A video praising genetically modified foods has reopened old wounds and sparked thousands of questions and observations in Nigeria about agriculture, foreign influence, and food sovereignty.

The video was posted by a popular medical influencer, Dr Chinonso Egemba, known as Aproko Doctor, and racked up over 5.9 million views on X, where he extolled the virtues of Genetically Modified Organism (GMOs).

But what drew attention wasn’t just his words; it was a resurfaced photo from a 2023 meeting with billionaire philanthropist Bill Gates that lit the match. Gates is a major backer of GMO development across Africa; reports confirm he has invested over $2.8 billion in Nigeria’s health and food sectors. But for many Nigerians, it feels less like help and more like a quiet takeover.

Also Read: 4 food preservatives implying Nigerians launched their own cancer

Though GMOs have been legally present in Nigeria since 2019, their expansion has never been without suspicion. Critics often call it neo‑colonialism in a lab coat.

Recently, the controversy hit a boiling point.

“GMO is simply a 21st‑century slavery scheme to recolonise Africa through what we cultivate and eat,” wrote one X user. The stakes feel higher than ever, especially as the UN’s World Food Programme warns that 31 million Nigerians are facing acute hunger in what they called an “unprecedented crisis.”

Nigeria’s GMO regulator, the National Biosafety Management Agency (NBMA), stepped in with a strong message: “Nigeria needs GMOs to survive,” declared the agency’s Director‑General, Dr. Agnes Asagbra, emphasizing that the country must responsibly adopt biotech to boost food security. She underscored that NBMA oversees every step, from research to market, ensuring GMO products meet stringent biosafety standards. The agency also reaffirmed its dedication to aligning with global frameworks like WHO and Codex.

Not to be outdone, NAFDAC’s Director‑General, Prof. Mojisola Adeyeye, added her voice on Channels television: “GMOs are not bad for us, depending on the type and safety considerations,” she explained, urging that GMO products be properly labeled and only approved in collaboration with NBMA.

But these reassurances did little to assuage the skepticism online.

The concern is not just about health, it’s about power. Genetically modified crops are often patented by agritech corporations, meaning farmers cannot reuse seeds and must purchase new ones each planting season. Activists warn this could trap smallholder farmers in cycles of dependency.

“GMOs aggravate food insecurity and threaten seed sovereignty,” said Greenpeace. “They do so by holding farmers in debt cycles that reduce their ability to produce more food for consumption.”

The sensitivity is palpable in a country still facing the lingering economic wounds of colonialism.

Fueling the fury further was a 2024 investigation by Lighthouse Reports, revealing that a U.S.‑funded PR agency had actively targeted critics of GMO crops in Africa and Asia. Critics say this maneuver deepens mistrust, especially as Nigeria already has GMO maize and cowpea approved for sale and 33 more crops under trial. Many argue the rollout is moving too fast, with too little public dialogue and understanding.

Across the continent, the stance on GMOs varies widely. South Africa leads in GMO farming adoption; Kenya and Ghana are proceeding with caution; while Algeria, Madagascar, and Zimbabwe have banned GMO imports and cultivation, citing threats to biodiversity.

In Nigeria, as videos go viral and public trust remains fragile, people are asking:

Who truly benefits from GMOs, those feeding the nation, or those shaping it from behind the scenes?

Are these crops the key to food security, or a new form of silent control?

And more urgently: What’s in our food, and who put it there?

Anita Chinedu