Alex Steffen
See book keywords and concepts |
 The environmental risks of farming gm crops are significant—genetic engineering introduces into the environment self-reproducing species that haven't existed long enough to be studied in depth. The race to develop gm crops is largely an attempt by large corporations to monopolize factory farming, and raises huge social and economic questions. Corporate research into gm crops is not geared toward redesigning crops for free distribution to the world's poorer farmers but toward design-patented products that prop up agribusiness and generate wealth for a powerful few. |
Jeffrey M. Smith
See book keywords and concepts |
 Transgenes in commercial gm crops tend to be inserted near transposons.
4. This insertion might alter the transgene expression.
Genetic engineering activates mobile DNA, called transposons, which generate mutations
Throughout the genome of plants are virus-like DNA sequences called transposons. Under conditions of stress, transposons are activated and make RNA. Their RNA, however, produces DNA, which then reinserts itself back into the genome in a new location. This reinsertion causes a mutation at the insertion site and may disrupt gene expression in some way. |
Alex Steffen
See book keywords and concepts |
| The race to develop gm crops is largely an attempt by large corporations to monopolize factory farming, and raises huge social and economic questions. Corporate research into gm crops is not geared toward redesigning crops for free distribution to the world's poorer farmers but toward design-patented products that prop up agribusiness and generate wealth for a powerful few.
Nonetheless, genetic modification is not inherently evil, and when applied with wisdom, it can have positive results. |
Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
See article keywords and concepts |
 If we stay informed, focused and committed to protecting nature, we can end the secrecy and get gm crops either labeled on foods or banned outright. In time, we may even be able to overthrow modern patent law and ultimately ban the patenting of seeds, genes and living entities. In time, I hope to see the ending of patent law on all medicines, too.
Patents on genes, seeds, foods and medicines should have never been allowed. These things belong to the people (actually, they belong to no one except nature). They certainly do not belong to any corporation. |
Jeffrey M. Smith
See book keywords and concepts |
| Virus-resistant gm crops are engineered to create large quantities of small regulatory dsRNA. As described in section 2.8, regulatory RNA can influence gene expression, even in future generations. Cummins says, "It is not unreasonable to suggest that a unique interfering plum RNA may be active in humans and animals." Although this proposition is speculative, Cummins says that "common sense requires adequate safety experiments," and calls for "fuller testing of the small silencing RNA" used in trans-
113 genie crops. |
| According to Latham, the proteins produced in gm crops have never been properly evaluated for human toxicity.
If GM viral proteins disrupt plant metabolism, the impact might be obvious and the variety would not be used. But this might not always be the case. Humans may be more sensitive than plants to the effects of the protein. Also, the quantity of viral protein produced in a GM plant can significantly increase in certain circumstances (e.g. when the plant is infected with a non-target virus). |
| Since important viral defense mechanisms in plants (such as gene silencing) are very similar in humans, proteins that work in plants may also disable human defenses. gm crops that produce viral proteins in every cell expose us to unprecedented levels. This could weaken our resistance to viral infections, particularly in the gut, where viral proteins circulate after a meal. (The gut is an important entry point for infections by viruses.) The mouth is also at risk, and the nose and lungs may be impacted if protein is expressed in GM pollen. |
| Pollen-sterilizing barnase in gm crops may cause kidney damage
As part of the process of breeding hybrid corn, Aventis (now Bayer CropScience) developed male-sterile corn (MS6) that is incapable of producing viable pollen—it will not out-cross or self-pollinate.* This was accomplished by inserting a gene from a bacterium that creates the enzyme barnase.
Bamase is a known toxin. It degrades single-stranded RNA, is toxic to a variety of human cell lines,64 and can destroy plant cells in which it is expressed.65 When injected into rats, it causes kidney damage. |
| Without post-market surveillance or better allergy screening methods, gm crops must be considered a suspect for contributing to this situation.
"i n its consultation with Aventis on the company's GE male-sterile corn, the FDA apparently raised no concerns about Aventis'failure to test for possible expression of the pollen-sterilizing GE toxin ... in kernels, leaves, or other non-pollen corn tissues,.. . despite evidence that bacterial barnase causes kidney damage in rats.
«63
—William Freese and David Schubert, Nil tun' Biotechnology
1. |
Alex Steffen
See book keywords and concepts |
| Corporate research into gm crops is not geared toward redesigning crops for free distribution to the world's poorer farmers but toward design-patented products that prop up agribusiness and generate wealth for a powerful few.
Nonetheless, genetic modification is not inherently evil, and when applied with wisdom, it can have positive results. An excellent example is New Rice for Africa (NERICA), a strain of rice that may succeed in bettering health in West and Central Africa, restoring agricultural sus-tainability there, and improving the economics of food importation in the regions. |
Kaayla T. Daniel, PhD, CCN
See book keywords and concepts |
 Pusztai's testimony made a mockery of claims to safety put forth by Monsanto and other biotechnology giants that stand to profit mightily from gm crops and within four days, the distinguished researcher was forced to retire from a job he had held for 36 years at the Rowett Research Institute in Aberdeen, Scotland. The pretext was that he had muddled his findings. More likely greed led the Institute to kowtow to Monsanto, which had given a $230,000 (U.S. dollars) research grant to the institute. |
| The adoption of gm crops has been the most rapid in the United States although Argentina offers the clearest lesson in environmental dangers. (See Sidebar on page 29.)
SOY SPROUTS: YOUNG AND RESTLESS
Soy sprouts are grown by germinating whole soybeans for five to seven days. Slightly larger and firmer than the more familiar mung bean sprouts, they are higher in vitamin C and beta-carotene and are usually served lightly boiled in salads or sauteed as part of a stir fry.12
Traditionally, soy sprouts are eaten in Korea but less often in China or Japan. |
by Michael Murray, N.D. and Joseph Pizzorno, N.D.
See book keywords and concepts |
| The reality is that farmers who grow gm crops actually use more herbicide, not less. For example, Monsanto created Roundup Ready (RR) soy, corn, and cotton specifically so that farmers would continue to buy Roundup, the company's best-selling chemical weed killer, which is sold with RR seeds. Instead of reducing pesticide use, one study of more than eight thousand university-based field trials indicated that farmers who plant RR soy use two to five times more herbicide than farmers who use traditional weed control methods. |
Peter Pringle
See book keywords and concepts |
 If the Berkeley researchers were correct, farmers had either knowingly defied the ban on planting gm crops, or the modern corn genes had somehow slipped over the border in undocumented alien seeds and into the Mexican gene pool.
Trying to make sense of the academic bickering, reporters traveled to the remote hills an hour and a half's drive from the city of Oaxaca where the Berkeley team had taken their corn samples. They quickly discovered one possible explanation for what had happened. |
| Industry analysts say that introduction of gm crops could increase the entire African market by 50 percent.26 But the seed companies will not operate in countries where there is no strong protection for property rights.
Africans fear a repeat of what happened during the Green Revolution, when seed companies developed high-yielding varieties requiring costly inputs for those who could afford them, leaving the majority of small farmers without improved varieties. |
| Second, Zambia was not against gm crops per se, but the government had been advised by its top scientists to favor the precautionary principie—which basically meant that until a food was proved safe, it was off-limits. The Zambian scientists had come to this conclusion after seeking advice from experts on both sides of the debate in Europe, the United States, and South Africa. The scientific group had concluded that GM food was still a potential health hazard and, citing the recent Mexican gene flow example, that American corn could contaminate local African varieties. |
| For several years, the developing countries had sought a way of regulating the import and cultivation of gm crops and foods. In 2000 they had succeeded, against U.S. opposition, in securing an amendment known as the Biosafety Protocol to the 1993 Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). This amendment gave governments the right to regulate GM foods.2 The protocol required exporters of GM seeds for planting to give the importing country written notification of their arrival. |
| Several studies continue to show a risk that gm crops will interbreed with wild relatives and thereby not only create GM-tainted crops but also sprout "superweeds." A team of researchers at Ohio State University showed that wild sunflowers, considered a weed by many U.S. farmers, become hardier and produce 50 percent more seeds when crossed with a GM sunflower resistant to a particular moth larva.11 Researchers in France found gene flow between GM sugar beets and wild cousins. |
Patrick Holford
See book keywords and concepts |
 Because pollen is carried by bees, insects, and the wind, contamination of other crops, including organic ones, will be inevitable if gm crops become widely grown.
The implications for human health and the environment remain unknown, though there are concerns that GM food could pose a serious health risk, with possible health problems involving antibiotic resistance, the creation of new toxins, and unexpected allergic reactions. The reality is that these concerns remain largely speculative because no one can predict what the outcome of the introduction of GM food into the food chain will be. |
Jeffrey M. Smith
See book keywords and concepts |
 Also that week, it was disclosed that Sir Robert May, the Government's Chief Scientific Adviser said, "the gm crops now being tested should not be approved for commercial use until at least 2003."24
Also that week, one of the world's leading medical journals, the Lancet, described the Royal Society's unprecedented condemnation of Dr. Pusztai as "a gesture of breathtaking impertinence to the Rowett Institute scientists who should be judged only on the full and final publication of their work." The editorial also said, "it is astounding that the U.S. |
| In the presence of the code scramblers, the foreign genes inserted in gm crops might create many unintended proteins "with unpredictable effects on ecosystems and human health."2
The relationship between genes and the code scramblers has evolved for billions of years, right along with the evolution of DNA itself. We do not fully understand how they work together in the same species. We certainly can't predict how they will work when a gene from one species meets a code scrambler from another. Will the code scramblers ignore the foreign gene? |
| Rather than doing a careful analysis to verify that unintended proteins were not created, the manufacturers of gm crops decided to stay with their original assumptions. They assume, according to Commoner, "without adequate experimental proof, that a bacterial gene for an insecticidal protein, for example, transferred to a corn plant, will produce precisely that protein and nothing else."2
Code scramblers aren't the only things found in a cell that can make an inserted foreign gene change its characteristics.
2. |
| Some gm crops accidentally acquire additional foreign genes through cross-pollination. Canola plants in Canada, for example, ended up with foreign genes from two different companies, each conferring tolerance to its own brand of herbicide.
Stacked genes and their proteins may interact in dangerous ways. Traditional pesticides illustrate this principle. When they are mixed with other pesticides or chemicals, their strength can be multiplied. "Compounds that enhance the activity of pesticides are not uncommon. |
| Cummins and others are concerned that the CaMV promoter, which is used in nearly all commercialized gm crops, might be reactivating viruses. In addition to waking viruses in the DNA of corn, soy, and other GM foods, they are concerned that the promoters might move between organisms through horizontal gene transfer. Suppose, for example, that the CaMV promoter from a GM corn kernel wanders off inside the stomach of a human and gets reattached to the DNA of a dormant virus. Instead of promoting an insecticide gene as was intended, it may now be switching on a virus. |
| In a survey of at least thirty companies developing gm crops, all had observed it.15
New DNA chip technology has recently allowed scientists to monitor changes in DNA functioning when foreign genes are inserted. In one experiment, there was a staggering 5 percent disruption of overall gene expression. In other words, after a single foreign gene had been added through genetic engineering, one out of every 20 genes that were creating proteins either increased or decreased their output. |
Peter Pringle
See book keywords and concepts |
| In addition, there was still uncertainty over the supposed benefits from gm crops. Did Bt crops cut down on pesticide use? Did Roundup Ready crops reduce the overall use of herbicides? The answers depended on who did the measuring. According to an industry survey for 2001, transgenic crops have been a success. The report said herbicide-tolerant soybeans saved U.S. farmers $1 billion and a GM variety of corn raised yields by 1.58 million metric tons. |
John Robbins
See book keywords and concepts |
 The Supreme Court of India banned the testing of gm crops. The governments of France, Italy, Denmark, Greece, and Luxembourg announced that they would block any attempt to approve new varieties of genetically engineered crops in the European Union. Japan, South Korea, Australia, and Mexico joined the European Community in requiring the mandatory labeling of genetically engineered food.
Trying to stem the tide, the biotech industry funded a survey and then announced, as loudly as they could, that "two-thirds to three-quarters of U.S. consumers are positive about food biotechnology. |
Email this page to a friend
