Farmer Support Group (South Africa)
  37. Family Farm Defenders (USA)
  38. Farm Workers Association of Florida (USA)
  39. Fellowship of Christian Councils and Churches in West Africa (West Africa)
  40. Food First/Institute for Food and Development Policy
  41. Food Sovereignty Ghana (Ghana)
  42. Food Democracy Now! (USA)
  43. Food Matters Zimbabwe
  44. Food and Water Watch (USA)
  45. FOOD Watch (Australia)
  46. Friends of the Earth Africa
  47. FNQ Sustainability Alliance (Australia)
  48. Garden Africa
  49. Gaia Foundation (United Kingdom)
  50. Gene Ethics (Australia)
  51. Gen-ethisches Netzwerk
  52. GRAIN
  53. Greenpeace
  54. GM Free Australia (Australia)
  55. GM-Free Far North Queensland (Australia)
  56. Grassroots International (USA)
  57. Growth Partners Africa (Kenya)
  58. Hawai`i SEED
  59. Health of Mother Earth Foundation (HOMEF) Nigeria
  60. International Development Exchange (USA)
  61. Institute for Culture and Ecology (Kenya)
  62. Institute for Research and Promotion of Alternatives (Mali)
  63. Institute for Sustainable Development (ISD) Ethiopia
  64. Interface Development Interventions (Philippines)
  65. Iowa  Citizens for Community Improvement
  66. jAbL (Germany)
  67. JA!FOE (Mozambique)
  68. JINUKUN- Coalition to Protect African Genetic Heritage (Benin)
  69. Kenya Biodiversity Coalition (Kenya)
  70. Kenya Food Rights Alliance (Kenya)
  71. Land Loss Prevention Project (USA)
  72. La Via Campesina (Africa)
  73. La Via Campesina (North America)
  74. Legal Resources Centre (South Africa)
  75. MADGE Australia Inc (Australia)
  76. Mantasa (Indonesia)
  77. Melca (Ethiopia)
  78. Mississippi State Association of Cooperatives (USA)
  79. Maryknoll Office for Global Concerns (USA)
  80. National Association for Professional Environmentalists (Uganda)
  81. National Family Farm Coalition (USA)
  82. Natures Friends Institute Demonstration Site (USA)
  83. Ndima Community Service (South Africa)
  84. Nkuzi Development Association (South Africa)
  85. Navdanya (India)
  86. Never Ending Food  (Malawi)
  87. Network of Farmers and Agricultural Producers’ Organisations of West Africa
  88. North East Organic Farming Association of New York (USA)
  89. Oakland Institute (USA)
  90. Pesticide Action Network- North America
  91. Partners for the Land and Agriculture Needs of Traditional Peoples (USA)
  92. PELUM Association (Regional network representing 10 countries in Africa)
  93. Right to Agrarian Reform for Food Sovereignty Campaign (South Africa)
  94. Rural Women’s Assembly (Southern Africa)
  95. Slow Food Youth Network (South Africa)
  96. Society for International Development (Italy/International)
  97. SOS Faim Luxemburg (Germany)
  98. Southern Cape land Committee (South Africa)
  99. Southern and Eastern Africa Trade Information and Negotiations Institute (Uganda)
  100. Sovereign Seeds (Western Australia)
  101. Surplus people project (South Africa)
  102. The Ecologist Magazine
  103. The Indigenous Peoples of Africa Coordinating Committee
  104. The Acequia Institute (USA)
  105. Third World Network
  106. Tanzania Alliance for Biodiversity (Tanzania)
  107. Terra Nova (Italy)
  108. Tropical Sustainable Foundation (Uganda)
  109. Truly Living Well Center for Natural Urban Agriculture (USA)
  110. The Committee on Vital Environment Resources (Nigeria)
  111. The Young Environmental Network (Nigeria)
  112. The Health of Mother Earth Foundation (Nigeria)
  113. Trust for Community Outreach and Education (South Africa)
  114. Transkei Land Service Organisation (South Africa)
  115. Pan-Africanist International (Belgium)
  116. Participatory Ecological Land Use Management (Uganda)
  117. Platforme Regionale des Organisations d’Afrique Centrale
  118. SEARICE (Philippines)
  119. Uganda Coalition for Sustainable Development (Uganda)
  120. US-Africa Network (USA)
  121. US Food Sovereignty Alliance (USFA)
  122. Vijiji Foundation (Tanzania)
  123. Washington Biotechnology Action Council (USA)
  124. Women on Farms (South Africa)
  125. World Neighbours
  126. Support for Women in Agriculture and Environment (Uganda)
  127. Zambia Alliance for Agro Ecology and Biodiversity Conservation (Zambia)




  1. Dr. Vandana Shiva (India)
  2. Joanna Stodden (Seattle, USA)
  3. LanDinh (Philadelphia USA)
  4. Dr. Jeanne Koopman (USA)
  5. Sheila Kinsey (Rome, Italy)
  6. Sue Kalicinska (United Kingdom)
  7. Sue Edwards
  8. Reverend M Dele (USA)
  9. Dr. Eva Novotny (United Kingdom)
  10. Erik Dalhuijsen (Aberdeen Scotland)
  11. Franz Fischer (Zimbabwe)
  12. Dr. Michael Antoniou (United Kingdom)
  13. Sr. Kumudine Dassanayake (Holy Family of Bordeaux,  Sri-Lanka)
  14. Dr. Norman Albon (United Kingdom)
  15. Frances Moore Lappe
  16. Prof. Joseph Cummins (Canada)
  17. Dr. Marion Hersh (Scotland)
  18. Mellese Damtie Dandi
  19. June Walker Thanthwe (Malawi)
  20. John Wilson (Zimbabwe)
  21. Philip L Bereano, Professor Emeritus
  22. Dr. Devon G. Peña
  23. H.M. Owens
  24. Jeanie Clark (Warracknabeal, Australia)
  25. Joan Gussow Professor Emeritus (Columbia University, USA)
  26. Eric Holt-Gimenez

  • kimsayers

    Beautifully and intelligently written. I am in support of your position100%. I am over 18 years of age and a citizen of the United States and I happily join my name with yours, et al.
    Deborah L Olmstead

    • Arthur Doucette

      So you support letting African kids dying or going blind because they either can’t or don’t know they should eat a more diverse food supply.

      Congratulations on being so utterly uncaring.

      • kimsayers

        Who the hell do you think you are, making such a vile statement to a complete stranger? Why don’t you formally attack the woman who wrote the thing, and/or the hundreds of agencies and others who also supported this endeavor? But of course, you wouldn’t do THAT, its far easier for a bullying coward of your obvious ilk to lash out at someone on the internet you would never have to face or answer to.
        If you truly have knowledge about a downside to this and actually cared about the same population you disgustingly claim I have no concern for (since you KNOW me, of course), you would have utilized a comment section to inform and educate, in a calm and intelligent manner. But that clearly isn’t your MO, nor was it your interest in the slightest. Your true motivation was to try to sound ‘clever’ and snarky, somewhere on the great anonymous stage.
        Congratulations on being so utterly self-aggrandizing.

        • Arthur Doucette

          You’re the one who claims that she is “strongly opposed to the human feeding trials taking place at the Iowa State University involving the so called genetically modified (GM) ‘super banana’”

          The banana that is being developed to help prevent African kids from dying or going blind from Vit A deficiency.

          The only support for this position is from the rather dubious Anti-GMO organization ENSSER, with not a shred of scientific support to back up any claim that this Banana is in any way unsafe.

          You are exactly what this article is discussing, this is just for Asian children.

          • kimsayers

            The fact that you actually believe I would read anything else from you is simply further evidence that you haven’t either the stones or the inclination to confront the people who are ACTUALLY responsible for this petition, or do anything tangible to truly aid or assist the people you pretend to care about. You are merely, as I have already said, an internet coward. and I won’t be repeating myself further. Blather on all you like, but just know that you are alone in the room.

          • Arthur Doucette

            You obviously did read what I posted.

            I do what I can, which is obviously more than someone like you.

          • Debbie Owen

            So all you can do is insult for no reason, lie and mislead. At least you are showing the mindset of the typical pro-GMOer. Why would readers want to read links to a pro-GMO biased blog or industry funded site? Nothing credible there.

          • Arthur Doucette

            So you also support letting kids die for no other reason than your support of “Big Organic”?
            Good to know how callous you can be Debbie.

          • Debbie Owen

            Readers can see the comments for themselves so making things up won’t work very well for you.

        • sir_ken_g

          Doucette is a well known Koch $hill.

        • Rob Bright

          He’s a paid, pro-GMO activist who promotes Monsanto and the biotech cartel 24/7. (Check out the comments sections of any GMO article and chances are you’ll find Arthur spewing his misinformation and pseudoscience…)

      • Rob Bright

        Another false claim of the pro-GMO activists — if the biotechs were really interested in feeding the poor, they would have done something in the last 20 years they’ve been producing GMOs. Instead, nothing — they haven’t even made a dint in world hunger. Why? Because they don’t give a crap about feeding the poor, and never did. (It just makes a good PR sound byte to say such things.) No, Monsanto and the the other biotechs/agri-chemical corporations care about one thing, and one thing onle: PROFITS! And they have no problem using unsafe, untested technologies, and potentially sickening millions to make their money.

        • Arthur Doucette


          The UN reports that there were 1 billion hungry people in 1990-92 and and the world population was 5.4 Billion, thus 18% were hungry (and many were actually starving). This was before GMOs.

          Today we have lowered that number to 870 million hungry, which divided by 2013 world population of 7.1 Billion is but 12% and starvation has been virtually eliminated. This represents a HUGE reduction in hunger in a short period of time while the world’s population has SOARED.

          Now in 1990 the EU used to grow more corn per acre than the US did but not anymore, since they don’t grow GMO. Here’s the recent data from 2011 to 2014 for corn yields (Data from USDA and IndexMundi)

          Year – EU Bushels – Acres – EU Yield per acre – US yields per acre

          2011 – 3,133,658,000 – 22,493,513 – 139 – 148

          2012 – 2,709,216,000 – 24,013,178 – 113 – 122

          2013 – 2,955,914,000 – 24,065,069 – 123 – 158

          2014 – 3,411,360,000 – 23,635,115 – 144 – 171 (Note that’s a RECORD yield per acre for the US, breaking the 2013 total which was also a record)

          Had the EU gotten the same yields as the US they would have produced 1,892,385,207 more bushels of corn in just those 4 years, a 15% increase over what they managed.

          Which leads us to the global impact and hunger, again a total failure to understand.

          If that 1.9 billion bushels of corn was provided to these people, it would provide every chronically undernourished person ~42 lbs of corn each year which would be a decent increase in their daily food intake

          Those fighting against GMO are Pro Hunger.

      • StopGMO

        African kids are not dying or going blind because of a lack of eating GMO infested foods. The majority of these foods are grown for cattle feed, fuel and processed foods which is not healthy to begin with. How is this helping them?

        • Arthur Doucette

          The article is about GMO Bananas, specifically modified to contain Vitamin A.

          The targeted populations eat these bananas with decent regularity, but don’t get enough Vit A in their diet, thus leading to blindness and death.

          This is an attempt to solve that problem.
          It is not an industry driven program, but an aid driven program, so no profits are involved, just an attempt to save lives.

          Being against this is totally irrational and heartless.

          • StopGMO

            Genetically engineering a fruit to contain something it originally cannot produce naturally is completely & utterly wrong not to mention, we don’t know the consequences in the long run. There are plenty of foods which are high in vitamin A. BS about no profits being made!

          • Arthur Doucette

            They are using genes from a Pacific cultivar of the banana which does produce Vit A but doesn’t grow in Africa, to get the African variety to grow there. They are also using conventional breeding methods to try to accomplish the same thing, but since most bananas don’t propagate by seed, it is a lot slower process.

            Nobody is making any money off of this.
            Its all supported with grants.

            You shouldn’t have a knee jerk aversion to that which you simply don’t understand. Understand it first, then decide.


          • Dominick Dickerson

            It’s like these people have never heard of CGIAR or something.

          • Arthur Doucette

            CGIAR is a non-profit agency.

            The CGIAR Fund is a multi-donor trust fund that finances CGIAR research guided by the Strategy and Results Framework.

            The CGIAR Fund is administered by the World Bank, as Trustee, and governed by the Fund Council, a representative body of Fund donors and other stakeholders. The Fund Council is the decision-making body of the CGIAR Fund. It also appoints the Independent Science and Partnership Council, a panel of leading scientific experts who provide independent advice and expertise to all Fund donors. This advice is used by the Council to approve CGIAR Research Programs and allocate resources to them. Before receiving funding, CGIAR Research Programs set out their expected achievements and provide verifiable targets against which progress can be measured and monitored. By linking funding to results, the Fund gives donors better value for money and ensures that research translates into tangible benefits for the poor.

            They sell no products they make no profits.


          • Pogo333

            Well, yes, but you neglected to mention that CGIAR works closely with USDA Feed the Future labs, which include US university and ARS scientists who are tainted by having worked on GE crops, and CGIAR scientists have consort with Monsanto and get technical and financial help from Monsanto. In addition, there is good reason to believe that many of their workers are also capable of spelling “Monsanto”, which is, of course, sufficient justification to discard all of the amazing good that this agency has done for feeding people in developing countries.

            But we sure don’t want those folks to become better nourished if they have to eat GE foods! Much better to let them continue to suffer malnutrition and death while we spend decades looking for traits within the respective plant species that may add small increments to improving the nutritional quality of the foodplants. StopGMO should change his/her screen name to StopPoorPeopleFromBreathing.

  • Iveren Abwa

    I, Iveren Abwa, would also like to add my name to this petition. I can confirm that i am over 18 years of age and i reside in the United Kingdom.

    • hyperzombie

      Why, do you have something against banana genes in bananas?

      • Rob Bright

        Another pro-GMO activist and shill…