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. 31, 2012 719 GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD

example, came from GM strains in Field Trials Focus on Corn and Other Big Crops 2012. 7 Because corn and soy are ubiq - More than three-quarters of the crop field trials conducted by 24 uitous in processed foods in the Unit - developed countries (excluding China and India) from 2003-2008 ed States, from corn syrup-sweetened Coca-Cola to crackers made with soy - were for big commodity crops, or crops bought and sold on futures bean oil, it’s likely that most Americans exchanges. Only 15 percent of the trials were for GM fruits, consume a product containing a ge - vegetables, nuts and other specialty crops, which netically modified ingredient every day. biotech companies have largely abandoned Nonetheless, GM agriculture has made in favor of industrially grown commodities, uneven progress over the past two such as corn and cotton. Commodity crops decades. At the dawn of the GM food 80% revolution in the mid-1990s, scientists Genetically Modified Crop Field Trials and industry officials predicted it would in Developed Countries, 2003-2008 produce healthier food that would be 5% slower to rot, taste better and reduce Forest tree products 15% agriculture’s impact on the environ - ment. But some GM crops have failed Specialty crops to produce benefits, and some once- promising research has been abandoned. Source: Jamie K. Miller and Kent J. Bradford, “The Regulatory Bottleneck for Biotech For instance, researchers have all but Specialty Crops,” Nature Biotechnology , October 2010, p. 1014, www.nature.com/ given up on developing GM fruits and nbt/journal/v28/n10/full/nbt1010-1012.html other so-called specialty crops because the costs of gaining regulatory approval research shows GM crops are safe and is among the least toxic herbicides that do not justify the potential economic that uninformed pressure groups and can kill a broad spectrum of weeds, rewards, plant scientists say. the organic-farming industry have and thus is safer for farmworkers and They argue that valuable research thwarted GM progress. Opponents less environmentally damaging than many has been hindered by consumer re - argue that the jury is still out on the chemical alternatives. 5 sistance to GM foods, due to either safety and environmental effects of • The introduction of genes from the misunderstanding or confusion about GM crops and that, at the very least, soil bacterium Bacillus thurengiensis (Bt) the safety of the crops. Twenty-one growers should better inform the pub - produces a substance toxic to many percent of respondents to a 2010 Thom - lic about the use of gene-transferring pests but harmless to humans, wildlife son Reuters and NPR poll thought GM techniques in food. and most beneficial insects, such as food is safe, while 15 percent said it The techniques, which have been bees. While Bt has long been used by was unsafe. Nearly two-thirds weren’t perfected in laboratories over the past organic farmers, scientists have produced sure. 8 Some GM proponents contend 40 years, include bombarding target GM crops that manufacture their own that opponents resist GM crops be - cells with heavy metals coated with Bt in the part of the plant susceptible cause they oppose industrial farming, the gene to be transferred; using a to attack from pests — such as corn- which is how most GM crops in the naturally occurring bacterium to trans - plant roots prone to root-worm attack. United States are grown. fer genes into the host cell and using Bt has allowed many farmers to reduce Organic farmers, meanwhile, fear a pulse of electricity to introduce the use of harmful insecticides. In China that their non-GM crops could be con - genes into the targeted cell. 4 alone, the use of Bt cotton has halved taminated by the spread of genetically Two technologies currently domi - pesticide use since the crop was intro - modified traits by wind and insect nate the GM farming industry: duced in 1997, and the population of cross-pollination. Once those traits are • Some crops have been modified beneficial pest-eating insects such as in the agricultural gene pool, they say, to be able to survive the weed-killer ladybugs has increased, because they there’s no way to remove them. glyphosate, commonly sold under Mon - are resistant to Bt. 6 “We believe that this technology does - santo’s Roundup brand. So-called The use of GM crops has become n’t make sense in the long run for the Roundup Ready crops decrease the widespread among U.S. growers of human species,” says Bill Duesing, an need to till before planting, saving farm - commodities, or big crops sold on fu - organic farmer in Oxford, Conn., and ers time and money and reducing ero - tures exchanges. Eighty-eight percent Interstate Council president of the sion and loss of soil moisture. Glyphosate of corn and 94 percent of cotton, for 5,000-member Northeast Organic Farm -

720 CQ Researcher ing Association. “This is pollution with a life of its own; it spreads forever.” Hundreds of Permits Issued for GM Crop Testing Environmental groups such as the Permits for U.S. field trials of genetically modified (GM) crops totaled Union of Concerned Scientists say the 743 in 2008, more than six times the number in 1992. Most permits U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) were for soybeans, corn and other commodity crops, which are far does not adequately examine the envi - ronmental impacts of introducing new larger than specialty crops such as fruits and vegetables, and thus farming methods on millions of acres, are more profitable. Successful field trials help the government such as possible resistance to Bt and decide whether to allow GM crops to be commercially produced. Roundup by weeds and insects. In ad - Field Trial Permits for dition, some scientists complain that biotech Genetically Modified U.S. Crops companies deny access to their patent- No. of permits 1,000 protected GM technology if they suspect Specialty crop researchers may cast doubt on its effec - 800 Commodity crop tiveness, a charge companies deny. 9 600 Meanwhile, some consumers and or - ganic farmers pose philosophical ob - 400 jections to GM plant-breeding methods. 200 “It’s the kind of breeding that would 0 never happen in the wild,” Duesing 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 says. Resistance to genetic crop engi - Source: Jamie K. Miller and Kent J. Bradford, “The Regulatory Bottleneck for Biotech neering ratcheted up a notch this sum - Specialty Crops,” Nature Biotechnology , October 2010, p. 1014, www.nature.com/ mer after the House passed a version nbt/journal/v28/n10/full/nbt1010-1012.html of a new farm bill that critics said would weaken the USDA’s regulatory power rather to eliminate the technology from help stave off blindness, infections and over the industry while cutting funds agriculture in this country.” other maladies among impoverished for more stringent Environmental Pro - Ironically, for more than a decade children in countries like India and tection Agency (EPA) regulations. The some vaccines and life-saving medi - Bangladesh. Current estimates say wide - House bill would “create multiple back - cines have been genetically engineered spread use of the crop could save up door approval mechanisms that would in the laboratory by creating new or - to 2.7 million children a year, according allow for the premature commercial - ganisms that would never be created to Dubock, but it has not been com - ization of untested biotech traits to in nature — some even made by mix - mercially planted due to suspicion enter our food system,” charged Colin ing plant and animal genes. Yet oppo - about genetic engineering. That may O’Neil, a policy analyst at the Center sition to such products has been much change soon — the Philippines like - for Food Safety, a Washington-based more muted. Likewise, nongenetic en - ly will permit cultivation in 2013. advocacy group . 10 gineered plant-breeding methods that “The activists have been very suc - But biotechnology researchers and would be impossible in nature, such cessful in promulgating their view,” industry advocates argue that envi - as bombarding plants with radiation Dubock asserts. “We could have given ronmental and food-safety groups are or carcinogenic chemicals to induce it to farmers everywhere. We are not creating public confusion about GM genetic change, have not attracted such able to because of international regu - foods long after scientific studies have widespread opposition. lations that prevent us from putting established that the technology is safe. Dubock says unfounded opposition seeds in an envelope and mailing “We’re seeing in the last couple years to GM foods has caused needless de - them to people who could use them.” a vocal opposition to the technology, lays in technologies that would po - As scientists, environmentalists, con - and food-labeling requirements are just tentially save hundreds of thousands sumer advocates and organic farmers one of the tactics being employed,” of lives. Golden Rice was hailed on debate the effects of GM foods, here says Cathleen Enright, vice president the cover of Time magazine a dozen are some of the questions being asked: for food and agriculture at the Biotech - years ago as having the potential to nology Industry Organization. save a million children a year. That’s Were the consumer benefits of Labeling initiatives, she says, are “es - because the rice strain was genetical - GM crops oversold? sentially meant not to inform consumers ly modified to be rich in beta-carotene The future for genetically modified about genetically engineered food but — a vitamin A precursor — that could crops envisioned by biotech advocates

www.cqresearcher.com Aug. 31, 2012 721 GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD

1994 and 1998, U.S. regulatory au - Genetic Engineering by the Numbers thorities approved 17 GM fruits and vegetables, which the USDA calls spe - 400 million — Acres worldwide planted in genetically cialty crops. Over the next decade they modified crops in 2011. approved only three, even though spe - 170 million — Acres of GM crops in U.S. cialty crops account for 40 percent of U.S. agricultural revenues. 13 74.8 million — GM acres planted in 2011 by Brazil, the Commercialized in 1996, Bt insec - second-largest biotech nation after the U.S. ticidal crops and so-called Roundup Ready crops tolerant of herbicides be - Dollars that companies that engineer or produce 25 million — came some of the most rapidly adopt - GM crops had contributed by mid-August to defeat the labeling ed agricultural technologies in history. initiative in California — nearly 10 times the amount raised by But 16 years later, the two modifica - supporters. tions are being used largely in only 2.7 million — Impoverished children in countries like India three row crops: corn, soybeans and cotton, which are grown on a large and Bangladesh whose lives could be saved by genetically engi - scale. The three commodities account neered Golden Rice. for 94 percent of the world’s acreage 1 million-plus — People who signed a petition this year planted in GM crops. 14 urging the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to require labeling Critics of biotechnology say other GM of GM foods. varieties haven’t been developed be - cause researchers haven’t been able to 20 — States in which labeling laws or ballot measures have been deliver the beneficial new products they proposed in the past year. promised. “This technology seems to me to be a fundamentally failed technolo - 12 — Percentage of the world’s arable land planted in GM crops. gy, because the science just didn’t work,” Sources: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications, Feb. 7, says Andrew Kimbrell, executive direc - 2012; Biotechnology Industry Organization; United Nations; U.S. Department of tor of the Center for Food Safety, a Agriculture Washington-based consumer group that has opposed GM crops and helped or - in the 1990s looked substantially dif - years — and certainly within 10 — ganize the labeling petition to the FDA. ferent from the GM landscape today. some 90 to 95 percent of plant-derived In other words, he explains, while Developing countries without reliable food material in the United States will Roundup Ready and Bt insecticidal crops energy for refrigeration would have an come from genetically engineered tech - were extremely popular with large-scale additional supply of food “with no ad - niques.” Furthermore, he predicted, “It’ll commodity farmers, the crops haven’t ditional cost or environmental effect,” take a little bit longer for these tech - provided an identifiable benefit to con - Charles Gasser, a cellular biologist at nologies to penetrate into the organic sumers. “In 30 years, we’ve yet to come the University of California-Davis and market, but it will. As the benefits be - up with a single [genetic] trait that’s ad - former Monsanto researcher, predicted come clearer, . . . opposition will be vantageous to the consumer,” Kimbrell optimistically in 1994. Biotechnology replaced by understanding, and adop - adds. “It’s not likely they’re going to would provide such countries with slow- tion will follow.” 12 succeed in the near future.” ripening fruits and vegetables with shelf Instead, the organic foods industry Both opponents and supporters of lives up to five times longer than reg - — which rebuffed GM crops when the technology agree that the decision ular produce, he said. 11 they were first commercialized in the by biotech companies to first market Not only have such technologies not mid-1990s — has seen record growth, herbicide-resistant and insecticidal com - been commercialized, but the scale of while GM crop research has slowed modity crops did not help to garner adoption of genetically modified crops markedly. Biotech companies have public acceptance and may have low - has not matched earlier predictions, such largely abandoned pursuing genetical - ered perceptions of the potential con - as this one from Val Giddings, vice pres - ly modified varieties of fruits, vegeta - sumer benefits of the technology. ident for food and agriculture for the bles, nuts and other specialty crops in “It’s easy for consumers to reject Biotechnology Industry Organization favor of industrially grown commodi - GMOs [genetically modified organisms], (BIO), who said in 1998: “Within five ties, such as corn and cotton. Between because they don’t taste better or smell

722 CQ Researcher any better, and they’re not noticeably cheaper,” says Robert Paarlberg, a po - Most Acreage Used for GM Crops litical scientist at Wellesley College More than 90 percent of the farmland for soybeans in the United who researches the debate over biotech States is dedicated to genetically modified (GM) herbicide-tolerant foods. “Most of the economic gains are not captured by the consumer but varieties. Most acreage for cotton and corn is also used for by the farmer and the biotech seed herbicide-tolerant or insect-resistant varieties, or both. companies.” U.S. Acreage Dedicated to GM Crops, 2012 GM seed producer Monsanto tight - Percentage of planted acreage ly controls use of its product. Farmers 100% who buy Monsanto GM seeds while they 80 93% are covered by patents are barred from 60 80% 77% 73% 67% saving them from season to season as 40 they may do with conventional crops. 20 Some organic farmers, who shun 0 pesticides and GM crops, say the ben - Herbicide- Herbicide- Herbicide- Insect- Insect- efits of biotechnology touted by tolerant tolerant tolerant resistant resistant many scientists are illusory. “You soybeans cotton corn cotton corn keep being told the same promises Source: “Adoption of Genetically Engineered Crops in the U.S.,” U.S. Department of or propaganda that you heard 20 years Agriculture, July 2012, www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/adoption-of-genetically - ago: It’s going to reduce pesticides, engineered-crops-in-the-us/recent-trends-in-ge-adoption.aspx it’s going to be safer, it’s going to produce more food,” says Connecti - While supporters of biotechnology Dubock of the Golden Rice Project cut farmer Duesing. may have overstated the possibilities of says the cost of regulatory approval But he says the way in which ge - biotech foods, so too did opponents ex - has kept GM crops out of the hands netically engineered crops were de - aggerate the dangers, says Gregory Jaffe, of all but the best-funded multinational veloped in the United States — via biotechnology project director at the Cen - corporations. monoculture industrial farming — has ter for Science in the Public Interest. “I “Do we want this technology to be mainly benefited the seed companies. don’t think we’ve seen a lot of detri - only ruled by multinationals, or do we “Nature works because of biodiversity,” mental impacts on the environment yet,” want it to be accessed by startups and he says. Growing a single crop on he says. “Similarly, we haven’t seen some developing countries?” he asks. “It’s re - thousands of acres “is the absolute op - of the huge benefits that the industry ally a paradox that the attitudes pro - posite of biodiversity.” had also suggested would happen.” mulgated by the activists against the Others say the potential benefits of Some biotech supporters blame the technology reinforce the status of GM biotechnology to farmers in poor coun - slow development of new GM vari - crops as row crops for the industrial - tries have been exaggerated. “Tech - eties on opposition generated by food ized world.” nology is not going to solve the prob - and environmental groups such as the lems of poor farmers,” says Rachel Center for Food Safety and the Union Have existing GM crops caused Schurman, a sociologist at the Uni - of Concerned Scientists. The failure is environmental harm? versity of Minnesota. Farming practices “directly attributable” to “the people Most of the environmental concerns that dramatically boosted agricultural who are claiming this as a failure of initially raised about biotech crops have output during the “Green Revolution” biotech,” says UC’s Gasser. “The evi - not materialized. However, one worry in the 1960s and ’70s — such as high- dence was we could do it.” — that the large-scale adoption of GM yield crop varieties, irrigation and heavy Others, like Harry Klee, a former commodity crops would accelerate the fertilizer and pesticide use — still have Monsanto scientist who is now at the natural development of resistance to not trickled down to many of the University of Florida, say progress in the relatively safe Roundup herbicide poorest farmers in the developing developing new crops — especially and Bt insecticide — appears to have world, she points out. “If they’re going specialty crops like tomatoes — is im - become reality. to devote all of these resources,” she peded by high regulatory costs. Pro - Researchers have documented asks, “does it make economic sense viding research data to make a single cases of resistance to Bt insecticide by to devote them to expensive tech - genetic alteration in a tomato variety, the corn borer and corn rootworm, nologies?” he says, can cost up to $15 million. the two main pests killed by Bt corn

www.cqresearcher.com Aug. 31, 2012 723 GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD

nationals like Monsanto, which already U.S Leads in Biotech Agriculture are developing crops resistant to other, More than 170 million acres of biotech crops are under cultivation more toxic pesticides. It’s no coinci - dence, say the critics, that the new in the United States, more than twice Brazil’s acreage, which ranks products will be coming on the mar - second. Experts credit faster technological advances, more lenient ket just as the patents for Roundup regulations and expanding economic benefits for the U.S. lead. Ready crops expire, in 2014. When the Biotech Acreage by Country, 2011 patents expire, other companies can produce seed with the same technol - Acres ogy, and farmers can legally plant seed Country (in millions) Biotech crops harvested from Roundup Ready plants. United States 170.5 Corn, soybean, cotton, canola, “It’s a chemical arms race going sugarbeet, alfalfa, papaya, squash backwards,” says Kimbrell of the Cen - Brazil 74.9 Soybean, corn, cotton ter for Food Safety. “Now we have to close our eyes and hope we do find Argentina 58.6 Soybean, corn, cotton this magic, new herbicide. I don’t think India 26.2 Cotton that’s very good policy.” Canada 25.7 Canola, corn, soybean, sugarbeet Many biotech supporters are equal - China 9.6 Cotton, papaya, poplar, tomato, ly worried about resistance to Bt and sweet pepper Roundup. But they say the problem is Paraguay 6.9 Soybean not biotechnology itself but American- Pakistan 6.4 Cotton style industrial farming, which allows a single crop to be planted year after South Africa 5.7 Corn, soybean, cotton year over vast swathes of land, which Uruguay 3.2 Soybean, corn accelerates resistance to pesticides. Source: Clive James, “Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2011,” “If people had been smarter — the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications, 2011, p. 2, farmers, the companies and the U.S. www.isaaa.org/purchasepublications/itemdescription.asp?ItemType=BRIEFS& Department of Agriculture — they could Control=IB043-2011 have easily developed rotations and minimal-use programs to avoid resis - — and a Roundup-resistant strain of of biotechnology are just more herbi - tance,” says Raoul Adamchak, the or - a weed called waterhemp already has cides and stronger weeds,” Margaret ganic farm coordinator at UC-Davis spread to 10 states. 15 Mellon, a biotechnology expert with and co-author of Tomorrow’s Table: “In 2011, we saw glyphosate-resistant the Union of Concerned Scientists, wrote Organic Farming, Genetics and the waterhemp explode across the Mid - in May . 18 Future of Food. “Those issues come west,” said Dan Westberg, a technical Farmers could have slowed the spread up with herbicides all the time. If you market manager at BASF, a maker of of resistance by planting “refuges,” or develop an integrated control strategy, pesticides and biotech seeds. “It was a small plots, of nonbiotech crops, which you can put resistance off for many tipping point for farmers and another would allow some of the pests to sur - years, or possibly even indefinitely.” sign that we have to think beyond vive and breed without generating re - Biotech opponents also discount the glyphosate alone for weed control.” 16 sistance. Yet farmers growing Roundup environmental benefits of replacing more Experts say Roundup and Bt have Ready crops are not required by law to toxic herbicides and pesticides with the become so widespread that resistant provide refuges, and those growing Bt relatively safe Roundup and Bt. mutations have developed faster than crops are supposed to provide refuges “There are now Roundup-resistant they normally would in conventional equivalent to 20 percent of their acreage weeds on millions of acres that are cre - crops because other types of controls (or 50 percent for some types of Bt ating problems for farmers,” says Jaffe, are absent, an outcome that some GM cotton). But a 2009 study found that up of the Center for Science in the Public opponents predicted. to 25 percent of corn farmers were not Interest. “What does that mean? That A coalition of environmental groups complying with refuge requirements. 19 just means you’re going back to other published a report in 1990 predict - Opponents of biotechnology point forms of weed killers that are toxic. But ing the rise of resistant weeds. 17 “We out that resistance to existing GM we did get 20 years of using the less- now know that inside the Trojan horse products does not harm biotech multi - toxic weed killer.”

724 CQ Researcher The increased New York Times earlier productivity provid - this year, having spent part ed by biotech crops of her morning furtively has also slowed de - applying stickers reading forestation, say GM “Warning May Contain proponents. “The GMOs” to cereal boxes at reduced environ - her local super market. 22 mental impact and Just Label It argues that abundance in food sufficient testing has not supply that is of - yet been done on the m a l fered with geneti - e technology. The Univer - e S cally engineered sity of Minnesota’s Schur - h a

seed help to pre - o man argues that even if N /

serve biodiversity,” s there is no specific sci - e g

says Enright, of the a entific evidence that GM m

Biotechnology In - I crops are more harmful

y t dustry Organization. t than conventional vari - e G

“Instead of chop - / eties, there is a legitimate P ping down the F case for labeling them. A Amazon or other A Greenpeace activist campaigns against genetically modified eggplant “I don’t think scientif - pools of diversity, (brinjal) at a farmers market in Hyderabad, India, on Jan. 19, 2010. ic concerns are the only let’s see what we The potential commercialization of a GM variety of the popular reason we should be con - vegetable has drawn support and criticism. Cotton is can do on the land currently the only GM crop permitted in India. cerned about the impact that we have.” 20 of technology,” she says. Roundup Ready crops also reduce organized the labeling petition to the “We should be able to make decisions the need for plowing to clear fields FDA, argues that U.S. consumers are about the kind of society we live in, and of weeds before planting, which saves being effectively used as guinea pigs we can’t make those decisions if we topsoil. Bill Olthoff, who farms 1,800 in testing GM foods. “The debate about don’t have information. It’s a question acres of corn and soybeans in Kanka - the benefits and risks of GE crops may of democracy.” kee, Ill., says that since switching to go on for a long time,” says the group’s Gurian-Sherman, of the Union of Roundup Ready soybeans he makes website, JustLabelIt.org. “Meanwhile, an Concerned Scientists, says GM crops three fewer plowing runs over his field entire generation will have grown up have helped to push farming more to - per crop, which conserves topsoil and consuming them. We should all have ward industrial agriculture, and con - tractor fuel, and he uses less herbicide. a choice about whether we want to sumers who favor more sustainable Additionally, he says, by using Bt corn participate in this grand experiment methods should be able to decide which he no longer has to use a more toxic with our bodies and our environment.” kinds of foods they want to buy. insecticide, which can disrupt human A large majority of consumers “Both Bt and herbicide tolerance and animal neurological systems. agree, according to a poll of 1,000 work in simplified crop systems,” says “There’s less use of fuel, less man- people commissioned earlier this year Gurian-Sherman. “If your aim is to be hours and less pesticide,” says Olthoff . 21 by Just Label It. It found that 92 per - more and more efficient, you need to cent support mandatory labeling, a fig - make agriculture [simpler], with many, Should GM foods be labeled? ure that changed only slightly after re - many acres of one crop that is har - GM opponents say consumers have spondents heard arguments for and vested with one type of machinery a right to know what they’re eating and against labeling. and simple pest control. All of those feeding their children. “Labeling is ob - Cynthia LaPier, a mental health coun - things are bad for the environment in vious — there is a fundamental physi - selor in Massachusetts, feels she has a a number of different ways.” cal change in the plants that’s patent - right to know whether her food con - Biotechnology supporters say labels ed,” says Kimbrell of the Center for Food tains genetically modified components. will mislead consumers into believing Safety. “There are novel proteins in the “It just makes me nervous when you there is something harmful to human plants, never seen before in food.” take genetic matter from something else health about GM foods. That’s been The Just Label It campaign, which that wouldn’t have been done in na - the case in Europe, where labeling supports California’s referendum and ture and put it into food,” she told The combined with public suspicion of

www.cqresearcher.com Aug. 31, 2012 725 GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD

genetically engineered foods has kept says Gasser. “It’s only the people who Among other benefits, it laid the products containing GM crops off gro - don’t understand it that are scared of it. groundwork for the birth of modern cery store shelves. Unfortunately that’s most everyone.” agriculture in the early 20th century. Gasser, the UC Davis researcher, likens Opponents of labeling also argue In 1905 British researcher Roland Bif - the debate to that over climate change, that it is unfair to conflate arguments fen showed that a type of wheat re - in which one side has overwhelming against the environmental harm sistant to rust fungus could pass the research data on its side but opponents caused by industrial agriculture with trait on to future generations. Since are able to cast doubt on those find - a lab technique for creating better seeds then dozens of crops, from potatoes ings with spurious arguments because — since farming is damaging to the to parsnips, have been bred to resist the public has little understanding of environment no matter what kind of disease and insects. 25 the complex science involved. seeds are used. “If everyone’s goal is Government investments in breed - “Climate science is the perfect ex - to have a more sustainable agriculture, ing and agricultural technologies helped ample, because the anti-biotech peo - to reduce pesticide use and to reduce lead to rapid productivity increases in ple are on the wrong side of the ar - [fertilizer] run-off, then this labeling the 20th century. For example, yields gument both environmentally and campaign doesn’t make any improve - of English wheat took a thousand scientifically,” Gasser says. ments,” says Adamchak, the UC-Davis years to increase from 0.5 to 2 met - He argues that since scientific re - organic farmer. “I’d much rather see ric tons per hectare, * but jumped from search over the past two decades has people putting lots of energy into pro - 2 to 6 metric tons in just 40 years dur - vindicated genetic engineering in plant moting sustainable agriculture.” ing the period. 26 breeding, opponents are really left Beginning in the 1960s, higher yield - only with a philosophical argument ing plant varieties, combined with in - about the so-called mutagenic tech - creased use of fertilizer, pesticides and niques used to manipulate plant BACKGROUND irrigation, led to a global boom in agri - genes. Moreover, he says that GM op - cultural production — especially in the ponents are hypocritical to single out developing world — known as the genetic engineering in food crops as “Green Revolution.” “unnatural.” There are numerous con - ‘Green Revolution’ In the early 1970s scientists first ventional plant breeding methods that learned how to replicate DNA in the differ radically from how plants re - umans began collecting seeds even lab and then to introduce foreign ge - produce in the wild, including self- H before they settled in farming vil - netic material into living organisms, pollinating two different plant lines for lages millennia ago in the Near East. such as bacteria. Initially, concern that seven or more generations and then Ancient governments often played transferring genes among organisms crossing them; and triggering muta - a major role in introducing new plants could create dangerous microbes led tions through gamma rays, irradiation to civilizations. An inscription from scientists to establish a National Insti - and carcinogenic chemicals. Mesopotamia tells of the ruler Sargon tutes of Health committee to oversee Thousands of products have been journeying to Anatolia to collect figs, the approval of biotech research. It developed using mutagenic tech - vines and roses to introduce to his soon became evident, however, that niques alone, according to the U.N.’s country in the 24th century B.C. In genetic engineering tended to weak - Food and Agriculture Organization, in - 1495 B.C., Egypt’s Queen Hatshepsut en bacteria rather than strengthen them. cluding more than 800 varieties of rice sent a team to what is now Ethiopia The NIH ended restrictions on genet - and familiar fruits such as the Rio Red and Somalia to find the fragrant tree ic research in the 1980s, setting the grapefruit and a variety of the McIn - that produces frankincense. 24 stage for the commercialization of nu - tosh apple. 23 Proponents say that, as For centuries farmers have selected merous genetically engineered drugs, with GM crops, there is no evidence seeds and cross-bred plants to pro - such as synthetic insulin for diabetics. that crops developed with mutagenic duce crops that had little in common In 1992 the commercialization of ge - techniques are inherently more harm - with wild species. Yet it was not until netically modified foods was accelerat - ful to people or the environment than 1856 that Gregor Johann Mendel, an ed when limits were put on FDA over - other crops. Augustinian monk in Austria, began sight of GM foods. The new policy meant “The fact that you’re arguing about his famous study of garden peas that the one and not the other means your led to the identification of the factors * A hectare equals about 2.47 acres; a metric argument is not about safety it’s about that control heredity. Mendel’s work ton equals about 2,200 pounds. this religious view you have about biotech,” ushered in the study of genetics. Continued on p. 728

726 CQ Researcher Chronology

1993 2002 1950s-1960s FDA allows cows to be injected National Center for Food and Agri - Scientists identify genes and with bovine growth hormone cultural Policy finds that GM crops begin investigating the role of (rBGH) made from genetically in the United States produced four DNA in plant development. modified bacteria, setting off con - billion pounds of additional food sumer protests. and fiber on the same acreage, im - 1953 proved farm income by $1.5 billion American biochemist James Watson 1994 and reduced pesticide use by 46 and British biophysicist Francis FDA approves Flavr Savr tomato, million pounds. . . . Monsanto an - Crick describe the structure of first GM food approved for sale to nounces it will delay introduction DNA, setting the stage for mapping consumers. of GM wheat amid concerns from the genetic code. farmers that it will harm exports. 1996 1967 Monsanto introduces Roundup 2003 Lenape potato, a new variety bred Ready soybeans, first of several Bollworms resistant to the Bt toxin, for making potato chips is with - popular herbicide-tolerant or insec - an insecticide produced by GM drawn from experimental production ticide-producing crops. cotton, discovered in the South. after high levels of toxins are found. 1998 2004 • European Union (EU) halts approvals Under U.S. pressure, EU drops de of new GM crops in what is termed facto ban on GM crops but insti - an “unofficial moratorium.” tutes mandatory labeling; many 1970s-1980s European stores won’t stock GM Scientists begin experimenting • foods because of consumer fears. with genetic transformation of plants and animals. 2008 2000s Genetically engi - Monsanto sells unit that produces 1973 neered foods face continued rBGH, as major grocers including Scientists create first genetically criticism despite growing scien - Walmart, Publix and Kroger decline engineered organism. tific consensus that they do not to sell milk from cows treated with pose greater safety risks than the product. 1983 conventional crops. Researchers transfer new DNA into 2010 plants, leading to the creation of 2000 After approving the sale of GM genetically modified crops. Bowing to international demands, eggplant, India’s environment min - U.S. officials agree to label GM ister declares a moratorium on the 1989 commodities for export. . . . product because of public outcry. Calgene Inc. receives U.S. patent Weeds resistant to Roundup dis - for gene sequence in GM Flavr covered in Delaware. . . . Friends 2011 Savr tomato. of the Earth, a major environmen - GM crops are grown on 395 million tal group, reports that genes from acres of farmland globally, though • StarLink corn, a GM crop ap - more than 90 percent is in just three proved only for animal consump - crops: soybeans, corn and cotton. tion, have been discovered in taco 1990s Biotech foods are shells. The discovery prompts re - 2012 marketed to the public despite en - calls of corn products and law - Anti-GMO groups file petitions con - vironmental and health concerns. suits, but researchers are unable to taining more than 1 million signa - document any human health ef - tures demanding that the FDA re - 1992 fects. . . . Centers for Disease quire GM foods be labeled. . . . FDA decides not to require labeling Control study concludes StarLink Californian vote scheduled for Nov. 6 of most GM foods, sparking mistrust did not cause allergic reactions on ballot initiative requiring labeling of the technology. claimed by 28 people. for GM foods.

www.cqresearcher.com Aug. 31, 2012 727 GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD

Is Tampering With DNA Inherently Wrong? Ethicists and religious scholars have differing opinions. any people recoil instinctively from the idea of tak - While Rifkin approaches the question from the secular per - ing genes from one plant or animal and inserting spective of genetic engineering violating the dignity of nature, M them into another — especially if the process inserts theologians have also argued against genetic engineering from an animal gene into a plant’s DNA, for instance. Some view a religious perspective. Paul Ramsey, a prominent Christian ethi - the creation of such new part-plant, part-animal organisms as cist who taught at Princeton University in the 1970s and ’80s, “playing God” or a violation of the natural order. was a leading advocate of the idea that genetic engineering Several of these objections were first voiced by Jeremy Rifkin, was inherently unethical and that reducing people and other a leading critic of genetic engineering, as early as 1977 when beings to a collection of genetic traits was a flawed concept. he published a book entitled Who Should Play God? The Arti - He also argued that since human beings are inherently fallible, ficial Creation of Life and What it Means for the Human Race. they are poor custodians of the building blocks of life. Rifkin expanded on concerns voiced in that book with later “We should not play God before we have learned to be writings on the implications of cloning animals and the cre - men, and as we learn to be men we will not want to play ation of plant and animal chimeras, or organisms with genes God,” Ramsey wrote. 2 from both kingdoms. The technology also has implications for religious and dietary “The globalization of commerce and trade makes possible traditions established long before the advent of molecular biol - the wholesale reseeding of the Earth’s biosphere with a labo - ogy. For instance, some vegetarians have questioned whether ratory-conceived second Genesis, an artificially produced bioin - they can eat a vegetable containing one or more genes taken dustrial nature designed to replace nature’s own evolutionary from an animal. scheme,” Rifkin wrote. 1 “A global life-science industry is al - “The resulting vegetable is no longer a pure vegetable, but ready beginning to wield unprecedented power over the vast instead a chimera with properties taken from the original plant, biological resources of the planet. Life-science fields ranging plus some additional characteristics from an animal,” according from agriculture to medicine are being consolidated under the to Marcus Williamson, a London-based vegetarian who writes umbrella of giant ‘life’ companies in the emerging biotech mar - for the website www.gmfoodnews.com. 3 ketplace.” Likewise, the world’s 1 billion Hindus — many of whom Ethics research into agricultural biotechnology focuses on are vegetarians and all of whom revere cows as sacred — two questions: whether the benefits of GM crops outweigh the might be concerned about eating a plant containing bovine drawbacks, and whether genetic engineering is inherently genes, just as a Jew or Muslim might be concerned about eat - wrong. The tangible benefits and drawbacks of genetic engi - ing a GM food containing pork genes. neering are often discussed in the media but the latter ques - Such alterations are potentially within the technology’s reach: tion is largely overlooked. The use of jellyfish genes to create plant and animal organ -

Continued from p. 726 cases the EPA. Many groups argued that Academy of Pediatrics concluded milk the agency would give GM crops no the tests required by federal regulators from cows treated with the product was more scrutiny than it gave crops pro - were insufficient and too reliant on stud - no different from other milk. 28 duced through conventional breeding. ies supplied by the biotech industry. Meanwhile, California-based Calgene The FDA’s resulting program of “vol - Monsanto, a large, St. Louis-based Inc. developed a tomato that contained untary” consultation set off a controver - chemical manufacturer, was among the an extra bit of tomato DNA that had sy that endures today. Activist and econ - first companies to capitalize on biotech - been altered in the lab. This new gene omist Jeremy Rifkin, founder and president nology for commercial farming. Its sci - had been engineered to block produc - of the Foundation On Economic Trends, entists inserted cow DNA into bacteria tion of an enzyme that makes tomatoes launched the Pure Food Movement, ar - that then worked like millions of tiny grow mushy and rot. Calgene’s new guing that biotech crops were likely to factories to produce synthetic bovine Flavr Savr tomato was approved by fed - be harmful to human health and de - growth hormone, known as rBGH or eral regulators in 1994 and became the stroy the natural environment. 27 The rBST. The hormone was then adminis - first genetically engineered food to be outcry led biotech companies to uni - tered to cows to induce greater milk commercialized in the United States. 29 versally take part in the voluntary production. In 1993, the FDA approved But Flavr Savr turned out to be a process for reviewing new crops, in ad - the hormone for dairy production after failure. Activists wielding images of a dition to mandatory regulation by the the American Medical Association, Na - tomato grafted onto a fish head, a refer - Department of Agriculture and in some tional Institutes of Health and American ence to a different experimental tomato

728 CQ Researcher isms that “glow” under UV light has been used as a method Likewise Koepsell contends that those who argue against ge - of “marking” the transference of other genetic traits by re - netic engineering from a secular perspective must explain why searchers. 4 other forms of genetic change, such as evolution, are not affronts According to a review of the issue, as of 2008 there was to the “natural” order of things. They also must show that there no consensus about biotechnology within the world’s three is an inherent dignity to the current genetic makeup of any given main monotheistic faiths — Islam, Judaism and Christianity — species and why that genetic makeup should only be changed on the ethical and moral issues surrounding GM foods. 5 by some forms of genetic alteration and not others. Other ethicists see arguments questioning the inherent im - Still, Koepsell and some other advocates of the technology morality of genetic engineering as logically flawed. From a re - allow that its effects on our world over the long term are dif - ligious perspective, those who argue that genetic engineering ficult to predict and could yet prove harmful in unexpected is a violation of God’s creation must explain why genetic en - ways. In that respect biotechnology is hardly unique: few in gineering is not also an expression of God’s will, since God the 19th century would have foreseen that the invention of the gave humans “free will,” including the ability to create tech - internal combustion engine would contribute to rising global nology, according to David Koepsell, a philosophy professor temperatures, melting polar ice caps and disappearing species at Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands. 6 100 years later. Those who would argue that genetic engineering is a mis - use of free will are plagued by a lack of sacred writings sup - — Jason McLure porting that conclusion, says Koepsell. The Bible, for example, says nothing about recombinant DNA. 1 Jeremy Rifkin, The Biotech Century: Harnessing the Gene and Remaking the They must also explain why altering DNA through genetic World (1998), excerpted by The New York Times , www.nytimes.com/books/ first/r/rifkin-biotech.html. engineering is bad, but other forms of altering DNA through 2 Paul Ramsey, Fabricated Man: The Ethics of Genetic Control (1970), p. 151. other techniques are acceptable, given that it is arguably dis - 3 Marcus Williamson, “Genetically Modified Food — Not Suitable for Vege - tinct only as a method. “The speed and predictability of the tarians,” Connectotel.com, undated, www.connectotel.com/gmfood/gm260401.txt. changes brought about by genetic engineering do surpass the 4 “Glowing Proteins — A Guiding Star for Biochemistry,” The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2008, Oct. 8, 2008, speed and predictability of changes accomplished by selective www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/laureates/2008/press.html. breeding techniques, but that seems a poor argument for say - 5 Emmanuel Omobowale, Peter Singer and Abdallah Daar, “The Three Monothe - ing the former is contrary to God’s will, while the latter is ac - istic Religions and GM Food Technology: An Overview of Perspectives,” BMC ceptable,” Koepsell writes. “Is it God’s will that modifying na - International Health and Human Rights, 2009, www.biomedcentral.com/1472- 698X/9/18. ture is acceptable, but only provided we proceed slowly and 6 David Koepsell, “The Ethics of Genetic Engineering,” Center for Inquiry, haphazardly?” Aug. 28, 2007. developed by another company that hormone, citing public opposition to the organic dairy industry’s rapid contained a fish gene for cold resis - use of hormones on dairy cows and growth. The number of certified or - tance, portrayed the Calgene product gaps in research. ganic dairy cows rose to 249,766 in as Frankenfood. The company’s bigger In the United States, more than a 2008 from zero in 1995, according to problem was that the Flavr Savr was fifth of dairy cows were being inject - the USDA. 33 Companies such as more susceptible than other varieties to ed with the synthetic hormone bi - Unilever’s Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream and pests in the main tomato-growing states weekly by 2002, with milk production Oakhurst Dairy in Maine successfully of Florida and California, and it could rising by about one gallon per day in marketed their products as rGBH-free. still bruise and become unappealing lactating cows. 31 But advocacy groups Meanwhile, rGBH use declined from even without becoming mushy. 30 What’s opposed the hormone, pointing to stud - 22 percent of U.S. dairy cows in 2002 more, many consumers concluded it ies showing it increased bovine udder to 17 percent in 2007, and major re - didn’t taste good enough to justify the infections and led to higher usage of tailers such as Walmart, Kroger and higher price. By 1997 Flavr Savr was veterinary antibiotics, which potential - Publix agreed to stop selling milk off the market. ly could lead to human resistance to made from rBGH-treated cows in rBGH was more successful com - the drugs. Other research, including their private-label dairy products. With mercially, though it too faced strong some sponsored by hormone pro - backlash against the hormone growing, resistance. By 1999, both Canada and ducers, disputed the findings. 32 Monsanto sold its rBGH division in the European Union had banned the Resistance to rBGH helped propel 2008 to Eli Lilly & Co. 34

www.cqresearcher.com Aug. 31, 2012 729 GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD

sold in the U.K. from 1996 to 1999. In the wake of the accord, the Unit - The Roaring 1990s The tomatoes cost 20 percent less than ed Nations Environmental Program conventional ones used for tomato began a $60 million training program ore significant than the Flavr Savr paste and labeled as genetically engi - for governments in the developing M or rBGH was Monsanto’s intro - neered. Initially they sold well, but de - world on assessing the risks of duction in 1995 and ’96 of genetically mand collapsed following the airing of biotechnology. Largely funded by Eu - engineered soybeans, corn and cotton a documentary in which a Hungarian ropean nations skeptical of the tech - that were either resistant to Roundup researcher said he had found that ge - nology, the program promoted use of or contained Bt insecticide. netically modified potatoes led to bio - the precautionary principle. It also Many farmers rapidly switched to the logical changes in rats — research that called for each nation to set up its new crops. In 1996 genetically engi - has since been called into question. 36 own system of field trials of GM crops; neered crops were grown in six coun - Surveys also indicated that the Euro - rules on marketing, transport, pack - tries on 4.2 million acres. By 2000 they peans were skeptical of Monsanto, the aging, labeling and disposal; and re - were being grown on 109.2 million acres company that led the charge to bring search on the crops’ effects on tradi - in 13 countries, though 68 percent of GM crops to Europe. To some, the com - tional farming practices and implications that acreage was in the United States, pany was an agent of American cor - for cultural and religious interests. 38 according to the Council for Biotech - porate imperialism. Many Europeans nology Information, an industry group. also perceived the technology as a While some food safety and envi - threat to small farmers, who hold dis - StarLink Recall ronmental groups in the United States proportionate political influence. resisted the rapid growth of geneti - “In Europe they made a huge mis - defining moment for GM crops cally modified foods, it set off a firestorm step by saying, ‘Look, we’re going to give A came in 2000, when Taco Bell of protest in Europe. The reaction was this to you and you’re going to accept it taco shells were found to contain due in part to bad luck: The first ship - because America makes so much food traces of a genetically engineered corn ments of genetically modified soybeans and if you don’t want it you’re going to variety not approved for human con - from the United States to the U.K. co - have to pay more for your food,’ ” says sumption, prompting recall of the shells incided with a major outbreak of mad Klee, the former Monsanto researcher. and other consumer products. 39 cow disease in Britain. The outbreak Resistance may also have reflected Developed by the French biotech undermined the credibility of British European values about the role of farms company Aventis, the corn variety — food-safety officials, who had previ - and nature, which Monsanto did little known as StarLink — had been ap - ously assured Britons that they could to address. In Europe, which lacks large proved for animal consumption. But not get bovine disease from eating in - forested areas, nature is more closely pollen from the corn had drifted into fected beef. 35 associated with agricultural land. 37 fields with other types of corn. Because The environmental organization Green - “There was a bit of myopia in the one of the proteins in Starlink had not peace and other groups opposed to GM industry,” says the University of Min - been in the human diet before, it was crops found the European public re - nesota’s Schurman. “On Monsanto’s seen as a possible allergen. ceptive to arguments that the technolo - part, they were so busy trying to get “I view it as a very poignant cau - gy had not been adequately tested and to the patent office that they didn’t re - tionary tale that our regulatory system was likely to be harmful in ways not yet alize there were people organizing is not up to the task of preventing po - understood. “Mad cow disease was im - around environmental implications.” tential problems with genetically engi - mediately used by the anti-biotech groups,” Rising resistance to GM crops in Eu - neered food,” Joseph Mendelson III, then says Jaffe, at the Center for Science in rope led to adoption of the Cartagena the legal director of the Center for Food the Public Interest. “That was a big dis - Protocol in 2000, a U.N. treaty that up - Safety, told The New York Times. 40 advantage, to the detriment of biotech. dated a 1992 accord on biosafety to Fallout from the controversy led to They were able to raise this specter of permit the use of the so-called pre - a temporary halt in U.S. corn exports, an unknown that could hurt you.” cautionary principle in the regulation a recall of numerous corn products Emblematic of Europeans’ skeptical of biotech crops. That principle holds and l awsuits by dozens of consumers attitudes was the response to a genet - that when a technology has the po - — some of whom reported having al - ically modified tomato created by Zeneca, tential to cause widespread harm to lergic reactions. However, medical stud - a British multinational company. De - people or the environment, policy - ies have since been unable to docu - veloped for lower water content to make makers should delay approving it until ment any harms from the protein. 41 it more suitable for tomato paste, it was it has been definitively proven safe. Similarly, in 2006 low levels of ge -

730 CQ Researcher Ethics and Genetically Modified Animals Is there a difference between GM plants and animals?

n the Gulf of Mexico, a vast oxygen-depleted dead zone Yet most societies do treat animals, especially large mam - as large as New Jersey forms annually due to algae blooms mals such as pigs, as different moral beings than plants. No I caused by phosphorus and nitrogen run-off from farms in jurisdictions bar cruelty to soybeans. But as genetic engineer - the Midwest. Similar blooms occur in the Great Lakes, killing ing pushes further into human health care, it is possible that fish and spoiling scenery. Genetic engineering could help with genetic modification of animals will seem less strange. Insulin the problem, as Monsanto, DuPont and BASF are developing produced by genetically engineered organisms has been used corn varieties that are more efficient at utilizing nitrogen fer - for diabetes patients since the early 1980s. Genetic engineer - tilizers. A more provocative ing is expanding rapidly in product is the Enviropig, a health care, and people will genetically modified York - likely benefit from therapeutic shire pig developed in cloning of skin cells, heart tis - Canada that digests phos - sue and even bones. 1 phorus more effectively and U.S. consumers are unlike - excretes less polluting nu - ly to be eating genetically mod - trients. ified animal products anytime The development of ge - soon. The Enviropig project was netically modified animals recently terminated due to a h

presents just one of a myr - p lack of commercial interest, l e

iad number of ethical prob - u and a salmon genetically engi - G

lems that would have been f neered to grow nearly twice as o

hard to fathom even 50 years y fast as existing breeds is still t i s

ago. From corporations r awaiting approval nearly two e v

patenting genetic se - i years after the FDA reached a n

quences to inserting animal U preliminary finding that it is genes into plants, biotech - Genetically modified animals such as the Enviropig, a safe for people and the envi - nology has stretched into Yorkshire developed in Canada that excretes less polluting ronment. Yet some fear that nutrients, raise perplexing scientific and ethical issues. areas that are the province continued resistance will cause of dystopic novels. the United States to fall behind Evaluating the ethics of creations such as the Enviropig in - other countries. Researchers in China are already studying trans - volves weighing environmental benefits — such as a reduction genic sheep that produce more wool, cows resistant to foot- in phosphorus in waterways — against concerns over manip - and-mouth disease and pigs that contain healthy omega-3 fatty ulating the genes of a large mammal that is closely related to acids in their meat. 2 humans. The Biotechnology Industry Organization argues that there — Jason McLure is no ethical difference between genetically modified animals and genetically modified plants and that government regulators 1 “The Value of Therapeutic Cloning,” Biotechnology Industry Organization, are wrong to delay approval of the first GM animal. “The mar - May 25, 2010, www.bio.org/articles/value-therapeutic-cloning-patients. 2 Andrew Pollack, “An Entrepreneur Bankrolls a Genetically-Modified ket should determine whether there is a market for genetical - Salmon,” The New York Times , May 21, 2012, www.nytimes.com/2012/05/ ly modified animals,” says Cathleen Enright, vice president for 22/business/kakha-bendukidze-holds-fate-of-gene-engineered-salmon.html? food and agriculture at the group. pagewanted=all. netic material from a herbicide-resistant that LibertyLink posed no identifiable Two other factors helped keep GM rice known as LibertyLink, which concerns for human health and the en - biotech agriculture in the spotlight. Mon - was not approved for human consump - vironment and approved it for human santo, Dupont and Novartis — three tion, appeared in other U.S. rice. That consumption, but farmers suffered ex - of the biggest developers of biotech led to a plunge in rice prices and tem - tensive economic damage . 42 In 2011, crops — all began buying up region - porary bans on imports of U.S. rice by Bayer CropScience, which had devel - al seed companies, greatly i ncreasing Japan and the EU. The following year oped the rice, settled a class action suit their ability to spread the technology the Department of Agriculture concluded with farmers for $750 million . 43 but also expanding their clout in the

www.cqresearcher.com Aug. 31, 2012 731 GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD

market. Their growing mercializing additional dominance raised con - drought-resistant strains, cerns that a handful of which could potentially aid large businesses would farmers in the developing gain too much control world and help mitigate the over global agriculture. effects of increasingly fre - Also controversial has quent droughts linked to cli - been a decision by Mon - mate change. santo to sue its own cus - Dupont’s Pioneer Hi- tomers over the use of Bred division and Monsanto seeds gathered and saved also anticipate marketing GM from crops that original - soybean varieties rich in ly were sown with the heart-healthy oils such as company’s patented GM omega-3 fatty acids. Re - seeks. Saving and using searchers also are in the ad - seeds from subsequent vanced stage of developing crops violates contracts new forms of Bt corn seed that farmers sign with that provide non-Bt refuges the company. for insects so as to slow the To gather evidence development of resistance. against the farmers, Mon - Virus-resistant strains of pota - santo sent “seed police” toes and beans are also less to gather samples from than a decade away, ac - fields that it suspected cording to the industry’s illegally contained plants trade association. 46 o t n

with its patented genet - a Other products could s

ic sequence. Since 1997, n potentially be more envi - o

Monsanto says it has M ronmentally damaging than Monsanto soybean seeds are genetically modified to resist disease filed suit against 145 U.S. and provide more yield per bushel. In the mid-1990s, the St. Louis today’s GM crops, analysts farmers — a relatively agribusiness giant introduced GM soybeans, corn and cotton that say. These include corn and small number consider - were either resistant to Roundup or contained Bt insecticide. soybean varieties being de - ing the 250,000 Ameri - Environmental groups say the Department of Agriculture does not veloped by Dow Agro - can farmers who buy adequately examine the potential impacts of introducing Sciences that would be re - GM farming methods on millions of acres, such as the company’s seed each weed and insect resistance to Roundup and Bt. sistant to the herbicide year. 44 Monsanto sees 2,4-D. The new crops are itself as defending a technology it spent being developed to provide farmers tens of millions of dollars to develop. an alternative herbicide-resistant crop A spokesman for Monsanto declined CURRENT to battle Roundup-resistant weeds. to be interviewed for this article. How - Yet 2,4-D is categorized as “moder - ever, on its website the company says SITUATION ately hazardous” by the World Health it sues “to ensure a level playing field Organization, two steps more toxic than for the vast majority of honest farm - Roundup, which is considered “unlike - ers who abide by their agreements, In the Pipeline ly to present acute hazard” to people. and to discourage using technology il - Opponents of biotech note that the legally to gain an unfair advantage.” ith patents for common GM seeds, chemical was an ingredient in Agent But critics see a corporate Goliath W such as Roundup Ready crops, Orange, a controversial defoliant used bullying farmers. expiring, biotechnology companies are by the U.S. military during the Vietnam Gary Rinehart, a Missouri farmer focusing on GM’s next generation. Mon - War that caused significant health prob - suspected by Monsanto of violating a santo has recently gained regulatory ap - lems — including cancer and birth de - seed contract, said their message was: proval for an early variety of drought - fects — among Vietnamese villagers “Monsanto is big. You can’t win. We resistant corn, and both it and Syngenta and U.S. soldiers exposed during the will get you. You will pay.” 45 are about five to seven years from com - Continued on p. 734

732 CQ Researcher At Issue:

Shoyes uld foods containing GM ingredients be labeled?

GARY HIRSHBERG PHILIP NELSON CHAIRMAN AND FOUNDING PARTNER , PRESIDENT , I LLINOIS FARM BUREAU JUST LABEL IT; C HAIRMAN AND CO- FOUNDER , S TONYFIELD FARM WRITTEN FOR CQ RESEARCHER , AUGUST 2012 WRITTEN FOR CQ RESEARCHER , AUGUST 2012

ecently, there’s been a lot of talk about the need to label nlike more than 40 other countries — including all of foods that contain genetically modified organisms, or Europe, Japan and China — the United States has no r GMOs, as activist groups negatively label them. But why? u laws requiring labeling of genetically engineered (GE) After all, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) provides foods. Yet most polls show that the vast majority (90 percent) science-based labeling guidelines for all food and drugs pro - of Americans believe GE foods should be labeled. For 20 years, duced and sold in the United States. however, we’ve been denied that right. That’s why the Illinois Farm Bureau supports FDA’s guidelines. Reasons for wanting to know what’s in our food vary, but In particular, we support the fact that no special labeling is re - the belief that it’s our right unifies us. Without labeling, we quired unless a food is significantly different than its traditional can’t make informed choices about our food. The Just Label It counterpart or where a specific component is altered. (JLI) campaign, a national coalition of more than 500 diverse We also support FDA’s use of nutritional information on labels, organizations, was created to advocate for GE foods labeling. particularly where health effects of an ingredient are medically Americans want labeling for many reasons, including health, proven, including, for example, information on salt, trans fat and safety, environmental and religious considerations, as well as caffeine content and whether a food is calcium-enriched. More - the belief thayt the right to eknow is a cs ore American value. over, we supponrt voluntary use of o special labeling for specific The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act requires the characteristics of a food product or when certain ingredients are Food and Drug Administration to prevent consumer deception used to preserve the characteristics of a product throughout pro - by clarifying that a food label is misleading if it omits signifi - duction and distribution, as they are in USDA-certified organic cant “material” information. In 1992 an FDA policy statement foods and even in some non-GMO foods. defined “material” as the ability to be sensed by taste, smell or The key is that we support voluntary labeling. other senses. The FDA determined that GE foods were “sub - FDA guidelines do not require labeling for products of stantially equivalent” to conventional foods, so no labeling was biotechnology — so-called GMOs. One reason is that biotech - required. nology is not a product — it is a process that speeds up plant Twenty years later, this outdated policy remains in effect. breeding. A second is that biotech products are not significantly This means a GE salmon designed to continuously produce different from conventional counterparts, nor are they allergens, hormones is not materially different from a non-GE salmon which do require labeling. Biotech crops have been researched, because it does not taste, smell or feel different, according to grown and consumed for nearly 30 years. In that time, not a the FDA. single allergy, sickness or reaction has occurred. What’s more, Mounting demand for the right to make informed decisions thousands of scientists have attested to their safety. is responsible for the unprecedented success of Just Label It. The government determines how best to provide labels that In only 180 days, JLI generated more than 1.2 million comments protect consumers while also informing them. That is why de - on the FDA’s labeling petition — the most comments on a tails on labels are science-based and why most companies have food petition in the agency’s history. additional information on their websites or information hotlines. Despite the overwhelming support for GE foods labeling, Finally, the organic industry does not include biotech pro - our elected officials in the greatest democracy on earth have duction methods in its certification. Therefore, if people do chosen to deny this right for the very people they represent. not want to eat anything that includes GMO foods, they can People on all sides of the political spectrum are voicing con - choose organic products. cern and distrust with how government and companies are To start labeling for reasons other than science is a slippery making decisions. slope that will result in less useful information, greater confu - We’re living in a new era of transparency, and government sion and higher prices. Moreover, mandatory labeling of GM can no longer justify keeping us in the dark. GE foods must products will reduce organic market share and potentially deci - be labeled so consumers can have the information they need mate a market that farmers and the food industry alike to make informed decisions about the foods they eat and feed worked to build. their fano milies.

www.cqresearcher.com Aug. 31, 2012 733 GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD

Continued from p. 732 tries — including all of Europe, Japan every product currently on the market war. The USDA recently received 365,000 and even China — already label ge - has gone through FDA’s voluntary reg - public comments opposing the approval netically engineered food,” said Grant ulatory process or that crops also are of 2,4-D-resistant crops. 47 Lundberg, CEO of Lundberg Family required to be approved by the USDA Enright, of the Biotechnology Indus - Farms, a large, organic rice grower and and in some cases the EPA. They also try Organization, argues that such prod - processor. “Californians deserve to be question concerns about violating reli - ucts will extend the life of Roundup by able to make informed choices too.” 48 gious dietary restrictions, given that no ridding fields of Roundup-resistant weeds Consumers Union, publisher of Con - products on the market are made using with an herbicide sold under a variety sumer Reports magazine, also supports genetic material from animals, nor have of brand names such as Ortho’s Weed labeling, arguing that there is uncertainty major Christian, Jewish or Muslim lead - B Gon Max. “Now what we’re hearing about the molecular characterization of ers raised significant opposition to the is that farmers are going to be using some GM crops and researchers’ abili - technology. 50 Agent Orange. That’s not true,” says En - ty to detect potential allergens. The issue In June the AMA opposed labeling right. “Is 2,4-D new to consumers? No, is one of consumers’ ability to make and called for the FDA to strengthen they put it on their lawns every day.” choices about their products and pro - pre-market safety testing for new GM Enright said she did not have enough tect themselves from potential harms, products. “There is no scientific justi - information about 2,4-D to determine the group says. fication for special labeling of bio - whether it would be worse for the en - “If foods are not labeled, it would engineered foods, as a class, and volun - vironment if sprayed on the same scale be very difficult to even identify an un - tary labeling is without value unless as Roundup. expected health effect resulting from a it is accompanied by focused consumer Others, however, are concerned [GM] food,” Michael Hansen, a researcher education,” the group said. 51 about the prospect of a dramatic in - with the group, wrote to the American The labeling referendum is likely to crease in 2,4-D spraying. “2,4-D is a Medical Association (AMA) this year. 49 come down to a funding battle. Mon - much more toxic material,” says Adam - The California ballot measure includes santo and other multinationals, for in - chak, the UC-Davis organic farm co - several assertions that are misleading or stance, spent $5.5 million campaigning ordinator, who supports biotech re - at odds with peer-reviewed scientific re - against a similar measure in Oregon in search. “If the next generation is 2,4-D search. “Government scientists have stat - 2002. Food processors and biotech giants resistant, that’s not making progress; ed that the artificial insertion of DNA into have already dwarfed that figure, raising that’s going backwards.” plants, a technique unique to genetic $25 million through Aug. 15, including engineering, can cause a variety of sig - seven-figure contributions from Monsanto, nificant problems with plant foods,” the DuPont, PepsiCo., BASF Plant Science Labeling Battle ballot mea sure reads. “Such genetic en - and Conagra Foods. This money is being gineering can increase the levels of largely spent on advertisements calling he frontlines of the current debate known toxicants in foods and introduce the labeling proposal a costly and need - T are now in California, where the new toxicants and health concerns.” less burden on food companies. November ballot measure would require It also states that the FDA “does not Despite being outspent, labeling pro - foods containing biotech crops to be la - require safety studies of such food” and ponents include some heavy hitters. beled as “Partially Produced with Genetic argues that some consumers — such as Organic food sales in the United States Engineering,” or “May Be Partially Pro - vegetarians, Muslims, Jews and Hindus topped $31.5 billion in 2011, 52 nearly duced with Genetic Engineering.” Should — “can unknowingly violate their own three times Monsanto’s $11.8 billion in it pass, the measure could have a broad dietary and religious restrictions” by eat - global biotech sales in 2011. 53 The board impact nationwide if some food proces - ing genetically modified foods that of directors of Just Label It, which is sors choose to stop using GM ingredi - might be created using animal genes. spearheading the California effort, in - ents in order to avoid the stigma of a Opponents of the measure point out cludes representatives of Stonyfield label in America’s most populous state. that it doesn’t explain that the FDA, Farms, an organic yogurt company Supporters of the measure have World Health Organization, numerous that is majority-owned by Groupe momentum. It took them just 10 national science academies and other Danon, the world’s largest dairy com - weeks to gather 971,126 signatures to prestigious research organizations have pany; Organic Valley, the largest U.S. put the question before voters. determined that GM crops aren’t inher - organic dairy co-op with $715 million The supporters argue labeling will ently less safe than other foods, which in sales; and the Organic Trade As - put California in line with other devel - also aren’t required to go through safe - sociation, a coalition of 6,500 organ - oped nations. “More than 40 other coun - ty studies — nor does it mention that ic businesses.

734 CQ Researcher The growing political clout of the or - Duesing, of the Northeast Organic by consumer resistance — even as ganic industry rankles conventional farm - Farming Association, predicts growing crops that are components of processed ers like Olthoff, who say labeling un - conflict between organic farmers and foods are more widely adopted. “When fairly demonizes GM crops. “I believe the biotech industry, particularly as GM someone picks up a GM fruit or vegetable in testing; I want everything to be right, alfalfa and sweet corn are grown in and someone points out to them that but I don’t want people to bad-mouth the Northeast, where small farms are this is a genetically modified food, there biotech just to make money,” he says. often clustered closely together. Should is a different attitude,” says Klee. Proponents have crafted the Cali - GM varieties pollinate with nearby or - The only exception is when spe - fornia measure more narrowly than ganic fields, organic farmers could lose cialty crops face crises, as when ringspot Oregon’s. The California initiative would their organic certification — and thus virus cut production by more than half allow several exemptions, including: their price premium. in Hawaii’s papaya industry, says Klee. • restaurants; Duesing expects such situations to “In the late 1980s [the virus] took • meat from animals fed GM crops; trigger an even stronger backlash against over everybody, and we were chop - • milk from cows injected with rBGH; biotech companies, benefitting small ping down trees,” says Ken Kamiya, a • food unintentionally contaminated farmers. “They’ve got their vision for director of the Hawaii Papaya Indus - with GM material; the food system,” he says. “They want try Association. That led to the de - • alcoholic beverages (such as control, and they don’t want any other velopment of the Rainbow papaya, wine made with genetically modified messy thing. Once we move away bred to be virus resistant. “Without yeast); and from Monsanto’s technologies, people GMOs we basically wouldn’t have a • cheeses and other foods made will be breeding for local conditions.” papaya industry,” he says. using genetically engineered enzymes. The Center for Food Safety’s Kim - The fact that public sentiment, “It’s cleverly crafted to exempt those brell foresees greater environmental dam - spurred by advocacy groups and the interests in California that could most age from GM crops and the expanded rapidly growing organic sector, may be readily influence consumers to reject use of older and more toxic herbicides strong enough to pass a GM labeling the initiative,” says Enright, of the to fight Roundup-resistant weeds. law in California has the industry re - biotech industry trade group. “I think the past is the future,” he thinking its public relations approach. The effectiveness of the FDA label - says. “You can’t base good agriculture “They have a problem with indus - ing petition, meanwhile, seems uncer - on bad science. That doesn’t mean the trial agriculture or with processed food,” tain. Although organizers say more than corporations . . . won’t keep pushing it.” says Enright, of the industry trade group. a million people have sent comments Others predict that biotechnology “So to argue against either one of and signed petitions to the agency, the will be able to achieve only modest those they criticize biotech, because FDA says it has only received 394 offi - gains in the near future as researchers it’s an easy target.” The growth of so - cial comments. Even if thousands of peo - struggle with the scientific challenges cial media has helped fuel anti-GM ple sign a form letter or a petition, the of producing higher-yielding and more sentiment, she adds. “What we’re all agency explains, their signatures are only drought-resistant crops. “We think breed - reconsidering right now is how do we counted as one person or “comment.” ing will considerably outpace genetic talk about genetically engineered food. After the March deadline to respond engineering for five to 10 years,” says One of the results of all these calls to the petition passed, the agency said Gurian-Sherman, of the Union of Con - for mandatory labeling has been to it needed more time to consider its cerned Scientists. “For the foreseeable make us think about how we want response. future I see genetic engineering being our food products to be perceived.” useful at the margins for society.” Golden Rice may be the product Some grain farmers disagree. “As far that changes the dynamics of the de - as we’ve come, I think we’ll go fur - bate, should it end up saving the lives, OUTLOOK ther again, we’ll double it,” says Olthoff, or sight, of hundreds of thousands of the Illinois corn and soybean farmer. Vitamin A-deficient malnourished chil - “I know Monsanto is working on dren each year. The Philippines now drought-tolerant corn, which will be a appears likely to approve the product Conflict Ahead? boon for us and a boon for Africa.” for its first commercial planting in 2013, Klee, the University of Florida mol - and China, Vietnam and Bangladesh ome opponents of biotechnology ecular biologist, predicts research into may eventually approve it. S foresee a difficult future for the fruit and vegetable crops likely will re - The Golden Rice Project’s Dubock seed-development technique. main stymied for the foreseeable future says researchers in the future will be

www.cqresearcher.com Aug. 31, 2012 735 GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD

able to create grain varieties that include June 13, 2012, www.guardian.co.uk/environ 15 Dan Charles, “Insect Experts Issue ‘Urgent’ nutrients such as folic acid. Deficiencies ment/2012/jun/13/gm-crops-environment-study . Warning on Using Biotech Seeds,” NPR, of the B-complex vitamins in pregnant 7 “Recent Trends in GE Adoption,” Economic March 9, 2012, www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/ women can lead to birth defects. Research Service, U.S. Department of Agri - 03/08/148227668/insect-experts-issue-urgent- “It’s important for a project like Gold - culture, 2012, www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/ warning-on-using-biotech-seeds . adoption-of-genetically-engineered-crops-in- 16 en Rice to be successful,” says Dubock. “Survey: Waterhemp Top Weed to Watch the-us/recent-trends-in-ge-adoption.aspx . in Midwest,” Croplife.com, July 9, 2012, “Twenty years from now, people will 8 “National Survey of Healthcare Consumers: www.croplife.com/article/29047/survey-water - look back on it and say, ‘What was Genetically Engineered Food,” Thomson hemp-top-weed-to-watch-in-midwest . all the fuss about?’ ” Reuters PULSE, October 2010, www.factsfor 17 Rebecca Goldburg, Jane Rissler, Hope Shand healthcare.com/pressroom/NPR_report_Genetic and Chuck Hassebrook, “Biotechnology’s Bitter EngineeredFood.pdf . Harvest: Herbicide-Tolerant Crops and the Threat Notes 9 Andrew Pollack, “Crop Scientists Say Biotech to Sustainable Agriculture,” Biotechnology Research Companies are Thwarting Research,” Working Group, March 1990, http://blog.ucs The New York Times , Feb. 19, 2009, www.ny usa.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Biotech 1 Elizabeth Weise, “Fight over genetically en - times.com/2009/02/20/business/20crop.html . nologys-Bitter-Harvest.pdf . gineered crops on Calif. ballot,” USA Today , 10 “Statement by Center for Food Safety at 18 Margaret Mellon, “The Trojan Horse of June 12, 2012, www.usatoday.com/news/health/ National Press Club Event Challenging House Biotechnology,” Union of Concerned Scien - story/2012-06-12/genetically-engineered-food- Farm Bill Biotech Riders,” Center for Food Safe - tists, May 10, 2012, http://blog.ucsusa.org/the- california/55558352/1. ty, July 17, 2012, www.centerforfoodsafety.org/ trojan-horse-of-biotechnology /. 2 “20 questions on genetically modified 2012/07/17/statement-by-center-for-food-safety- 19 Gregory Jaffe, “Complacency on the Farm: foods,” World Health Organization, 2012, www. at-national-press-club-event-challenging-house- Significant Noncompliance with EPA’s Refuge who.int/foodsafety/publications/biotech/20 farm -bill-biotech-riders /. For background on the Requirements Threatens the Future Effective - questions/en /. farm bill, see Jennifer Weeks, “Farm Policy,” CQ ness of Genetically Engineered Pest-Protected 3 “Ag Giants Spend Big to Defeat Labeling Researcher , Aug. 10, 2012, pp. 693-716. Corn,” Center for Science in the Public Inter - Initiative,” The Associated Press, Aug. 15, 2012, 11 Quoted in Susan C. Phillips, “Genetically est, November 2009, http://cspinet.org/new/ www.nytimes.com/aponline/2012/08/15/us/ap- Engineered Foods,” CQ Researcher , Aug. 5, 1994, pdf/complacencyonthefarm.pdf . us-california-food-labeling.html?hp . pp. 673-696. 20 For background, see Doug Struck, “Dis - 4 Safety of Genetically Engineered Foods: Ap - 12 For background, see Kathy Koch, “Food appearing Forests,” CQ Global Researcher , proaches to Assessing Unintended Health Ef - Safety Battle: Organic Vs. Biotech,” CQ Re - Jan. 18, 2011, pp. 27-52. fects, National Research Council and Institute searcher , Sept. 4, 1998, pp. 761-784. 21 For information on pesticides and toxicity of Medicine of the National Academies (2004), 13 Jamie Miller and Kent Bradford, “The Reg - see the Pesticide Action Network Database: pp. 191-195. ulatory Bottleneck for Biotech Specialty Crops,” www.pesticideinfo.org /. 5 Stephen Duke and Stephen Powle, “Glyphosate: Nature Biotechnology , October, 2010. 22 Amy Harmon and Andrew Pollack, “Battle A Once In a Century Herbicide,” Pest Man - 14 Clive James, “Global Status of Commercial - Brewing Over Labeling of Genetically Modi - agement Science , April 2008, http:/ /ddr.nal.usda. ized Biotech/GM Crops: 2011,” International fied Food,” The New York Times , May 25, gov/bitstream/10113/17918/1/IND44034731.pdf . Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech 2012 , www.nytimes.com/2012/05/25/science/ 6 Damian Carrington, “GM Crops Good for Applications, 2011, p. 8 (web link in graphic dispute- over-labeling-of-genetically-modified- the Environment, Study Finds,” The Guardian , on p. 724). food.html?_ r=2&ref=geneticallymodifiedfood . 23 For additional information on mutagenic crops see the International Atomic Energy About the Author Agency and the Food and Agriculture Orga - nization’s database on mutant-enhanced crops Jason McLure is a New Hampshire-based correspondent at http://mvgs.iaea.org/Search.aspx . for Thomson Reuters. Previously he was an Africa corre - 24 Calestous Juma, The Gene Hunters (1989), spondent for Bloomberg News and Newsweek and worked pp. 37-38. for Legal Times in Washington, D.C. His writing has ap - 25 See David Hosansky, “Biotech Foods” CQ peared in publications such as The Economist , The New Researcher , March 30, 2001, pp. 249-272. York Times and Business Week. His last CQ Global Re - 26 B. R. Hazell, “Green Revolution: Curse or searcher was “Russia in Turmoil.” His work has been hon - Blessing?” International Food Policy Research ored by the Washington, D.C., chapter of the Society for Institute, 2002, www.ifpri.org/pubs/ib/ib11. Professional Journalists, the Maryland-Delaware-District of pdf . 27 Hosansky, op. cit. Columbia Press Association and the Overseas Press Club 28 Susan C. Phillips, “Genetically Engineered of America Foundation. He is also coordinator of the Com - Foods, CQ Researcher , Aug. 5, 1994, pp. 673- mittee to Free Eskinder Nega, a jailed Ethiopian journalist. 696. 29 Phillips, op. cit.

736 CQ Researcher 30 Mark Youngblood Herring, Genetic Engi - neering (2005) pp. 71-73. 31 Andrew Pollack, “Maker Warns of Hormone FOR MORE INFORMATION in Dairy Cows,” The New York Times , Jan. 27, Biotechnology Industry Organization , 1201 Maryland Ave., S.W., Suite 900, 2004, www.nytimes.com/2004/01/27/business/ Washington, DC 20024 ; 202-962-9200 ; www.bio.org . Trade group for agricultural maker-warns-of-scarcity-of-hormone-for-dairy- and medical biotechnology companies. cows.html . 32 See also I. R. Dohoo, et. al. , “A Meta-Analysis Center for Science in the Public Interest , 1220 L St., N.W., Suite 300, Wash - Review of the Effects of Recombinant Bovine ington, DC 20005 ; 202-332-9110 ; www.cspinet.org . Food-safety group that advo - Somatotropin,” Canadian Journal of Veterinary cates science-based government policies. Research , October 2003, www.ncbi.nlm.nih. Greenpeace USA , 702 H St., N.W., Suite 300, Washington, DC 20001 ; 202-462-1177 ; gov/pmc/articles/PMC280708/?tool=pmcentrez , www.greenpeace.org . Major global environmental group that opposes agricultural and Richard Raymond, et al. , “Recombinant biotechnology. Bovine Somatotropin (rbST): A Safety Assess - ment,” ADSA-CSAS-ASAS Joint Annual Meeting , International Food Policy Research Institute , 2033 K St., N.W., Washington, July 14, 2009, www.ads.uga.edu/documents/ DC 20006-1002 ; 202-862-5600 ; www.ifpri.org . Group supported by governments, foundations and international organizations that provides research and policy ad - rbstexpertpaper-6.26.09-final.pdf . vice on regulation of biotech crops. 33 “Organic Production Statistics,” Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agricul - National Academy of Sciences , 500 Fifth St., N.W., Washington, DC 20001 ; 202- ture, www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/organic - 334-2000 ; www.nasonline.org . Society of scientists and engineers created by Con - production.aspx . gress to advise the government on scientific issues. NAS has published a number 34 Andrew Martin and Andrew Pollack, “Mon - of reports assessing the risks of agricultural biotechnology. santo Looks to Sell Dairy Hormone Business,” Union of Concerned Scientists , Two Brattle Square, Cambridge, MA 02138-3780 ; 617- The New York Times , Aug. 6, 2008, www.ny 547-5552 ; www.ucsusa.org . Environmental group critical of agricultural biotechnology. times.com/2008/08/07/business/07bovine.html ; Mike Barris, “Lilly to Pay $300 Million for Dairy-Hormone Business,” The Wall Street Jour - 41 Andrew Pollack, “Study Raises Doubt 48 “California Voters to Decide on GMO Label - nal , Aug. 20, 2008, http://online.wsj.com/article/ About Allergy to Genetic Corn,” The New York ing,” California Right to Know press release, SB121923768836656505.html . Times , Nov. 10, 2003, www.nytimes.com/2003/ June 12, 2012, www.carighttoknow.org/califor 35 Sandra Blakeslee, “British Mad Cow Toll Rises, 11/10/business/study-raises-doubt-about-allergy- nia_voters_to_decide_on_gmo_labeling . but the Cause is Unclear,” The New York Times , to-genetic-corn.html . 49 Michael Hansen, “Reasons for Labeling Ge - March 19, 1999, www.nytimes.com/1999/03/ 42 “Conclusion on Rice Investigation,” Animal netically Engineered Foods,” letter to American 19/world/british-mad-cow-disease-toll-rises-but- and Plant Health Inspection Service, U.S. De - Medical Association Council on Science and the -cause-is-unclear.html . For additional back - partment of Agriculture, October 2007. Public Health, Consumers Union, March 19, ground, see Mary H. Cooper, “Mad Cow Dis - 43 Robert Patrick, “Genetic Rice Lawsuit in St. 2012, http://truthinlabelingcoalition.org/AMA. ease,” CQ Researcher , March 2, 2001, pp. 161-184. Louis Settled for $750 Million,” St. Louis Post- GE.resolution.3.19.12[1]%20(1).pdf . 36 G. Bruening and J. M. Lyons, “The Case Dispatch , July 2, 2011, www.stltoday.com/news/ 50 Emmanuel Omobowale; Singer, Peter and of the FLAVR SAVR Tomato,” California Agri - local/metro/genetic-rice-lawsuit-in-st-louis- Daar, Abadallah, “The Three Main Monotheistic culture , July-August, 2000, http://ucanr.org/ settled-for-million/article_38270243-c82f-5682- Religions and GM Food Technology: An repository/CAO/landingpage.cfm?article=ca.v0 ba3b-8f8e24b85a92.html . Overview of Perspectives,” BMC International 54n04p6&fulltext=yes . 44 “Saved Seed and Farmer Lawsuits,” Mon - Health & Human Rights, 2009, www.biomed 37 Michael Hertz, “Monsanto Europe, Case A: santo.com, www.monsanto.com/newsviews/ central.com/1472-698X/9/18 . Monsanto Introduces GMOs to Europe with Pages/saved-seed-farmer-lawsuits.aspx . 51 Rosie Mestel, “GMO Foods Don’t Need Unexpected Results: Draft,” University of Vir - 45 Donald Barlett and James Steele, “Mon - Special Labels, American Medical Association ginia Darden School Foundation, May 17, 2001, santo’s Harvest of Fear,” Vanity Fair , May 2008, Says,” Los Angeles Times , June 21, 2012, http:// www.docstoc.com/docs/50820240/Monsanto- www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/05/ articles.latimes.com/2012/jun/21/news/la-heb- Europe . monsanto200805 . gmo-foods-medical-association-20120620 . 38 Robert Paarlberg, Starved for Science: How 46 “Plant Biotechnology Pipeline: PowerPoint 52 “Consumer-Driven U.S. Organic Market Biotechnology is Being Kept Out of Africa Presentation,” Biotechnology Industry Orga - Surpasses $31 billion in 2011,” Organic Trade (2008), pp. 127-132. nization, May 2011. Association, April 23, 2012, www.organicnews 39 Andrew Pollack, “Kraft Recalls Taco Shells 47 “USDA Receives Over 365,000 Public Com - room.com/2012/04/us_consumerdriven_organ With Bioengineered Corn,” The New York ments Opposing Approval of 2,4-D Resistant, ic_ mark.html . Times , Sept. 23, 2000, www.nytimes.com/ Genetically Engineered Corn,” Center for Food 53 Carey Gillam, “UPDATE 1 — DuPont Urges 2000/09/23/business/kraft-recalls-taco-shells- Safety, April 26, 2012, www.centerforfood U.S. to Curb Monsanto Seed Monopoly,” with-bioengineered-corn.html?pagewanted= safety.org/2012/04/26/usda-receives-over-365 Reuters, Jan. 8, 2010, www.reuters.com/arti all&src=pm . 000-public-comments-opposing-approval-of- cle/2010/01/08/monsanto-antitrust-idUSN0871 40 Ibid. 24-d-resistant-genetically-engineered-corn /. 96620100108 .

www.cqresearcher.com Aug. 31, 2012 737 Bibliography Selected Sources

Books www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=food-fight . The author argues in favor of increased use of genetically Brunk , Conrad , and Harold Coward , eds., Acceptable Genes? modified crops. Religious Traditions and Genetically Modified Foods , State University of New York Press , 2009 . Levaux , Ari , “The Very Real Danger of Genetically Modified Brunk, a philosopher, and Coward, a historian, have gathered Foods,” The Atlantic , Jan. 9, 2012 , www.theatlantic.com/ views on how practices such as the insertion of fish genes health/archive/2012/01/the-very-real-danger-of-genetically- into tomatoes fit with religious dietary and ethical codes. modified-foods/251051 /. A food blogger argues that new research shows that geneti - Engdahl , William F. , Seeds of Destruction: The Hidden cally modified foods can be dangerous and merit greater reg - Agenda of Genetic Manipulation , Global Research , 2007 . ulation. The article generated extensive rebuttals from sci - Engdahl documents the effort by multinational companies ence writers at Scientific American and Slate. and governments to exert greater control over the world’s food supply through genetic engineering. Pollack , Andrew , “That Fresh Look, Genetically Buffed,” The New York Times , July 12, 2012 , www.nytimes.com/ Federoff , Nina , and Nancy Marie Brown , Mendel in the 2012/07/13/business/growers-fret-over-a-new-apple-that- Kitchen: A Scientist’s View of Genetically Modified Food , wont-turn-brown.html?pagewanted=all . Joseph Henry Press , 2006 . A GM apple that doesn’t bruise or turn brown has met re - A molecular biologist and member of the National Academy sistance from others in the apple industry. of Sciences (Federoff) and a science writer (Brown) argue that biotechnology will help feed humanity for generations. Willingham , Emily , “The Very Real Paranoia Over Ge - netically Modified Foods,” Slate , Jan. 17, 2012 , www. McHughen , Alan , Pandora’s Picnic Basket , Oxford Uni - slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/ versity Press , 2000 . 2012/01/genetically_modified_foods_ari_laux_s_alarmism_ A molecular geneticist at the University of California-River - in_the_atlantic.html . side clearly and objectively discusses the technologies un - A science writer attacks Levaux’s widely read critique of derlying genetically modified food and the controversy over, GMO foods in The Atlantic. Her article led the magazine to among other things, labeling of GM foods. admit “scientific inconsistencies” in his piece.

Paarlberg , Robert , Starved for Science: How Biotechnol - Reports and Studies ogy is Being Kept Out of Africa , Harvard University Press , 2008 . “A Decade of EU Funded GMO Research: 2001-2010,” A Wellesley College political scientist argues that non-science- European Commission, Directorate-General for Research based fears about genetically modified crops in wealthy coun - and Innovation , 2010 , http://ec.europa.eu/research/bio tries are slowing the adoption of beneficial crops in Africa. society/pdf/a_decade_of_eu-funded_gmo_research.pdf . A 262-page overview of 50 research projects on GM or - Ronald , Pamela , and Raoul Adamchak , Tomorrow’s Table: ganisms concludes that food biotechnology carries no more Organic Farming, Genetics and the Future of Food , environmental or health risks than other plant breeding Oxford University Press , 2010 . methods. Combining memoir with argument, a California plant ge - neticist (Ronald) and an organic farmer (Adamchak) argue “Genetically Engineered Food: An Overview,” Food & Water that the organic movement should adopt biotechnology in Watch , 2012 , www.foodandwaterwatch.org/reports/ the interest of feeding the world’s population sustainably. genetically-engineered-food /. Genetically modified food should be labeled, and the U.S. Schurman , Rachel , and William Munro , Fighting for the Fu - government should stop approving new GM crops, an ad - ture of Food: Activists Versus Agribusiness in the Struggle vocacy group argues. Over Biotechnology , University of Minnesota Press , 2010 . A sociologist (Schurman) and a political scientist (Munro) “Impact of Genetically Modified Crops on Farm Sustain - explore differing views of the biotech industry. ability in the United States,” National Academy of Sciences , 2010 , www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12804 . Articles The nation’s most prestigious scientific body concludes that genetically engineered crops offer farmers substantial envi - Borrell , Brendan , “Food Fight: The Case for Genetically ronmental and economic benefits. Modified Food,” Scientific American , April 11, 2011 ,

738 CQ Researcher The Next Step: Additional Articles from Current Periodicals

Effects Finz , Stacy , “Modified Food on Voters’ Menu,” Houston Chronicle , Aug. 12, 2012 , p. 1 , www.chron.com/business/ Bittman , Mark , “Profits Before Environment,” The New article/Modified-food-will-be-on-voters-menu-3780299.php . York Times , Aug. 31, 2011 , p. A27 , opinionator.blogs.ny California voters will decide in November whether their times.com/2011/08/30/profits-before-environment/. state will be the first to require labels on GM foods. The Obama administration continues to enact policies that benefit the genetically modified food industry regardless of Harmon , Amy , and Andrew Pollack , “Battle Brewing Over the environmental consequences, says a columnist. Labeling of Genetically Modified Food,” The New York Times , May 25, 2012 , p. A1 , www.nytimes.com/2012/05/25/science/ Burns , Greg , “A Plant of Last Resort,” Chicago Tribune , dispute-over-labeling-of-genetically-modified-food.html /. Oct. 2, 2011 , p. A27 , articles.chicagotribune.com/2011- Labeling bills have been proposed in more than a dozen 10-01/news/ct-oped-1002-cassava-20110930_1_cassava- states since 2011. genetic-engineering-famine . Americans have consumed genetically modified food in - Singer , Stephen , “Organic Farmers Hope for Boost With gredients for years with no ill effects thus far. Rivals’ Labels,” The Associated Press, April 15, 2012 , www. boston.com/news/local/connecticut/articles/2012/04/15/ Davies , Peter , “GM Crops Are a Boon to All of Us,” Itha - organic_ farmers_hope_for_boost_with_rivals_labels /. ca (N.Y.) Journal , Jan. 19, 2012 , www.courier-journal.com/ Organic farmers say they will benefit if genetically modi - article/CB/20120119/VIEWPOINTS02/201190328/Guest- fied food is labeled. Viewpoint-GM-crops-boon-all-us . U.S. production of GM foods is helping to feed other parts Superweeds of the world, says a Cornell biology professor. Lochhead , Carolyn , “Modified Crops Battle Steps Up as Kraft , Jessica Carew , “The Rapid Growth of GMOs,” East Doubts Grow,” The San Francisco Chronicle , April 30, Bay (Calif.) Express , Oct. 26, 2011 , www.eastbayexpress. 2012 , p. A1 . com/ebx/the-rapid-growth-of-gmos/Content?oid=3025056 . Many corn and soybean farmers want new genetically engi - Many facets of daily life, such as clothes and food, are in - neered seeds because those now in use have spawned super - fected with genetically modified organisms. weeds.

Labeling Winchester , Cody , “ ‘Superweeds’ Sprout Trouble in S.D. Fields,” Argus Leader (Sioux Falls, S.D.), May 22, 2012 , Bauers , Sandy , “Labeling the Modified Foods,” Philadel - p. A1 . phia Inquirer , Feb. 20, 2012 , p. D1 , articles.philly.com/ Superweeds are increasing farming costs in South Dakota, and 2012-02-20/news/31079947_1_gmo-crops-interest-in - some farmers are using more potent chemicals to combat them. organic-food-organic-farmers . The genetically modified food industry says GM foods are CITING CQ RESEARCHER safe to eat and do not require special labeling. Sample formats for citing these reports in a bibliography Dininny , Shannon , “Some Washington Farmers Support include the ones listed below. Preferred styles and formats Labeling Genetically Modified Foods,” Lewiston (Idaho) vary, so please check with your instructor or professor. Morning Tribune , Jan. 30, 2012 . Washington State wheat farmers want genetically modified MLA STYLE wheat to be labeled if its production is approved by the Jost, Kenneth. “Remembering 9/11,” CQ Researcher 2 Sept. federal government so that unlabeled GM wheat doesn’t un - 2011: 701-732. dermine their market. APA S TYLE Finston , Susan K. , “FDA Shouldn’t Order Costly GMO Jost, K. (2011, September 2). Remembering 9/11. CQ Re - Labels,” Fresno (Calif.) Bee , July 7, 2012 , www.fresnobee. com/2012/07/07/2900980/susan-k-finston-fda-shouldnt- searcher, 9 , 701-732. order.html . CHICAGO STYLE The Food and Drug Administration should not adopt cost - ly labeling requirements for GM foods just to satisfy those Jost, Kenneth. “Remembering 9/11.” CQ Researcher , September without scientific knowledge of the products, says a former 2, 2011, 701-732. director of the American BioIndustry Alliance.

www.cqresearcher.com Aug. 31, 2012 739 In-depth Reports on Issues in the News

Are you writing a paper? Need backup for a debate? Want to become an expert on an issue? For more than 80 years, students have ?turned to CQ Researcher for in-depth reporting on issues in the news. Reports on a full range of political and social issues are now available. Following is a selection of recent reports:

Civil Liberties Education Health/Safety Voter Rights, 5/12 Arts Education, 3/12 Farm Policy, 8/12 Remembering 9/11, 9/11 Youth Volunteerism, 1/12 Treating ADHD, 8/12 Government Secrecy, 2/11 Digital Education, 12/11 Alcohol Abuse, 6/12 Student Debt, 10/11 Traumatic Brain Injury, 6/12 Crime/Law Distracted Driving, 5/12 Debt Collectors, 7/12 Environment/Society Teen Drug Use, 6/11 Criminal Records, 4/12 Smart Cities, 7/12 Police Misconduct, 4/12 Whale Hunting, 6/12 Politics/Economy Immigration Conflict, 3/12 U.S. Oil Dependence, 6/12 Privatizing the Military, 7/12 Financial Misconduct, 1/12 Gambling in America, 6/12 U.S.-Europe Relations, 3/12 Eyewitness Testimony, 10/11 Celebrity Advocacy, 5/12 Attracting Jobs, 3/12 Death Penalty Debates, 11/10 Sexual Harassment, 4/12 Presidential Election, 2/12 Upcoming Reports Re-examining the Constitution, 9/7/12 Solitary Confinement, 9/14/12 Health Care Law, 9/21/12

ACCESS CQ Researcher is available in print and online. For access, visit your library or www.cqresearcher.com. STAY CURRENT For notice of upcoming CQ Researcher reports or to learn more about CQ Researcher products, subscribe to the free e-mail newsletters, CQ Re - searcher Alert! and CQ Researcher News : http://cqpress.com/newsletters. PURCHASE To purchase a CQ Researcher report in print or electronic format (PDF), visit www.cqpress.com or call 866-427-7737. Single reports start at $15. Bulk purchase discounts and electronic-rights licensing are also available. SUBSCRIBE Annual full-service CQ Researcher subscriptions—including 44 reports a year, monthly index updates, and a bound volume—start at $1,054. Add $25 for domestic postage.

CQ Researcher Online offers a backfile from 1991 and a number of tools to simplify research. For pricing information, call 800-834-9020, or e-mail [email protected].