According to Wikipedia, "Genetic engineering (GE), also called genetic modification, is.....the changing of an organism's genome using biotechnology. These methods are recent discoveries....
An organism that is altered by genetic engineering is a genetically modified organism (GMO). The first GMOs were bacteria in 1973..."
GMO s are NOT the result of cross pollination or hybridization.
According to www.dictionary.reference.com/browse/, "A GMO is an
organism whose genome has been altered by the techniques of genetic
engineering so that its DNA contains one or more genes not normally
found there." The World Health Organization defines GMO as "organisms
in which the genetic material (DNA) has been altered in a way that does
not occur naturally." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_organism)
A FEW EXAMPLES OF GE
According to the USDA the production of genetically engineered
(GE) crops such as cotton, soy beans, and corn has increased
dramatically in this country since 1996. In 2013, 76-85% of corn,
75-82% of cotton, and 93% of soybeans grown in the country were GMOs.
The Obama Administration has approved the unrestricted growing
of genetically engineered alfalfa. Herbicide-tolerant crops are those
that are genetically engineered to survive the effects of herbicides
that kill weeds and which are strong enough to kill the crop as well
except for the genetic modification. The corn, cotton, and
soybean GE crops referred to above include herbicide tolerant
varieties. The corn and cotton GE crops also include insect-resistant
varieties. These crops contain a gene from soil bacteria which produces
a protein that is toxic to specific insect pests.
GMO Yellow Crookneck Squash and Zucchini contain protein genes that protect
against viruses.
"To increase the quantity of milk produced, cows are often given rBGH (recombinant bovine growth hormone), which is also banned in the European Union, as well as in Japan, Canada, New Zealand and Australia." (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/builtlean/diet-and-nutrition_b_4323937.html)
GE is not limited to plant and animal food. There is
cotton, of course. (Although cottonseed oil is an ingredient in a number
of processed foods.) There are the cats that are modified to glow in
the dark
and multi-colored, glow-in-the-dark aquarium fish.
WHY?
You may be wondering why anyone would want to manipulate genes. The
short answer is money. There is money to be made selling Genetically
Engineered products. Monsanto, the largest manufacturer of Genetically
Engineered products, earned almost $1.5 billion dollars in the three
months ending on February 13, 2013.
The "official" reason
for growing GMOs is to save people in third world countries from
starving, to lower food costs, to save water, to increase crop productivity.
So why are
some of us opposed to GMOs? Some people believe GMO consumption can
and/or has made some people ill. Some people think gene manipulation is
contrary to God's will. Some think GMOs threaten the quality of the
environment. Some fear that GMOs will make the world's overpopulation
crisis worse. Some people don't like being treated as human guinea
pigs.
Are GMOs absolutely necessary? In my opinion, no. (I just read the
nation of Bhutan has decided to go 100% organic.) The alternative,
however, would require a massive shift to humans living in harmony with
Nature, which those in power would not favor. I can't imagine how the American
Upper Class would survive such a shift.
GMOs AND THE LAW
An article in the August, 2009 issue of Scientific American (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-seed-companies-control-gm-crop-research/)
explains that big agrotech companies such as Monsanto, Pioneer and
Syngenta require the purchasers of genetically modified seeds to sign
an
agreement that prohibits the seeds from being used for independent
research. "Under the threat of litigation,
scientists cannot test a seed to explore the different conditions under
which it thrives or fails. They cannot compare seeds from one company
against those from another company. And perhaps most important, they
cannot examine whether the genetically modified crops lead to unintended
environmental side effects." From the companies' viewpoint such
measures are necessary to protect intellectual property, and they
certainly don't want anyone else producing and selling "knock-offs".
According to this article, research on genetically engineered seeds,
presumably those supplied to scientists by the seed companies, has
been published. But only those studies approved by the seed companies
are published in peer-reviewed journals. I suspect that the researcher
is required to agree not to publish findings until the seed company
approves the research.
This may be related to the following incident. There was a
congressional bill passed by Congress and signed by President Obama in
March, 2013. In an article entitled "Critics Slam Obama For 'Protecting' Monsanto" by CBS News (March 28, 2013) , it was reported that
a provision was surreptitiously included in that bill which "protects
genetically modified seeds from
litigation suits over health risks posed by the crops' consumption."
That should have read "protects the manufacturer" (one of which is
Monsanto). If Monsanto is so convinced that GMOs are safe, I can't help
wondering why they would be worried about losing law suits. In their
defense, it is costly even for a multi-billion dollar international
corporation to defend itself in court. On the other hand, I can't
imagine Congress taking away the right of American citizens to sue car
companies that decide to suppress information about safety defects
rather than issuing prompt recalls.
Monsanto does not want people to sue it, but it is not shy about suing
farmers for patent infringement. According to its own website
(http://www.monsanto.com/newsviews/pages/saved-seed-farmer-lawsuits.aspx),
Monsanto has filed lawsuits against American farmers 145 times since
1997. These suits are prompted by farmers who save seed from GMO crops
they have grown in order to plant the seed next season. Monsanto
claims it "catches" most violators as a result of other neighboring
farmers reporting the GMO seed savers. It seems to me that if a farmer
discontinues buying Monsanto seed each year, all Monsanto needs to do is
send investigators onto the farmer's property to get a crop sample
which will be analyzed to see if it is a Monsanto GMO. This is not
limited to the farmers who buy the GMO seeds directly. The Monsanto GMO
pollen can be carried by the wind to neighboring farms who don't want
to grow GMO crops. When Monsanto has found GMO crops grown from the
seed these farmers have saved and subsequently planted, Monsanto has
pursued legal damages from them, as well.
The
Grocery Manufacturers Association has introduced a bill (HR 4432) in
Congress
that would block states from enacting GE food labeling laws. It would
give the FDA the exclusive power to decide if a GE food should be
labeled. If the FDA deems the product safe, the manufacturer will not have to label it as a GMO. (http://beta.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/4432/text)
Sixty-four countries, including members of the European Union, "enforce
consumer 'right to know laws for GE foods" according to the Center for
Food Safety (http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/... international-labeling-laws).
NOTE: For a discussion of the GMO right to know and GMO labeling law provisions go to Post F. GMO Labeling - No Excuses at www.classwarfarerg.blogspot.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment