Opinion: GMOs: Time bombs in our food supply?

Opinion: GMOs: Time bombs in our food supply?

IT’S RARE to find someone neutral on the subject of genetically modified food — which is, depending on whom you ask, either a risky technology giving Monsanto greater market control, or the heroic invention of scientists who will save us from world hunger.

The last few weeks have brought a flurry of news about scientists and techies trying to save the imperiled orange — and our food supply more generally — through genetic engineering. A few days ago, The New York Times published an in-depth story about farmers and scientists battling anti-GMO public sentiment to rescue oranges from an epidemic bacterial disease. They were testing a new orange (with a gene taken from spinach) that would resist pathogens.

Earlier this month, an article in Slate suggested genetic engineering could move beyond the ills of corporate agriculture and become an open-source project, as hip and democratic as the operating system Linux. The magazine ran a second story from a vegetarian yoga instructor who had seen the light on GMOs. This author chose to debunk a series of arguments against genetic tinkering, most connected to ick-factors — e.g., queasiness over whether animal genes are inserted into plant DNA. The gist of both pieces was that GMOs and genetic property rights should be taken out of corporate control and put into the public domain and the hands of smart, principled scientists.

“When genetic engineering is used to decrease pesticide use, to add nutrients to crops in malnourished countries, and otherwise improve the quality of our food products, then it’s a valuable tool that can contribute to a safe and healthy food supply,” wrote the self-described hippie.

It is doubtless true that the world will need smart science and diverse genetic resources to respond to crises like climate change and disease. But to read these stories, one would think that the biggest objections to GMOs were concocted solely by sentimental greenies and organic food growers with outdated sensibilities. From the Times piece:

Some … scientists were still fuming about what they saw as the lost potential for social good hijacked both by the activists who opposed genetic engineering and the corporations that failed to convince consumers of its benefits. In many developing countries, concerns about safety and ownership of seeds led governments to delay or prohibit cultivation of needed crops: Zambia, for instance, declined shipments of GMO corn even during a 2002 famine.

Truthfully, the science and the ethics have never been quite so cut and dried.

The Union of Concerned Scientists (or UCS, the nonprofit hatched out of MIT more than 40 years ago) has, for years, raised a number of concerns about GMOs. Most stem from an idea called the “precautionary principle,” which could be summed up as “First, do no harm.” Or in this case, we should prove a new technology won’t create big, messy health problems before we unleash it on the public. (It was this idea that led Zambian scientists to recommend that their government reject GMO corn.) 

UCS isn’t alarmist about GMOs: “There is a lot we don’t know … which is no reason for panic, but a good reason for caution.” The organization identifies a few possible concerns about genetic engineering.  (northjersey)

GMOs Hiding In Plain Sight

Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) now infest almost everything we consume. Yet, amazingly, most Americans don’t even realize they eat GMO food at just about every meal. That’s because they are deceptively hidden in the list of ingredients.

The term genetically modified, when pertaining to foods, refers to food plants and animals that have been modified at the molecular or genetic level to enhance or create certain desired traits. It is a process very different from hybridizing or selective breeding.

GMO proponents argue that the technology is safe. But there has been little research on the short-term effects and even less on the long-term effects of consuming foods that have been modified genetically or molecularly.

This is by design. Monsanto, one of the leading creators in the GMO field, owns Congress, the Environmental Protection Agency and other regulatory agencies. And when independent labs begin researching the effects of GMOs and producing their findings, Monsanto either squashes them under an avalanche of lawsuits or buys them up and buries the research. But recent discoveries about what happens in the genetic material of altered organisms are not reassuring.

For example, suppose you want to create tomatoes that can withstand cold weather. In theory, you take the genes that allow a frost-resistant plant to survive freezing temperatures and you put it into a tomato plant. When seeds of the new tomato plant grow, the presence of this genetic material stimulates activity in the new plants that keep them alive as the temperature drops.

In practice, however, unforeseen complications arise. Only during the past few months have scientists discovered that the genes technologists insert into plants are often contaminated with unintended material. That includes viruses.

Recently, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) discovered that when lab scientists altered genes in GMO food, they were also feeding in parts of a virus gene. No one had ever noticed that before. This virus gene, however, is now in the food we eat. Is it safe? Will it lead to unforeseen illness among the millions of people who consume it? The experts are uncertain. It has never been present in our food previously. And until this recent scientific discovery, nobody knew it was in our GMO foods.

Reports about this virus show that of the 86 different processes being used to insert genes into GMO crops, this virus is present in 54 of them. Meaning this virus of questionable safety is in a lot of the snack foods sitting in your cupboard.

Experts explain that these types of viral genes can be extremely dangerous. Viral genes are designed to hobble our immune systems (and the immune systems of plants and animals) so that the viruses can invade cells and flourish.

Scientists are concerned about this newly discovered viral material because the viruses that invade the cells of a plant do not fundamentally differ from the viruses that cause illness in humans and animals.

Concern about these genes caused Pete Riley, director of the public interest group GM Freeze, to warn: “This is a clear warning (that GMO food) is not sufficiently understood to be considered safe.” Riley also told the British newspaper The Daily Mail: “Authorization for these crops must be suspended immediately, and they should be withdrawn from sale, until a full and extended review of their safety has been carried out.”

Farmers in both the United States and around the world plant shockingly vast amounts of these laboratory-created crops. In particular, soy, corn and cotton (our food frequently has cottonseed oil added to it) have been genetically engineered to contain toxic pesticides and to withstand massive amounts of herbicides applied to farm fields. This allows GMO crops to survive and be harvested, while weeds are supposed to wither and die. Of course, other beneficial living things — most especially pollinators like honeybees, butterflies and a wide collection of other wildlife and fish — also perish from pesticide exposure. And the pesticides often persist long enough to poison our water and air.

Right now, the International Service for the Acquisition of Agribiotech Applications estimates that since GMO crops were introduced in the 1990s, 1 billion acres worldwide have been planted with these plants. That’s an area larger than the continental United States.

One of the modifications to many crops has made them resistant to glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup. This has allowed farmers to coat their fields with Roundup in order to wipe out all the weeds growing there.

Monsanto claims glyphosate is biodegradable and environmentally friendly. But in 2009, a French court found Monsanto guilty of lying about these claims. Glyphosate is being found in groundwater many miles from farmland. It is being detected in human and animal blood samples, and it has been shown to cross the placental barrier.

According to the U.S. Geological Survey, 88,000 tons of glyphosate have been used in the United States. The Environmental Protection Agency lists it as a Class III toxic substance. It is an endocrine disrupter, and just 30 grams can be fatal to humans. It has been linked to more than 20 adverse health effects, according to peer-reviewed literature.

The ailments and deleterious effects attributed to glyphosate exposure include autism, gastrointestinal diseases, obesity, allergies, cardiovascular disease, depression, cancer, infertility, Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, multiple sclerosis and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (Lou Gehrig’s disease).

But back to the GMOs themselves: GMOs are surreptitiously inserted into almost every form of processed food or product, and they are even found in vitamins.

According to the Non-GMO Shopping Guide, hidden GMOs are listed as innocent-sounding ingredients that include everything from baking powder to colorose to corn flour to cottonseed oil to food starch to fructose to invert sugar to malt to soy flour to starch to vitamin B12 to xanthan gum. A list of likely hidden GMO ingredients can be read in the guide here.

In vitamin supplements, GMOs are hidden as ascorbic acid, high fructose corn syrup, maltodextrin and sucrose, as well as other ingredients.

The proliferation of these substances makes avoiding them almost impossible and renders vigilance against them a full-time necessity.

One way to  help avoid GMOs is to avoid all processed food. When selecting meats choose only organically grown beef, poultry or fish that is not fed or injected with steroids, hormones and antibiotics. Ideally, your diet should focus instead on organically grown heirloom whole, fresh vegetables, as much raw as possible. PERSONALLIBERTY

GE Labeling in Illinois

GE Labeling in Illinois: What You Should Know and What You Can Do

Guess what? There currently is a bill, SB 1666 that Senator Dave Koehler (D-Peoria) introduced to the State Senate in February to require foods produced with GE products sold in Illinois to show the information on the label. This summer and through the fall, a series of public hearings are taking place to discuss the bill, with the next one set for Aug 7 in Carbondale and the last one set for September 17 in Chicago.

Genetically engineered (GE) foods -- also called genetically modified, or GMO -- are foods composed of ingredients derived from crops -- and perhaps, soon, animals -- that are altered with inserted genetic material to exhibit a desired trait. Most commercial GE crops are developed to be either herbicide tolerant, allowing herbicides to kill weeds without harming crops, or insect resistant, which protects plants from destructive pests.

The industry promotes genetic engineering as an environmentally responsible, profitable way for farmers to feed a growing global population. But despite all the hype, genetically engineered plants and animals do not perform better than their traditional counterparts, and they raise a slew of health, environmental and ethical concerns.

GE crops pose a serious threat to non-GE crops, especially organic farms. Farmers can face significant economic hardship if genetically engineered crops contaminate their non-GE and organic crops or organic livestock feed. Cross pollination is so common that even Monsanto admits that "a certain amount of incidental, trace level pollen movement occurs."

Polls show that a vast majority of consumers want food containing GE ingredients to be labeled; consumers want to be able to decide whether to consume the products.

(Supplied by Food and Water Watch Illinois)

Whether you agree or disagree on whether GE foods cause cancer, tumors and other illnesses, 64 other countries require GE labeling! What do they know that we don't? Chipotle Mexican Grill has recently announced that they will label their GMO foods, Whole Foods and Ben and Jerry's have followed suit.

What can you as an Illinois consumer do to see that the bill passes? Food and Water Watch has been coordinating the campaign in Illinois and you can attend one of the hearings this summer or send a letter to your state senator and ask them to co-sponsor the bill.

I have published a series of updates and will continue to on The Local Beet, including a recap of the first hearing in Normal. Food and Water Watch Illinois has a ton of great information on their website in regard to studies, a research paper on Monsanto and references to studies done on GE Foods. If GE foods present no harm then WHY NOT label them? Don't we as a consumer have the right to know what is in the food that we buy? huffingtonpost

GMOs Seen as Playing Major Role in Battling World Hunger

GMOs Seen as Playing Major Role in Battling World Hunger

By Nicola Smith

Valley News Staff Writer

Many scientists argue that genetically engineered crops have increased crop yield and reduced use of pesticides and herbicides that can damage the environment. Just as significant, they say, there is the potential for genetically engineered crops to alleviate hunger and improve health in the so-called developing world.

“Here’s the issue: a 7 billion world population is predicted to go to around 10 billion (by 2050),” said Tom Jack, a professor of biology at Dartmouth College. How will the world feed itself? “We could increase land use or we could use land we’re already using to grow more crops” by increasing their yield, Jack said. This is an area where genetically modified crops can be beneficial, he said.

Because of climate change, it wouldn’t be prudent to clear large swaths of carbon-absorbing forests to make way for farm land, say Jack and others who see a place for genetically modified crops, commonly known as GMOs. Crops that can be genetically engineered for drought-resistance or water-tolerance in the case of increased precipitation could play significant roles in helping humans adapt to the vagaries of altered climate patterns.

Skeptics argue, however, that science has made exaggerated claims for the efficacy of GMOs.

By emphasizing genetic engineering, rather than looking at underlying issues of poverty and political instability that contribute to famine, hunger and the prevalence of certain diseases, they say, scientists, government officials and agribusiness leaders are overlooking tried and true methods that work, albeit more slowly.

Susanne Friedberg, a professor of geography at Dartmouth, pointed to the Green Revolution of the 1960s and 1970s, spearheaded by agronomist Norman Borlaug, who received the Nobel Peace Prize and the Presidential Medal of Freedom for his work.Just because you have a technology, should you always use it?

Modernizing farming techniques, improving irrigation and distributing hybridized seeds were some of the initiatives introduced by Borlaug in the developing world. At the time, the Green Revolution was heralded as a partial solution to starvation in regions where famine and malnutrition were endemic.

“It vastly increased the food supply but it didn’t solve the hunger problem,” Friedberg said. It’s critical to focus on political and economic solutions to food insecurity, and not assume that biotechnology is always an answer, she said. But there are some applications of genetic engineering that might be useful.

For instance, cassava, a staple in Africa and South America, has to be prepared in a special way to get rid of its naturally occurring toxins, making it a labor-intensive crop. Efforts underway to develop a genetically modified, less toxic, more nutritious cassava seem worth pursuing, she said.

In the event that people could divorce their assumptions about genetically engineered crops from their perceptions of biotech corporations, what are the possible benefits?

In the early to mid-1990s, the Hawaiian papaya crop, which is second to pineapple as the state’s biggest fruit export, was virtually decimated by the papaya ringspot virus, said Rob McClung, a professor of biology at Dartmouth College.

Efforts had already been underway to grow a genetically modified papaya that would be resistant to the virus, according to a paper written by one of the scientists who developed a genetically modified papaya, Dennis Gonsalves of the Pacific Basin Agricultural Research Center, an arm of the USDA in Hilo, Hawaii.

But the spread of the virus was so rapid, and the possible loss of a major cash crop so grave, that scientists sped up the development of genetically modified papaya. After 2 1/2 years of field trials, the genetically modified rainbow papaya was introduced in 1998 when seeds were distributed free to growers.

Rainbow papaya was planted in the fields that had been abandoned because of the virus, and showed a sturdy resistance. The papaya crop rebounded. Papaya is the only genetically modified fruit crop in the U.S., and is notable because the breakthrough came from scientists working independently rather than through biotech companies.

But the relative speed with which scientists were able to address the rust virus is one of the arguments for genetic engineering, said McClung. When an outbreak such as the one in Hawaii happens, scientists, farmers and businesses don’t always have the luxury of time, which is a fundamental element of conventional cross-breeding.There have been some instances of genetic drift, from the rainbow papaya to the non-GMO papaya, and there have been complaints from organic papaya growers about the difficulty of maintaining a clean, organic chain with so much rainbow papaya around them, reported an article this June in the Hawaii Tribune Herald .

“We’re in an arms race with pathogens, they’re always going to be a step ahead,” he said. VNEWS

Nicola Smith can be reached at nsmith@vnews.com.

Ghana testing four genetically modified crops

Ghana is in the process of testing four genetically modified (GM) agricultural produce for mass production.

These are cowpea, cotton, high-protein sweet potato and nitrogen-efficient, water-efficient and salt-tolerant rice.

Apart from the cowpea, also known as Bt cowpea, which is being developed by the Savanna Agricultural Research Institute (SARI), the other three crops are under the Crops Research Institute (CRI) of the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR).

Field trials for the Bt cowpea and the sweet potato are yet to be done, while the rice and the cotton, also known as Bt cotton, have been planted and are under strict supervision.

This was made known to a group of journalists who participated in a training programme on bio-safety in Accra last Friday.

The programme, organised by the Ghana Journalists Association (GJA), in collaboration with Africa Harvest Foundation International (Africa Harvest), was to help the journalists report more accurately on issues of biotechnology.

Africa Harvest is a non-profit organisation that promotes the use of advanced science and technology products to improve agricultural productivity among Africa’s farmers. Its objective is to free Africans from poverty, hunger and malnutrition.

Legal issues

A representative of the Ministry of Environment, Science, Technology and Innovation, Mr Eric Okoree, who took the journalists through Ghana’s bio-safety legal instruments, said currently a technical advisory committee had been formed to conduct risk assessment into all GM applications in the country, adding that institutional bio-safety had been certified for two research institutions — the CRI and the SARI.

Media’s participation in promoting GM products

The Communications Director of Africa Harvest, Mr Daniel Kamanga, said the media in Africa were not doing much in the area of agricultural reporting and called on journalists to be more proactive in their stories, as well as write strategically to set the agenda.

A lecturer at the Biochemistry Department of the University of Ghana, Legon, Dr Yaa Difie, in a presentation, said biotechnology could be used in addressing many of the challenges that farmers faced across Africa.

That was because, biotechnological crops gave higher yields and reduced weeds and pests, as well as farm cost, she said.

She, however, said there was the need to regulate their use to ensure food and agricultural safety.

How GMOs can help the agric sector

A research scientist at the CRI of the CSIR, Dr Stephen Amoah, said although some successes had been chalked up from traditional farming, it was time to use modern technologies to improve yields.

He mentioned challenges in the agricultural sector as declining soil fertility, pests and disease infestations, climate change leading to drought, flood, heat, post-harvest losses and inherent low yields of crops.

He said with the country’s increasing population, there was the need for the adoption of GM technology to produce sufficient food for the people.

A plant breeder and Principal Investigator of Bt Cotton, Mr Emmanuel Chamba, said when successful, the Bt Cotton would help prevent worms from entering cotton bulbs to destroy them.

He said countries such as Burkina Faso had adopted the Bt. Cotton, making that country one of the biggest exporters of cotton in Africa. GHANAWEB

Pakistan: Seeds of doom

Seeds of doom

As the global trend for a complete ban on genetically modified organisms (GMO) escalates, it comes as no surprise to learn that the multinational corporations — the ones producing and marketing these highly questionable seeds and associated products — are suddenly going all out to corner unsuspecting farmers in Pakistan.

Markets in most European countries, along with the majority of South American countries, Russia and numerous other nations around the globe are now closed to these corporations. India is on the verge of following suit. Corporations, including Monsanto and Synergen, are reportedly pressuring the National Bio-Safety Committee of the Ministry of Environment to grant them full and unrestricted access to potentially lucrative markets here.

The controversy surrounding GMO seeds and food items containing GMO products has been raging for some years now. Those supporting GMO products claim that there is no scientific proof of them being dangerous to human, animal or environmental health. Those standing against the products claim otherwise and cite cases such as GMO-related food allergies from GMO corn products, the recent deaths of cows in Texas after they consumed GMO grass and the mutation of insects that have developed resistance to the pesticides that are ‘in-built’ in GMO plants. The uncontrollable cross pollination of GMO crops with wild plants has reportedly decimated some indigenous species and caused others to grow to unnatural proportions, in Canada for example, and this, opponents say, is just the tip of the potentially lethal GMO iceberg.

The battle for control of global food supplies via aggressive marketing of GMOs — seeds of which must be purchased each season — promises to get extremely nasty in the months to come. A variety of moves aimed at making it illegal for commercial and private growers to cultivate heritage varieties of edible plants from which seeds can be saved — at no cost, for growing in future years — have also been put in place and they just add to the mess. Protestors in America are increasingly taking matters into their own hands by physically uprooting or burning GMO crops. There are reports that Monsanto is investing heavily in its own private army to safeguard its commercial interests.

Russian Premier Vladimir Putin spoke out for many when he furiously denounced Monsanto recently, saying that it may “take a war to stop them”. Yet, sadly, the cotton lobby in Pakistan appears set on demanding that GMO cotton be made available as soon as conceivably possible. Lobbyists claim that only by growing GMO cotton — which is claimed to be highly productive and requires less inputs as pesticides are already inside the plants — will farmers be tempted back from their recent swing towards rice cultivation instead.

The cotton lobby, however, has failed to factor in the reason farmers are now opting for rice: there has not been a good cotton crop since 2009, as each year since then, huge losses have been incurred due to torrential rain and floods, which cotton cannot tolerate — but rice can. Introducing GMO cotton will not alter this climatic fact.

Allowing even a single GMO variety to be marketed in Pakistan is to invite disaster in and the National Bio-Safety Committee would do well to examine the situation in Indian Punjab, where the cultivation of GMOs literally killed fertile land and resulted in thousands of farmers committing suicide due to massive accumulation of un-payable debt. THE EXPRESS TRIBUNE

Are GM Products Kosher?

GMOs, A Global Debate: Israel a Center for Study, Kosher Concerns

Israel is an international center for studying genetically modified organisms (GMOs), though GMOs may only be grown for research purposes and under many restrictions. 

The sale and use of GM products is permitted, though they cannot be grown commercially in the country. GMOs are widely used in the pharmaceutical industry and, as in many other countries, more than 80 percent of soy and canola products, as well as baby formulas, include GM elements. 

There are no requirements for labeling GMOs in Israel, so most Israeli consumers are not aware they are buying GM food. 

Local and international environmental organizations are concerned about the lack of labeling and are actively lobbying for legislation in the Knesset (Israeli parliament) to address the issue. 

Agriculture research is very developed in Israel. Universities are widely involved in GM research projects financed by Israeli and international governments and foundations. The results of the research, however, cannot be tested on a large scale or implemented in Israel due to local restrictions on GMO crops. They inform tests abroad.

Research on GM Crops
Biodiversity Threat
Are GM Products Kosher?

Israel’s Ministry of Agriculture regulates GMO research to stem contamination of non-GM crops. A detailed research plan must accompany any application for the experimental growth of GM plants and their associated microorganisms in the laboratory. 

Dr. Yihiam Zeltz, who studies GMOs at the Agricultural Research Organization–Volcani Center (ARO), explained that GMO research can be conducted only in green houses or in open fields far away from agricultural areas. 

Most of the research conducted on GM plants includes developing and improving plants’ resistance to pests, diseases, and herbicides. But the research can only reach the “proof of concept” stage, because of regulations.

As tomato cultivation spreads in Israel, researchers are developing tomato varieties resistant to viruses and without seeds, though this research won’t help local growers any time soon. Zeltz’s recent research involves merging genes to affect the amount of non-saturated fat in plants. 

Many of the researchers in Israel are favorable toward GMOs.

The environmental movements in Israel against GMOs say GM seeds produce sterile crops, so cross-pollination with wild plants could bring rapid extinction to those wild varieties.

Israel has a diversified climate—from high, green mountains in the north to deserts in the south—and its flora is among the most diverse in the world. 

Zeltz said GM plants are very weak and “spoiled.” 

“They need irrigation and fertilizers, and they will die in natural conditions, not like the wild plants that are strong enough to overcome even drought,” he said. Zeltz is not worried about cross-contamination, as he believes the wild strains will persevere.

The issue of whether products including GMOs are kosher or not is controversial not only in Israel, but also among Jewish communities around the world. 

The question of kosher food among Jewish people concerns not only meat, but also vegetables. 

The religious kashrut authority in Israel had ruled that genetic engineering “does not affect kosher status” because genetic material is “microscopic.”

But there are Jewish groups that dispute this decision and consider GMOs a violation of the biblical prohibition against “kilayim,” mixed breeding both in crops and in livestock.

Those believing GM products cannot be labeled as kosher quote the well-respected 13th century Kabbalist Rabbi Moshe ben Nachman (known as “the Ramban”), who said mankind should not disturb the fundamental nature of creation.

Natural Food Certifiers (NFC) announced in April 2013, that its Apple K Kosher Certification Program will no longer accept applications for products that contain GMOs. The Epoch Times