GMO? Just say NO: Precautionary Tale

By Melinda Hemmelgarn, Mentions Claire Hope Cummings

Organic Valley: Straight from the Plate

October 2008

 

Available online at: http://www.organicvalley.coop/farm-friends/moo/straightplate/

 

ÒBe Afraid, Be Very Afraid.Ó YouÕve probably heard this popular expression whispered on spooky Halloween nights. The phrase gained fame in the 1986 horror movie, ÒThe Fly,Ó and referred to an experiment gone horribly wrong -- basically, scientist (man) is transformed into insect (fly). Blame it on a little genetic mix-up.

While the classic movie falls under the Òscience fictionÓ genre, a more chilling, yet truthful story can be told about American agriculture-turned-agribusiness, and the widespread planting of unregulated, inadequately tested bioengineered crops, with yet untold consequences (1,2,3). 
In a nutshell, hereÕs what happened. In 1992, under the powerful influence of the Monsanto Corporation, then Vice President Dan Quayle announced that Òno new laws would be passed to regulate biotechnologyÓ(1).

Unfortunately, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration took the stand that genetically modified (GM) foods, or GMOs, are essentially the same as their natural counterparts, and deemed them Ògenerally regarded as safeÓ (GRAS). This means manufacturers do not have to prove GM foods safe before going to market (1).

In the Dark

Even though 90% of consumers surveyed say they want identifying labels on GM foods (1); and despite the fact that the American Public Health Association supports labeling GM foods, the law does not require such foods to bear an identifying label (4).

The American consumer Òwould be very shockedÓ to know how many GM foods line their supermarket shelves, says Bill Freese, science policy analyst with the Center for Food Safety. While there have been valiant efforts to require GM food labeling, those in favor are battling Òinstitutional powerÓ against it (3). 

With at least 70 percent of processed foods in supermarkets containing GM ingredients, from soy lecithin to high fructose corn syrup and corn starch, you could say our families have been taking part in a nation-wide experiment for over a decade. Scary to think of our kids as guinea pigs, isnÕt it?

The Big Three

Since 1996, three GM food crops have entered and now dominate our agricultural and supermarket landscapes: soy, corn and canola.

According to the USDA (5), fully 80 percent of all corn and 90 percent of soy varieties planted in the U.S. are genetically engineered.

Most GM crops are either insect-resistant (Bt corn), herbicide-tolerant (Roundup Ready), or carry multiple, or ÒstackedÓ bioengineered traits. Bt corn produces its own insecticide in every plant cell, therefore in theory, would require fewer applications of pesticide. Roundup Ready (RR) crops can survive being sprayed with the herbicide glyphosate, which kills surrounding weeds while leaving the desired plant intact.

Newly planted this spring was the first crop of genetically modified (RR) sugar beets, accounting for 50 percent of the sugar beet crop. Harvested this fall, sugar from GMO sugar beets could reach supermarket shelves as early as this winter (6). About half of the sugar consumed in the U.S. comes from sugar beets.

 

Tricked or Treat? The Unintended Consequences of GMOs

American farmers and consumers have been fed a steady stream of misinformation about biotechnology, especially from those who stand to profit from it (1,2,3,7,8,9). Common myths include:

Myth: GM crops will reduce hunger, poverty and malnutrition; Increase crop yields; Reduce pesticide use.

DonÕt believe it. There is an abundance of evidence to the contrary. For example, ÒDiet for a Small PlanetÓ author, Frances Moore Lappe, warns us not to believe corporate agricultureÕs line that we need GMOs to feed the growing global population. The Food and Agriculture Organization recommends instead a worldwide shift to organic agriculture to protect against pollution, fight world hunger and tackle climate change (10).

In truth, GM crops:

1. Yield less or equal to traditional crops. 
2. Limit seed choices and promote monoculture which harms the soil, environment, plant and human health. 
3. Increase pesticide use due to the development and spread of resistant "superweeds."
4. Threaten non-target species with toxins.
5. Introduce new toxic compounds and allergens.
6. Benefit the biotech industry because they sell more herbicides, charge more for seeds and hold seed patents. 
7. Need long term safety tests. 

Robert Kremer, soil scientist at the University of Missouri says: Òthe old worn-out assumption that glyphosate (Roundup) is neutralized or immobilized in the environment does not hold anymoreÓ (11). He explains that glyphosate harms soil biology, root structure and function. Prolonged glyphosate application has been shown to increase plant diseases and infections. Plus, glyphosate can enter our waterways.

Kremer also shares his concern about the loss of protective plant biodiversity when we come to depend on one seed variety (RR), or mono-cropping systems. ÒRemember the Irish potato famine?Ó he asks (11).

The GenieÕs out of the Bottle

Bill Wenzel, National Director of the Farmer to Farmer Campaign on Genetic Engineering says when it comes to the big three crops, thereÕs "no way to put the genie back in the bottle" (12).
In other words, a significant problem with biotechnology is that it hasnÕt been contained. Wind and birds can carry pollen for miles, and the resulting environmental impact has never been fully evaluated. E. Ann Clark, professor of plant agriculture at the University of Guelph in Ontario agrees that ÒGM crops are uncontainable.Ó She also believes the industry should be held accountable for their harm (13).

In 2002, the National Academy of Sciences noted Òserious deficiencies in USDAÕs regulation of GE crops,Ó says the Center for Food Safety. And USDA's failure to adequately monitor and regulate GE field crop tests Òclearly puts the environment and public health at risk" (14).

 

Your Right to Know: Action Steps for Concerned Citizens

The food and biotechnology industries care about consumer acceptance of GM foods (15), because we affect their bottom line. A Mars company representative told me: Òconsumers are our boss.Ó So, letÕs put our advantage to our childrenÕs benefit. LetÕs embrace the Òprecautionary principleÓ which advises preventive action in the face of uncertainty (16). HereÕs how:

1.  Buy organic.

By law, certified organic foods are produced without the use of GMOs.

2. Contact your favorite cereal companies, candy, chocolate and sugar manufacturers.

Let them know you wonÕt buy their products if they choose to use sugar from GM sugar beets, or any other GMO ingredients.

3. Speak out daily.

Talk to your friends and legislators. Write a letter to the editor; call in to a radio talk show. Share your concerns and knowledge, and exercise your First Amendment rights!

4. Stay informed.

Pick up a copy of ÒUncertain Peril,Ó by Claire Hope Cummings, and suggest it for your book group. 

 

References and Further Reading

 

1.     ÒUncertain Peril: Genetic Engineering and the Future of Seeds,Ó Claire Hope Cummings, Beacon Press, 2008.

2.     Council for Responsible Genetics, www.gene-watch.org/index.html

3.     Personal communication with Bill Freese, Science Policy Analyst, Center for Food Safety, 9/11/08.

4.     ÒSupport of the Labeling of Genetically Modified Foods,Ó American Public Health Association, Policy Number: 200111; 1/1/2001.

5.     USDA Economic Research Service, ÒThe Economics of Food, Farming, Natural Resources, and Rural America,Ó www.ers.usda.gov/Data/BiotechCrops/

6.     Personal communication with Tom Schwartz, Executive Vice President, Beet Sugar Development Foundation: www.bsdf-assbt.org/

7.     Friends of the Earth: www.foe.org/ ; and Friends of the Earth International, ÒWho Benefits from GM crops?Ó January 2008.

8.     Biodiversity: Its Importance to Human Health, Harvard Medical School: http://chge.med.harvard.edu/programs/bio/index.htm 

9.     ÒPosition Statement on Genetically Engineered Food,Ó Health Care Without Harm: www.noharm.org/details.cfm?ID=1540&type=document 

10.  Food and Agriculture Organization, ÒOrganic Agriculture and Food Security,Ó ftp://ftp.fao.org/paia/organicag/ofs/OFS-2007-5.pdf

11.  Personal communications with Robert Kremer, September 5,8,9, 2008.

12.  Personal communication with Bill Wenzel, Farmer to Farmer Campaign on Genetic Engineering, 9/5/08.

13.   ÒGM crops are uncontainable: so what?Ó E. Ann Clark, Plant Agriculture, University of Guelph, Ontario.

14.  Center for Food Safety: <cite>www.centerforfoodsafety.org/ </cite>

15.   ÒRound 2 for Biotech Beets,Ó New York Times, November, 27, 2007: www.nytimes.com/2007/11/27/business/27sugar.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

  1. ÒApplication of Modern Biotechnology to Food and Agriculture: A Food Systems Perspective,Ó McCullum, C., Benbrook, C., Roberts, S., et. al. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, December 2003.