go to WASHINGTON FREE PRESS HOME (subscribe, contacts, archives, latest, etc.)
Jan/Feb 2000 issue (#43)
For over a decade, profound changes have been taking place in the food that Americans and people around the world are eating. Corporations like Monsanto, DuPont, and Novartis have been tinkering with our food at the genetic level, splicing genes from different species or bacteria into crops. The chemical and pharmaceutical giants, now calling themselves "life science companies," have been altering basic food crops so they can withstand mold or fungi; produce more protein, starch, or oil; resist strong applications of pesticides; tolerate freezing temperatures and handling during shipping; and the like.
By the end of 1999, nearly 100 million acres of these altered crops had been planted worldwide. In the U.S. some 30,000 foods, or about 70% of foods, contain genetically altered ingredients. Many scientists and environmentalists say the effects of these foods have not been tested sufficiently. They object that none of these foods are labeled, as they must be in Europe. People wanting to avoid these foods can do so by eating only certified organic foods. Thus, probably everyone in the United States is eating some of these foods every day without knowing it. As a Dec. 12 New York Times article noted: "The industry and its regulators evidently didn't think we needed to be informed that our entire food supply was about to be transformed."
According to News on Earth (175 Fifth Ave., Suite 2245, New York City, NY 10010), genetically altered foods include Coca-Cola (Aspartame or syrup), Fritos (corn) Green Giant Harvest Burgers (soy), McDonald's french fries (potatoes), Similac infant formula (soy), non-organic tomatoes, potatoes, yellow squash, corn oil, pizza, cookies, cakes, tofu, tofu burgers, ice cream, soy lecithin, and more. News on Earth added that most feed given to livestock and commercially sold fish is genetically altered.
These foods are sometimes called genetically altered (GA), genetically modified (GM), genetically engineered (GE), biotech, containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs), or transgenic.
Now, however, a storm of publicity is gathering, and the "biotech revolution" in foods may go the way of the "nuclear revolution" in energy--down to an ignominious defeat.
The first field trials of GA plants occurred in 1986, when tobacco was experimentally altered to resist certain viruses. The first crops were planted in 1994, when the Flavr-Savr tomato was engineered to delay ripening.
According to the New York Times, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), in order to avoid being sued for allowing these crops to be patented and planted, has no policy on biotech foods, although some of its own scientists have said that the foods have not been tested sufficiently. Following are some of the problems with these foods that have arisen in the roughly 15 years they have been on the market in the U.S.:
In February the Chicago Tribune ran a Daily Telegraph (London) dispatch to the effect that a suppressed report written for the British government stated that GM crops could wipe out some farmland birds, plants, and animals.
After two years of planting these crops, Canadian farmers reported that weeds from neighboring transgenic crops acquired the same herbicide tolerance. Some organic farmers on both sides of the Atlantic have worried that they could lose their organic certification if pollen from nearby GA crops drifts onto organic fields.
In June there was a firestorm of publicity when scientists reported that pollen from genetically modified corn was killing the monarch butterfly.
In October a study in Lancet, the prestigious British medical journal, showed that the internal organs and immune systems of rats were impaired when they were given genetically altered food. The rats were fed potatoes that had been injected with a gene that makes a protein, lectin, that increases the potato's resistance to pests. After ten days, the rats' intestines thinned in some places and hardened in others.
The WorldWatch Institute's Vital Signs/1999 stated: "The range of novel substances in transgenics--including pesticides, viral proteins, and compounds never before part of the human diet--raises the fear of widespread food allergies." The article noted that crops engineered to contain their own pesticides have harmed "non-target" insects, and "may harm other organisms as pesticide-laden residues persist in the soil." Also, drifting pollens can pass the pesticide resistance onto weeds and produce super-weeds and "upset insect and animal populations."
Some activists have pointed out that genetic "pollution" is more dangerous than oil spills. The latter can be mopped up but drifting pollen cannot.
Why has the FDA allowed these crops to be planted and eaten without sufficient testing? Food First, an organization that works on issues of world hunger (www.foodfirst.org; 398 60th St., Oakland, CA 94618) said there is a "revolving door" of bureaucrats who work for the government and for the big chemical and agribusiness companies. "Decisions made by these government agencies more often favor corporate profits at the cost of consumers' health and safety." Food First slammed the food giants' claims that GA food will help wipe out hunger. The organization said hunger exists because of poverty and inequality, not lack of food.
In fact, genetically altered foods make it more expensive for farmers to produce food, according to Food First. "Bankers and commodity buyers often insist that already debt-laden farmers use more pesticides, pesticide-resistant seeds, and bovine growth hormone to increase production. Expensive corporate-controlled seeds, pesticides, fertilizers, and farm equipment have dramatically increased the cost for a farmer to produce food," the organization stated. The Union of Concerned Scientists said sustainable agriculture tries to use few off-farm products. Thus, "biotechnology, particularly genetic engineering, is not a fruitful approach in the quest for sustainable agriculture." The public outcry over the uncertainty of the effect of genetically altered foods has prompted the following actions:
In November the World Trade Organization met in Seattle amidst a storm of protest against globalization and the corporations that, among other things, are the authors of biotech foods.
In England, even restaurants and caterers will have to start labeling any foods containing GMOs. Sainsbury's, Pryca, and Carrefour, supermarket chains in England, Spain, and France, respectively, advertise that none of their own-label foods contain GMOs. Austria and Luxembourg have banned all GM foods. Deutche Bank has recommended that its investors sell off their holdings of GM stock, according to the Seattle Times. Thailand has prohibited the importing of GM seeds, and in September, South Korea announced that all GM foods wold have to be labeled by the end of 1999. The WorldWatch Institute said that, "from England to India, farmers and activists have destroyed transgenic test plots in protest."
Baby-food makers H.J. Heinz Co. and Gerber recently announced that their foods will soon contain no GMOs.
Responding to a storm of outrage, Monsanto has said it will not retail its "terminator" seeds, which are bred to be sterile and would force farmers to "lease" new seeds each year instead of saving seeds for the next year's harvest. But the Union of Concerned Scientists (ucs@ucsusa.org; www.ucsusa.org) noted that "every multinational is developing some version of terminator-like technology." It called for people to write to Sec. Dan Glickman, U.S. Dept of Agriculture, 200-A Whitten Bldg, 1400 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20250; agsec@usda.gov to request that the FDA deny all permits for terminator technologies.
Several congress people, including Rep. Jack Metcalf (R-WA), have called for labeling GMO products. The Seattle Times on Nov. 25 published an editorial supporting labeling that would read: "U.S. Government Notice: This product contains genetically engineered material or was produced with a genetically engineered material." The companies using GM ingredients oppose labeling, and the FDA backs industry on this question.
In late November over 30 farmer groups, representing tens of thousands of farmers, met in Chicago and warned their members against planting GM crops, saying they feared "massive liability from damage caused by genetic drift."
The Consumer's Union, with 4.7 million members, has repeatedly called for more evaluation and labeling of GM products.
A Time magazine survey last year found 81% of respondents were in favor of labeling.
Where are the most GM crops? Worldwide, 98.6 million acres were planted by 1999, according to the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications, and quoted in the Seattle Times. The U.S. produces 72% of GM crops, Argentina 17%, Canada 10%, and China 1%. Australia, France, Mexico, Portugal, Romania, South Africa, Spain and Ukraine produce small amounts.
By crop, 54% of GM crops are soybeans, 28% is corn, 9% is canola, 9% is cotton. Some potatoes, squash and papayas are genetically modified.
Finally, the Pesticide Action Network has called for 1) labeling all GM foods and fibers; 2) supporting the public's right to know about developments, trials, and commercialization of GE crops; 3) increasing public awareness of the threat that GM crops present to health and the environment; 4) mobilizing opposition to GM foods and influencing the government's role in this area; 5) increasing public funding of sustainable agricultural research.