DOCSLIB.ORG

CQR Genetically Modified Food

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
CQR Genetically Modified Food Res earc her Published by CQ Press, an Imprint of SAGE Publications, Inc. CQ www.cqresearcher.com Genetically Modified Food Should labels be required? alifornia voters will decide in November whether foods produced with genetically modified ingredients — so-called GM foods — should bear special labels. C The controversial measure reflects the uneven ac - ceptance of genetically engineered crops since their rise in the 1990s. Organic farmers and other opponents of GM foods contend they may pose health or environmental risks, despite widespread scientific consensus that they are not inherently more risky than other crops. Foes of the labeling referendum, including GM farmers and seed producers, such as Monsanto, say that GM crops are more Plant breeder Alamgir Hossain is developing Golden Rice for Bangladesh. Supporters of the genetically engineered variety say it could save the lives of up to productive, pest-resistant and environmentally friendly than conven - 2.7 million children a year, but it has yet to be planted commercially; the Philippines may approve it for tional crops and that the fast-growing organic industry and misguid - cultivation in 2013. ed consumer groups are to blame for confusion about the science I behind them. Even as GM crops have been embraced by U.S. N THIS REPORT commodity growers, Europe remains skeptical. However, eight of S THE ISSUES ....................719 I the 10 countries with the most acreage in biotech crops are now BACKGROUND ................726 D in the developing world. CHRONOLOGY ................727 E CURRENT SITUATION ........732 CQ Researcher • Aug. 31, 2012 • www.cqresearcher.com AT ISSUE ........................733 Volume 22, Number 30 • Pages 717-740 OUTLOOK ......................735 RECIPIENT OF SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISTS AWARD FOR BIBLIOGRAPHY ................738 EXCELLENCE N AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION SILVER GAVEL AWARD THE NEXT STEP ..............739 GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD CQ Re search er Aug. 31, 2012 THE ISSUES SIDEBARS AND GRAPHICS Volume 22, Number 30 • Were the benefits of Soybeans and Corn Are MANAGING EDITOR: Thomas J. Billitteri 719 GM crops to consumers 720 Among Biggest GM Crops [email protected] oversold? Commodities, or crops sold ASSISTANT MANAGING EDITOR: Kathy Koch • Have existing GM crops on futures exchanges, account [email protected] for 80 percent of GM crop caused environmental harm? CONTRIBUTING EDITOR: Thomas J. Colin field trials in the developed [email protected] • Should GM foods be world. labeled? ASSOCIATE EDITOR: Kenneth Jost Permits for GM Crop- STAFF WRITER: Marcia Clemmitt BACKGROUND 721 Testing on Rise Six times as many were issued CONTRIBUTING WRITERS: Peter Katel , 726 ‘Green Revolution’ in 2008 as in 1992. Barbara Mantel, Jennifer Weeks High-yield plants helped DESIGN /P RODUCTION EDITOR: Olu B. Davis spark a boom in agricul - Genetic Engineering tural production in the 722 by the Numbers ASSISTANT EDITOR: Darrell Dela Rosa 1960s. Key data about GM foods FACT CHECKER: Michelle Harris and the industry. The Roaring ’90s 730 Most Acreage Used for U.S. farmers rapidly switched 723 GM Crops to new GM varieties. More than 90 percent of U.S. soybeans are herbicide tolerant. 730 StarLink Recall An Imprint of SAGE Publications, Inc. Contamination from GM U.S. Leads in Biotech VICE PRESIDENT AND EDITORIAL DIRECTOR, corn not for human con - 724 Agriculture HIGHER EDUCATION GROUP: sumption forced a food More than 170 million acres Michele Sordi of biotech crops are farmed. recall in 2000. DIRECTOR, ONLINE PUBLISHING: 727 Chronology Todd Baldwin CURRENT SITUATION Key events since 1953. Copyright © 2012 CQ Press, an Imprint of SAGE Pub - Is Tampering With DNA In the Pipeline 728 lications, Inc. SAGE reserves all copyright and other 732 Inherently Wrong? rights herein, unless pre vi ous ly spec i fied in writing. Drought-resistant corn and Anti-GM foods ethicist Jeremy soybeans rich in heart- No part of this publication may be reproduced Rifkin launched the debate in electronically or otherwise, without prior written healthy oils are being 1977. permission. Un au tho rized re pro duc tion or trans mis - developed. sion of SAGE copy right ed material is a violation of At Issue federal law car ry ing civil fines of up to $100,000. Labeling Battle 733 Should foods containing ge - 734 California’s controversial netically modified ingredients CQ Press is a registered trademark of Congressional Nov. 6 ballot referendum be labeled? Quarterly Inc. calls for special labels on CQ Researcher (ISSN 1056-2036) is printed on acid- GM foods. OR URTHER ESEARCH free paper. Pub lished weekly, except: (March wk. 5) F F R (May wk. 4) (July wk. 1) (Aug. wks. 3, 4) (Nov. wk. For More Information 4) and (Dec. wks. 3, 4). Published by SAGE Publica - OUTLOOK 737 Organizations to contact. tions, Inc., 2455 Teller Rd., Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Annual full-service subscriptions start at $1,054. For Conflict Ahead? Bibliography pricing, call 1-800-834-9020. To purchase a CQ Re - 735 Increasing friction between 738 Selected sources used. searcher report in print or electronic format (PDF), organic farmers and the visit www.cqpress.com or call 866-427-7737. Single bio-tech industry over The Next Step reports start at $15. Bulk purchase discounts and seed-production techniques 739 Additional articles . electronic-rights licensing are also available. Periodicals is seen. postage paid at Thousand Oaks, California, and at Citing CQ Researcher additional mailing offices . POST MAST ER: Send ad dress 739 Sample bibliography formats. chang es to CQ Re search er , 2300 N St., N.W., Suite 800, Wash ing ton, DC 20037. Cover: International Rice Research Institute 718 CQ Researcher Genetically Modified Food BY JASON MCLURE “Do you give the same sci - THE ISSUES entific weight to evolution and creationism?” asks Adrian hen California vot - Dubock, director of the Gold - ers go to the polls en Rice Project, which seeks W Nov. 6, they’ll be to cut malnutrition and save walking straight into a mas - millions of lives in the devel - sive food fight. oping world through the use On the ballot will be a of GM rice varieties enriched highly contentious proposal with Vitamin A. “There’s a point to require special labels on where the scientific controver - foods produced with genet - sy is over.” ically modified ingredients — On the contrary, the op - so-called GM foods. The fed - position seems to be growing, eral government does not re - says Douglas Gurian-Sherman, quire that GM foods be la - a senior scientist with the Union beled unless they change the of Concerned Scientists, which nutritional content or add favors labeling. “There is clear - toxic or allergenic properties ly more interest and momen - to food. Labeling advocates tum behind it than there was w want any GM food to be la - o 10 years ago,” he says. n K beled, as more than 40 coun - Indeed, big agribusiness o t tries do, including all of Eu - t and biotechnology companies h g rope, Japan and China. i that engineer or produce GM R California’s labeling refer - a crops are pouring resources i n endum has strong support r into halting that momentum. o f i from environmental and food- l a By mid-August, Monsanto, C safety groups that say GM foods Boxes delivered to the Los Angeles County courthouse in Dupont Pioneer, Cargill and — made from crops that have May hold nearly one million signatures from California others had contributed near - had genetic material inserted voters calling for a ballot initiative in November ly $25 million to defeat the or deleted in a laboratory to requiring labeling of genetically modified (GM) foods. statewide initiative — nearly give them specific advan - Organic farmers and some consumer groups support the 10 times the amount raised initiative, contending GM foods may pose health or 3 tages, such as resistance to environmental risks. The GM farming industry notes that by supporters. herbicides — may pose scientific organizations ranging from the National California is the nation’s health or environmental risks. Academy of Science to the World Health Organization biggest consumer market, and Also among the staunchest say GM crops pose no more risk than conventional foods. passage of the referendum labeling supporters are organic could influence GM food poli - farmers, who compete with GM food search, U.S. and international scientif - cies nationwide. Labeling laws or bal - producers. “People have a right to know ic organizations ranging from the Na - lot measures have been proposed in 20 what’s in the food we eat and feed to tional Academy of Science to the states in the past year, according to the our children,” said Stacy Malkan, a spokes - World Health Organization have con - Biotechnology Industry Organization woman for California Right to Know, a cluded that GM crops don’t inherent - (BIO), a trade group. And more than a coalition that has spearheaded the bal - ly pose more risk than their conven - million people signed a petition this year lot measure . 1 tional counterparts. What’s more, they urging the Food and Drug Administra - But GM farming giants and other say genetically modified crops are more tion (FDA) to require labeling. referendum foes argue that the health productive, pest-resistant and envi - California’s referendum campaign is and environmental concerns are un - ronmentally fri endly than convention - part of a much bigger, two-decades- founded, and that the labeling effort al crops — and they’ve been consumed old debate about the safety, effective - is an attempt to demonize a technol - by millions of people in the U.S. for ness and commercial viability of agri - ogy with enormous potential benefits. nearly two decades without any docu - cultural biotechnology. GM supporters They note that after extensive re - mented health consequences. 2 argue that abundant peer-reviewed www.cqresearcher.com Aug.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • U.S. V. Bayer AG and Monsanto Company Comment: the Sierra Club
    ATTN: Kathleen S. O'Neill Chief, Transportation, Energy & Agriculture Section Antitrust Division United States Department of Justice 450 5th Street, NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20530 Petition in opposition to proposed U.S. v. Bayer AG and Monsanto Company settlement and merger: A merger of agrochemical giants Bayer and Monsanto would create the world's largest seed and pesticide maker. I am afraid this move will reduce competition, raise prices for consumers and farmers, and result in an unacceptable degree of control over the agricultural industry and our food supply. I am very concerned about pollinators and the increased risks to bees, butterflies and birds with the increase of Bayer's neonicotinoids. Both companies produce corn products engineered to imply the use of harmful pesticides they manufacture. The production of corn uses high amounts of nitrogen- based fertilizers and the excess sediment is contaminating our waterways, therefore I am deeply worried about increased corn production from this merger. The heavy nutrient runoff from corn is widely attributed to exacerbating the marine "Dead Zone" in the Gulf of Mexico, in which algal blooms create hypoxic conditions wherein oxygen concentration is in such low levels that marine life suffocates and dies. I urge the Department of Justice to do more prevent the Bayer-Monsanto seed and pesticide platform from growing too strong by stopping this merger. If this merger is allowed, it should require more pesticide and seed divestments in order to protect our agriculture and food supply. This merger is anti-competition, if it is approved it will fail to protect farmers, consumers and the environment by allowing further consolidation of the industrial agriculture sector.
    [Show full text]
  • VIA CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED September 26, 2013 Secretary Vilsack U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Animal He
    VIA CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED September 26, 2013 Secretary Vilsack U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Animal Health and Plant Inspection Service (APHIS) 1400 Independence Ave., S.W. Washington, DC 20250 Petition for Agency Action, Rulemaking, Investigation, and Otherwise Collateral Relief on Recent Genetically Engineered Alfalfa Contamination Introduction Pursuant to the Right to Petition the Government Clause of the United States Constitution,1 the Administrative Procedure Act (APA),2 and United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)’s implementing regulations,3 petitioner Center for Food Safety (CFS) respectfully submits this petition for agency action, rulemaking, and collateral relief on behalf of its over 350,000 farmer and consumer members, including alfalfa farmers Joseph and Michelle Peila. CFS requests that the Department retract its September 17, 2013 decision and take all regulatory action needed to remedy the current genetically engineered (GE) alfalfa contamination because its original decision was based on erroneous factual information—that the transgenic contamination occurred after GE Roundup Ready alfalfa was approved for commercial sale. In fact, records indicate that the seed used for the rejected contaminated alfalfa itself tested positive for Roundup Ready contamination, and this seed was purchased in 2010, before the deregulation of Roundup Ready alfalfa. CFS is a nationwide public interest non-profit membership organization with offices in Washington, D.C., San Francisco, CA, and Portland, OR. Since the organization’s founding in 1997, CFS has sought to ameliorate the adverse impacts of industrial farming and food production systems on human health, animal welfare, and the environment. CFS also supports and promotes sustainable forms of agriculture, including organic systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Position Statement on Genetically Engineered Food
    Position Statement on Genetically Engineered Food ealth Care Without Harm opposes the produc- Human Health Concerns tion and marketing of genetically engineered Few long-term studies have been conducted to assure that H(GE) foods. These foods are not adequately production and consumption of GE foods will carry no assessed for their credible adverse effects on human or adverse long-term health impacts. A 2003 peer-reviewed animal health, or on the environment in which they are literature search found just ten published studies specifi- produced. Also of concern is the threat posed by genetic cally designed to assess the potential for health effects engineering to environmentally sustainable food produc- from GE foods or feed.4 For hospitals, patient health is tion and the threat to the economic livelihood of farmers of particular concern, since some patients may be more pursing sustainable food production. vulnerable to possible problems from GE foods than the We therefore encourage health care providers to purchase general public. For example, full digestion of proteins de- non-GE foods to the extent possible and to source from creases the likelihood they will survive to produce harm suppliers that demonstrate a strong commitment to al- (via direct toxicity or allergenicity), whereas digestive ternatives to GE food, and that support local farmers and function is sometimes compromised in hospital patients. sustainable practices. The immune system in such patients may also be compro- mised, making them more generally susceptible to harm. Background Allergies: Genetic engineering moves proteins novel For about a decade,1 companies have introduced geneti- to the human diet into the food supply.
    [Show full text]
  • Amazon's Antitrust Paradox
    LINA M. KHAN Amazon’s Antitrust Paradox abstract. Amazon is the titan of twenty-first century commerce. In addition to being a re- tailer, it is now a marketing platform, a delivery and logistics network, a payment service, a credit lender, an auction house, a major book publisher, a producer of television and films, a fashion designer, a hardware manufacturer, and a leading host of cloud server space. Although Amazon has clocked staggering growth, it generates meager profits, choosing to price below-cost and ex- pand widely instead. Through this strategy, the company has positioned itself at the center of e- commerce and now serves as essential infrastructure for a host of other businesses that depend upon it. Elements of the firm’s structure and conduct pose anticompetitive concerns—yet it has escaped antitrust scrutiny. This Note argues that the current framework in antitrust—specifically its pegging competi- tion to “consumer welfare,” defined as short-term price effects—is unequipped to capture the ar- chitecture of market power in the modern economy. We cannot cognize the potential harms to competition posed by Amazon’s dominance if we measure competition primarily through price and output. Specifically, current doctrine underappreciates the risk of predatory pricing and how integration across distinct business lines may prove anticompetitive. These concerns are height- ened in the context of online platforms for two reasons. First, the economics of platform markets create incentives for a company to pursue growth over profits, a strategy that investors have re- warded. Under these conditions, predatory pricing becomes highly rational—even as existing doctrine treats it as irrational and therefore implausible.
    [Show full text]
  • The Era of Corporate Consolidation and the End of Competition Bayer-Monsanto, Dow-Dupont, and Chemchina-Syngenta
    Research Brief October 2018 The Era of Corporate Consolidation and the End of Competition Bayer-Monsanto, Dow-DuPont, and ChemChina-Syngenta DISRUPT ECOSYSTEM ACCLERATE MONOPOLY THE EFFECTS OF CORPORATE CONSOLIDATION UNDERMINE FOOD SECURITY HARM SMALL PRODUCERS HAASINSTITUTE.BERKELEY.EDU This publication is published by the Haas Institute for a Fair and Inclusive Society at UC Berkeley This research brief is part of the Haas Institute's Shahidi Project from the Global Justice Program. The Shahidi Project (Shahidi is a Swahili word meaning “witness”) intends to demystify the power structures and capacities of transnational food and agricultural corporations within our food system. To that end, researchers have developed a robust database focusing on ten of the largest food and agricultural corporations in the world. See more at haasinstitute.berkeley.edu/shahidi. About the Authors Copyeditor Support Elsadig Elsheikh is the director Marc Abizeid Special thanks to the Food of the Global Justice program and Farm Communications at the Haas Institute for a Infographics Fund, which provided the seed Fair and Inclusive Society at Samir Gambhir funding for the Shahidi project. the University of California- Berkeley, where he oversees Report Citation Contact the program’s projects and Elsadig Elsheikh and Hossein 460 Stephens Hall research on corporate power, Ayazi. “The Era of Corporate Berkeley, CA 94720-2330 food system, forced migration, Consolidation and The End of Tel 510-642-3326 human rights, Islamophobia, Competition: Bayer-Monsanto, haasinstitute.berkeley.edu structural marginality and Dow-DuPont, and ChemChina- inclusion, and trade and Syngenta.” Haas Institute for development. a Fair and Inclusive Society at the University of California, Hossein Ayazi, PhD, is a Berkeley, CA.
    [Show full text]
  • The Peculiar Mormon Paradox
    Mormon Studies Review Volume 4 | Number 1 Article 4 1-1-2017 The ecP uliar Mormon Paradox Molly Worthen Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/msr2 Part of the Mormon Studies Commons BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Worthen, Molly (2017) "The eP culiar Mormon Paradox," Mormon Studies Review: Vol. 4 : No. 1 , Article 4. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/msr2/vol4/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the All Journals at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Mormon Studies Review by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Worthen: The Peculiar Mormon Paradox Review Essays The Peculiar Mormon Paradox Molly Worthen Review of Randall Balmer and Jana Riess. Mormonism and American Politics. New York: Columbia University Press, 2016; Neil J. Young. We Gather Together: The Religious Right and the Problem of Interfaith Poli- tics. New York: Oxford University Press, 2016; David E. Campbell, John C. Green, and J. Quin Monson. Seeking the Promised Land: Mormons and American Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014. When Joseph Smith ran for president in 1844, he spoke like a radi- cal democrat. “In the United States, the people are the government,” his campaign platform proclaimed. He enthusiastically endorsed popular sovereignty, offered a plan to abolish slavery by gradually buying out slaveholders with revenues from the sale of public lands, and proposed to pardon every convict, “blessing them as they go, and saying to them in the name of the Lord, go thy way and sin no more.”1 Smith’s rhetoric reflected the high view of human nature that is a cornerstone of Mormon theology.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Active Bayer Companies with at Least a Share of 50% Last Update: 17.8.2020 Country Company
    List of active Bayer companies with at least a share of 50% last update: 17.8.2020 Country Company Algeria Bayer Algerie S.P.A. Argentina Bayer S.A. Argentina Biagro S.A. Argentina Monsanto Argentina SRL Australia Bayer Australia Limited Australia Bayer CropScience Holdings Pty Ltd Australia Bayer CropScience Pty Limited Australia Cotton Growers Services Pty. Limited Australia Imaxeon Pty. Ltd. Australia Monsanto Australia Pty Ltd Bangladesh Bayer CropScience Ltd. Belgium Bayer Agriculture BVBA Belgium Bayer CropScience NV Belgium Bayer NV Bermuda MonSure Limited Bolivia Bayer Boliviana Ltda Bolivia Monsanto Bolivia S.A. Bosnia & Herzeg. Bayer d.o.o. Sarajevo Brazil Alkagro do Brasil Ltda Brazil Bayer S.A. Brazil D&PL Brasil Ltda Brazil Monsanto do Brasil Ltda. Brazil Rede Agro Fidelidade e Intermediacao S.A. Brazil Schering do Brasil Química e Farmacêutica Ltda. Brazil Stoneville Brasil Ltda. Bulgaria Bayer Bulgaria EOOD Burkina Faso Monsanto Burkina Faso SARL Chile Bayer Finance & Portfolio Management S.A. Chile Bayer Finance Ltda. Chile Bayer S.A. Chile Monsanto Chile, S.A. Costa Rica Bayer Business Services Costa Rica, SRL Costa Rica Bayer Medical S.R.L. Costa Rica Bayer S.A. Curacao Pianosa B.V. Germany Adverio Pharma GmbH - 1 - List of active Bayer companies with at least a share of 50% last update: 17.8.2020 Country Company Germany AgrEvo Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH Germany Alcafleu Management GmbH & Co. KG Germany BGI Deutschland GmbH Germany Bayer 04 Immobilien GmbH Germany Bayer 04 Leverkusen Fußball GmbH Germany Bayer 04 Leverkusen
    [Show full text]
  • Whither Plant Genetic Engineering? Allow Crops to Tolerate Environmental Stress Such As Drought, Cold, Salt, Heat, Or flood
    PLANT TREK TO BOLDLY GO WHERE NO PLANT HAS GONE BEFORE On the Past, Present & Future of Plant Genetic Engineering by Richard G. Stout A HowPlantsWork.com eBook Copyright © 2013 by Richard G. Stout Version 1.0.1 PDF August, 2013 Table of Contents Preface Chapter 1: Where Do New Plants Come From? Chapter 2: How To Make A Transgenic Plant Chapter 3: Gene Guns, Terminators & Traitors Chapter 4: Farmaceuticals, Plantibodies & Edible Vaccines Chapter 5: Into The Wild Chapter 6: Are GM Plants Self-Replicating Inventions? Chapter 7: Plant Trek - The Next Generation Chapter 8: DIY Plant Genetic Engineering? Attributions About The Author Glossary about where plant biotechnology may be headed in the future, Preface including how plant biotechnology “hobbyists” may be getting into the act. Who is this book for? Please Note: This book is NOT a comprehensive textbook on plant genetic engineering and biotechnology. (If you’re looking This book is intended for people who may be curious about for such books, I’m sure you can find them at your local college plant genetic engineering, but who don’t want to read a long, bookstore or at an online bookseller.) Nor is this book meant to technical textbook on the subject. (There are provided, be a defense of genetically-engineered organisms (GMOs), however, ample links to books and articles - and also to online though I’m sure some readers will think so. Maybe here’s why. resources - for further reading.) If you’re looking for small “tastes” of information regarding various aspects of plant Since I was a graduate student in the 1970s at the University of genetic engineering, then this little book maybe just the Washington where some of the original work on transgenic informational “snack” that you’re looking for.
    [Show full text]
  • Visual Metaphors on Album Covers: an Analysis Into Graphic Design's
    Visual Metaphors on Album Covers: An Analysis into Graphic Design’s Effectiveness at Conveying Music Genres by Vivian Le A THESIS submitted to Oregon State University Honors College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Honors Baccalaureate of Science in Accounting and Business Information Systems (Honors Scholar) Presented May 29, 2020 Commencement June 2020 AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Vivian Le for the degree of Honors Baccalaureate of Science in Accounting and Business Information Systems presented on May 29, 2020. Title: Visual Metaphors on Album Covers: An Analysis into Graphic Design’s Effectiveness at Conveying Music Genres. Abstract approved:_____________________________________________________ Ryann Reynolds-McIlnay The rise of digital streaming has largely impacted the way the average listener consumes music. Consequentially, while the role of album art has evolved to meet the changes in music technology, it is hard to measure the effect of digital streaming on modern album art. This research seeks to determine whether or not graphic design still plays a role in marketing information about the music, such as its genre, to the consumer. It does so through two studies: 1. A computer visual analysis that measures color dominance of an image, and 2. A mixed-design lab experiment with volunteer participants who attempt to assess the genre of a given album. Findings from the first study show that color scheme models created from album samples cannot be used to predict the genre of an album. Further findings from the second theory show that consumers pay a significant amount of attention to album covers, enough to be able to correctly assess the genre of an album most of the time.
    [Show full text]
  • 513127 Arkansas Food Law Policy 3.2.Ps
    University of Arkansas School of Law [email protected] $ (479) 575-7646 An Agricultural Law Research Article “Show-Me” No Rice Pharming: An Overview of the Introduction of and Opposition to Genetically Engineered Pharmaceutical Crops in the United States by Jillian S. Hishaw Originally published in JOURNAL OF FOOD LAW AND POLICY 3 J. FOOD L. & POL’Y 209 (2007) www.NationalAgLawCenter.org “SHOW-ME” NO RICE PHARMING: AN OVERVIEW OF THE INTRODUCTION OF AND OPPOSITION TO GENETICALLY ENGINEERED PHARMACEUTICAL CROPS IN THE UNITED STATES Jillian S. Hishaw* I. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................... 209 II. INEFFECTIVE REGULATORY CONTROLS .................................... 210 III. GENETICALLY MODIFIED CROP CONCERNS ............................. 214 A. Early Incidents ...................................................................... 215 B. The California Experience ..................................................... 218 C. The Missouri Welcome and Opposition ................................. 219 D. The Bayer Lawsuit ................................................................ 223 IV. CONCLUSION ............................................................................. 226 I. INTRODUCTION Farmers in California and Missouri have one thing in com- mon⎯opposition to the production of genetically modified (GM) “pharma” crops.1 A pharmaceutical crop, or “pharma” crop, is a plant that has been genetically altered so that it produces proteins which are used as drugs.2 Pharmaceutical companies can then harv- est the crop and isolate the proteins, which may be used to make * Jillian S. Hishaw received her J.D. in 2005 and LL.M in Agricultural Law in 2007, from the University of Arkansas School of Law, Fayetteville, Arkansas. Ms. Hishaw is a native of Kansas City, Missouri and currently works for the Missouri Department of Conservation. Ms. Hishaw would like to extend special thanks to Professor Susan Schneider for her devotion in helping her evolve into a more con- ceptual writer.
    [Show full text]
  • 11:115:321 (44K PDF)
    Ethical Issues in Biochemical Research Spring 2021 11:115:321:01 George Pieczenik, Ph.D., Professor Spring 2021 Day M,W Time 2:15-3:35 Online: GoToMeeting and Zoom 3 credits, meeting twice a week for 80 minutes Course Description This course will address ethical issues in biochemistry, with some focus on genetics and molecular biology. The course will consist of lectures by the professor, as well as student presentations on selected topics. Issues to be covered will include the ethics of recombinant DNA technology, of genetically modified plants and animals, of stem cell use, scientific patents, and of creating DNA databases. Other topics will include the political use of genetics and evolutionary paradigms, and the use of fraudulent data and “pseudo science”, and how these tools can be used to sway public opinion. Important issues facing scientists and students currently will also be discussed, such as plagiarism . data manipulation and consequences of the biotechnology revolution. Course Requirements 1. Class Attendance & Participation: Students are expected to attend class online and to participate actively. There will be spot quizzes. Unexcused absences (>3) will result in failure. (10%) Online class attendance will be through GoToMyMeeting and/or Zoom. Classes will be recorded and deposited to Dropbox for students who can not make the class synchronously. 2. Essays on assigned topics: Students will present two power point topics assigned or requested. for presentation to the class. (70%) 3. Final exam; A final take home 2 hour exam. (20%) Optional reading list from which to prepare paper The Main text is Edwin Black's - America's War on the Weak Publisher: Four Walls Eight Windows; (September 2003) ISBN: 1568582587 Rosalind Franklin: The Dark Lady of DNA by Brenda Maddox , Harper Collins 2002, UK The Fraud of Abderhalden’s Enzymes by Ute Deichmann and Benno Muller-Hill, Nature vol 393.
    [Show full text]
  • MONARCHS in PERIL HE MONARCH BUTTERFLY IS in SERIOUS TROUBLE —Their Numbers Have Tplummeted Over the Past Two Decades
    MONARC HS IN PERIL HERBICIDE-RESISTANT CROPS AND THE DECLINE OF MONARCH BUTTERFLIES IN NORTH AMERICA EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FEBRUARY 2015 ABOUT CENTER FOR FOOD SAFETY CENTER FOR FOOD SAFETY (CFS) is a non-profit public interest and environmental advocacy membership organization established in 1997 for the purpose of challenging harmful food production technologies and promoting sustainable alternatives. CFS combines multiple tools and strategies in pur suing its goals, including litigation and legal petitions for rulemaking, legal support for various sustainable agriculture and food safety constituencies, as well as public education, grassroots organizing and media outreach. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Authors: BILL FREESE AND MARTHA CROUCH, P hD Executive Summary Contributing Writer: LARISSA WALKER Copy Editing: ABIGAIL SEILER, LARISSA WALKER, MADELEINE CARNEMARK Legal Consultant: GEORGE KIMBRELL Graphics: PATRICK RIGGS Design: HUMMINGBIRD DESIGN STUDIO Report Advisor: ANDREW KIMBRELL The authors are indebted to several reviewers, in particular Dr. Lincoln Brower, for their helpful comments and suggestions. CENTER FOR FOOD SAFETY MONARCHS IN PERIL HE MONARCH BUTTERFLY IS IN SERIOUS TROUBLE —their numbers have Tplummeted over the past two decades. The butterfly’s decline tracks the virtual eradication of its caterpillar’s chief food source—common milkweed—from Midwestern cropland. The demise of milkweed is due to intensive spraying of glyphosate herbicide on Monsanto’s Roundup Ready corn and soybeans that have been genetically engi - neered to withstand it. Monarchs are in imminent danger unless milkweed is restored to Midwestern crop fields. Milkweed cannot recover with continued heavy use of glyphosate on Roundup Ready crops. We face a historic choice: do we want to protect Monsanto or mon - archs? The threats to monarch survival will soon escalate, if new genetically engineered (GE) crops resistant to glyphosate and additional herbicides like 2,4-D and dicamba are introduced.
    [Show full text]