Conscious Choice: Frankenfoods

May 1999

Frankenfoods

by Liane Clorfene-Casten

Like a Celtic sea monster emerging from the depths of a brackish Scottish lake, the footprints of bio-engineered and sterile seeds populating the world have become the focus of international debates, lawsuits, and activist campaigns that will not disappear very soon. The bio engineering story could become the agricultural issue of the next decade.

In the center of it all is multinational giant Monsanto, the biggest player in the field right now. But Monsanto is not alone in its efforts to spread bio-engineered and sterile seeds across the globe. It is aided by the White House, the Department of Commerce, the Secretary of State, U.S. Trade Representative Charlene Barshevsky and an economic policy that puts free trade and corporate control ahead of all other concerns.

The FrankenFood Method

Genetic engineering is an artificial laboratory technique that allows scientists to cut, join, and transfer genes between totally unrelated living things. Scientists can transfer genetic material from a species of plant, bacteria, virus, animal, or fish into another species with which it will not naturally breed. Unlike normal methods of reproduction or traditional crossbreeding, genetic engineers can create combinations of genes that would never occur naturally. Some crops have been engineered to make them resistant to weed killers; others produce their own pesticide. Those who work in the industry insist genetically-engineered (G-E) foods are safe; that G-E foods can increase yields and profits, enhance nutritional value, reduce waste and improve flavor and shelf life. Monsanto claims their products will help eradicate world hunger by making farming easier, more reliable, and thus cheaper.

Some farmers in the U.S. swear by their new Monsanto G-E seeds. Once a farmer plants them, the only weed control that group of crops will need is one produced by Monsanto. Thanks to a bit of gene splicing, soybean, cotton, and canola seeds will grow in spite of that herbicide while weeds all around it will die. The crops are engineered to tolerate Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide, also known as glyphosate.

There are problems; glyphosate is the third most commonly reported cause of pesticide illness among farm workers. According to the Journal of Pesticide Reform, glyphosate is "Acutely toxic to animals, including humans....Glyphosate-containing products have caused genetic damage in human blood cells, fruit flies, and onion cells; it causes reduced sperm counts in male rats, lengthened estrous cycle in female rats, decreased birth weights in offspring....Residues in the soil have persisted over a year; damaging or reducing the population of beneficial insects, fish, birds, and earthworms."

Scientists at an American Association for the Advancement of Science forum in May, 1998 warned of the potential risks of agricultural G-E crops. "I’ve come to believe that the potential power of G-E dwarfs that of nuclear power," said Liebe Cavalieri, professor of Environmental Science at State University of New York at Purchase. "Society should not be carried away with fantasies promised by the biotech promoters."

Ohio State University scientists have found that G-E crops can pass their traits on to nearby weeds via hybridization. These hybrid, transgenic weeds resist the herbicides that were designed to kill them. What’s perhaps more fundamental is that New York scientists have learned that genetically engineered Bt may accumulate in soil. Bt bacteria occurs naturally in some plants, offering them protection from certain insect predators. But natural Bt becomes inactive in soil. Thus, its toxic effects are limited. Genetically engineered Bt binds with clay and humic acid soil particles and does not lose its capacity to kill insects.

The gene beans also contain potential allergens, microbial genes, new proteins and increased chemical residues. Currently, "gene beans" are grown separately from others but are mixed after harvest with conventional soybeans; the company and the U.S. government aggressively refuse to keep them separate.

So far, there are insufficient long-term tests of these products, but if the general public continues to be as unaware as it is, the consequences to public health can be serious. G-E products interfere with the natural order of nature. When these products are introduced at random into the food supply of an unknowing public, there is no certain cause-and-effect relationship, no identifiable way anyone can say "My allergies are the result of the food I’m eating." (There is no control group.) Thus, the manufacturer of these products will take no responsibility for their effects.

In fact, the U.S. has been accused of "bullying" foreign governments in order to protect Monsanto’s global ambitions. But Monsanto itself is far from clean. One alarming tale is the story of Dr. Arpad Pusztai, a Hungarian-born research scientist now in Aberdeen, Scotland. Front-page headlines in the U.K. told of Dr. Pusztai’s suspension from his research post at Rowett Research Institute in August, 1998, ending a distinguished career. Pusztai found, to his own surprise, that consumption by rats of G-E potatoes had a "profound physiological effect" on their growth and development. Dr Pusztai, a research scientist with a world reputation, has published over 200 papers on lectin, a protein which is a natural insecticide found in the snowdrop flower.

In his 1998 experiments, he fed lectin to rats. The rats who ate potatoes mixed together with lectin suffered no ill effects. But the rats who ate potatoes into which lectin had been genetically engineered became ill. Pusztai sums up the situation as follows: two harmless substances, potato and lectin, were found to become toxic after genetic modification.

Pusztai is the first world-renowned scientist whose research findings question the use of genetic engineering as a whole, and it is significant that he is, at heart, an advocate of genetic engineering. His experiment had not been done to see if the potatoes were safe as human food, but to devise a way of testing for safety in general, as part of a project set up by the government. The findings surprised Dr Pusztai as much as anyone else.

"I was totally taken aback," Pusztai told the press. "I was absolutely confident that I would not find anything, but the longer I spent on the experiment the more uneasy I became. I believe in the technology. But it is too new for us to be absolutely sure that what we are doing is right."

Pusztai was attacked by "Britain’s most august Fellows of the Royal Society," his computers were "sealed," and all data from his experiments was confiscated.

While Pusztai’s findings were subsequently duplicated by a panel of 20 other international scientists, he is deeply bitter that he took a fall as the result of corporate pressure. "His firing and the ensuing scientific cover-up by the U.K. government were a direct consequence of ongoing White House pressure on Tony Blair to keep the door open to Monsanto and other biotech companies," said Ronnie Cummins of the Pure Food Campaign. Dr. Pusztai added, "If anyone dares to say anything even slightly contraindicative, they are vilified and totally destroyed."

Reaction is taking hold — slowly — across North America. Lawsuits are being filed, as Monsanto’s altered form of Bt (along with Roundup,) has been used in growing cotton with negative results. One U.S. farmer nearly lost his whole crop and is suing Monsanto for $250,000. Almost 200 cotton farmers in Georgia, Florida, and North Carolina are suing Monsanto for damages after crop failures on both Monsanto’s Bt and Roundup Ready cotton seeds. Twenty-five Texas, Oklahoma, Mississippi, and Louisiana farmers are suing Monsanto for fraud and misrepresentation — thanks to Bt cotton failures. Monsanto and Delta and Pine Land Company were forced through legal proceedings to pay more than $1.9 million to three Mississippi cotton farmers who planted Roundup Ready cotton seed that was defective. Other Mississippi farmers settled privately.

On February 18, an international coalition of public interest organizations, led by attorneys from the Center for Food Safety, filed a lawsuit in Federal District Court in Washington, D.C. to have all Bt crops taken off the market, citing hazards to the environment and public health. Last May, the CFS sued the FDA to have all G-E foods taken off the market on the grounds that they are neither properly labeled nor safety-tested. Lack of mandatory labeling illegally restricts the freedom of choice of those who would choose, on religious or ethical grounds, to avoid G-E foods.

But Monsanto is fighting back. Percy Schmeiser, a Canadian farmer who has been farming his fertile acres his whole life, is being sued by Monsanto for what the company calls "seed piracy." It’s a landmark case; the outcome could influence how much control biotech companies will have over the world’s food supply for years. Schmeiser is one of hundreds of farmers in the U.S. and Canada who are accused by Monsanto of replanting the company’s patented gene-altered seeds in violation of a three-year-old company rule requiring that farmers buy the seeds fresh every year. He denies having bought Monsanto seeds, saying pollen or seeds must have blown onto his farm. He accuses the company of harassment. Why? Pinkerton detectives are sent into farmers’ fields, and the company sponsors a toll-free "tip-line" to help farmers blow the whistle on their neighbors. It places radio ads broadcasting the names of non-compliant growers caught planting the company’s seeds. Critics say these tactics are fraying the social fabric that holds farming communities together.

Schmesier’s story is the tip of the iceberg. A bill has been introduced in the Ohio state legislature that would require registration and state-level regulation of any farmer who cleans or conditions self-pollinated seed. According to the Rural Advancement Foundation International, the proposed legislation is part of Monsanto’s aggressive corporate strategy to police rural communities and intimidate seed-saving farmers.

The proposal to amend Ohio’s seed law originated with Monsanto in 1998. Under U.S. patent law, it is illegal for farmers to save patented seed. To enforce its exclusive monopoly, Monsanto has aggressively prosecuted farmers for "seed piracy." Usually the seed saving is illegal only if the farmer is saving or re-using patented seed. If this bill becomes law, it would require seed cleaners to keep detailed records on every seed cleaning transaction, to document the name of the farmer, seed variety names, and whether or not the seed is protected by patents or breeders’ rights. Thus, the bill discriminates against farmers who are lawfully saving and re-planting their own non-patented seeds. And the bill would shift expenses and the burden of policing rural communities to the seed cleaners and state governments.

Currently, it’s estimated that 60 to 70 percent of the foods in U.S. stores contain G-E components. The FDA projects that 100-150 new G-E products will hit the market by the year 2000. These foods have not been subjected to thorough, pre-market safety testing, nor are they labeled. (FDA has worked with Monsanto and other G-E companies in keeping consumers in the dark about what is in their foods.) Soybeans, cotton, canola, corn (ten varieties), potatoes, yellow crookneck squash, radicchio, and tomatoes (five varieties) are already on the list of G-E products which unknowing consumers eat.

Big name products such as Coca-Cola (corn syrup or Aspartame), Fritos, Green Giant Harvest Burgers (soy), McDonald’s French fries (potatoes), Nestle’s chocolate (soy), Karo corn syrup (corn), NutraSweet (Aspartame), Kraft salad dressings (canola oil), Fleishmann’s margarine (soy), Similac infant formula (soy), Land O’Lakes butter (rBGH), and Cabot Creamery Butter (rBGH)—all include G-E ingredients.

G-E foods represent 30 percent of all soy grown in the U.S and over a quarter of the maize. G-E cotton crops now comprise 45 percent of all cotton. Monsanto now controls ten percent of the global seed supply and its share is growing rapidly. Monsanto has been in the process of buying up as many seed companies as it can afford. So far, it has bought Holden’s Foundation Seeds, Asgrow Agronomics, De Kalb, Delta, Pine Land, and Cargill (joint venture.) The company owns 85 percent of all the U.S. cottonseed market alone. Acquisition price so far: $8 billion in the last two years. So far, the Justice Department has closed a blind eye to this chemical monopoly.

Monsanto predicts that by the year 2000, nearly 100 percent of U.S. soybeans (60 million acres) will be genetically modified. If the corporation and the U.S. have their way, there’s every reason to suggest that over a period of time, every crop in the world can and will be altered and patented.

Anyone for fasting?

New From Monsanto: Terminator Technology

In March, 1998, Delta and Pine Land Company (purchased by Monsanto that year), in collaboration with the USDA, was awarded U.S. patent number 5,723,765: Control of Plant Gene Expression. Although the patent is broad and covers many applications, the one application that most attracts these biotech companies is the one that the Rural Advancement Foundation in 1998 dubbed the "terminator technology."

The terminator patent aims at engineering crops to kill their own seeds in the second generation, making it impossible for farmers to save and replant seeds. Each farmer who buys terminator seeds from Monsanto will have to return to that company to buy next year’s seeds. Critics call this technology a blatant act of control.

While the final plans for terminator technology are not yet in force (and some scientists suggests the international uproar may keep these plans from being fully implemented), the environmental consequences of these technologies are not fully understood.

Still, several problems already have been identified. For example, the terminator gene is likely to "drift." That is, under certain conditions, it can kill seeds of neighboring plants from the same species, becoming a potential problem for the farmer whose fields are close to the terminator crop. If enough normal seeds die, the farmer next door may not be able to save his or her own seeds.

In addition, scientists speculate that the seeds may have an impact on birds, insects, fungi, and bacteria that eat the seeds.

Other issues related to genetic engineering also apply. Scientists do not yet know how these seeds will affect the ecology of soil organisms; whether they will provoke allergic reactions, or how the effects of these seeds can be distinguished and measured, once they’re released into the general population.

These are troubling issues; but they hardly surface in the U.S. news. Watch international news reports to catch a glimmer of the international reaction to these technologies. — Liane Clorfene-Casten

Genetically Modified Nightmares

One of the biggest fears of the natural products industry recently became reality when the first known instance of Genetically Modified Organism (GMO) contamination of a U.S. organic product was discovered.

A European importer was forced to destroy an entire shipment of certified organic chips from the U.S. after they were genetically tested by Dutch importers and determined to have traces of GMOs.

The contaminated chips, manufactured by Wisconsin-based company Terra Prima, Inc., came from certified organic corn grown on a farm in Texas and were processed by a certified organic facility. According to Melodi Nelson, vice-president of Terra Prima, Inc., the problem was not due to fraud or to the audit-trail system, but to cross-pollination. It is believed that corn genetically modified with Bt, a natural pesticide used to kill corn earworms, was responsible for the contamination.

Because genetic testing is expensive, it is currently not part of the organic certification process and is rarely done in the U.S., leaving questions about how many other organic products on the market have genetic contamination. According to estimates, at least 25 percent of U.S. corn is genetically modified.

Terra Prima lost $147,000 by destroying the contaminated chips, and says it will now do genetic testing on all corn before processing. The company will refuse corn with contamination of more than one part per thousand by weight. They have also joined the Center for Food Safety and other concerned groups, including Greenpeace, the International Federation of Organic Agriculture, and organic farmers from 21 states in filing suit against the EPA to stop the Bt genetic engineering.

The contamination incident could be devastating to the organic industry, whose growth in part has been due to consumers wanting GMO-free products. It also has raised concerns as to how much genetic contamination will be allowed by proposed organic regulations.

"Genetically engineered crops are a threat to farmers, consumers, and the environment," said Charles Margulis, a Greenpeace genetic engineering specialist. "The evidence overwhelmingly backs our concerns, yet the [EPA] refuses to act. The threat to farmers and the environment is imminent and requires immediate action." — James Faber

Recommend this page to a friend

Top Ten pages recommended to friends: