Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

internetworkers - Re: [internetworkers] Genetically modified foods

internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: childers.paula AT epamail.epa.gov
  • To: internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [internetworkers] Genetically modified foods
  • Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 13:39:31 -0400





The two things I still haven't seen anyone mention are the reproductive
viability of the genetic modification, and whether the modification was
of similar species origin. To wit: one of the genes that has recently
been inserted into corn is actually from a firefly. No amount of
hybridization could ever have resulted in that modification.

"Genetic engineering represents a radical break from traditional
crossbreeding. While horticulturists have crossbred plants for thousands
of years, they have only ever been able to combine genetic material from
the same or closely related species, like broccoli and cauliflower for
example. Genetic engineering allows genes to be crossed between
organisms that could never breed under normal conditions - fish and
tomatoes, for example, or viruses and potatoes."
http://www.foei.org/publications/link/93/e93tubefood.html

"Cantaloupe and squash containing genes for bacteria and viruses,
potatoes with chicken and waxmoth genes, corn with firefly genes, and
fish and pigs with human genes, are just a few of the food products
currently being developed. "
http://www.life.ca/nl/38/gentech.html

"Critics of the rapid introduction of GE crops into the food supply
point to one particularly alarming incident in which dozens of people
were killed and 1,500 others afflicted by an excruciatingly painful
disorder scientists suspect is linked to a bacterium engineered to
produce the food supplement L-tryptophan. In addition, many scientists
fear that bioengineered crops could spark widespread ecological damage,
creating insecticide-resistant bugs and herbicide-resistant "superweeds"
that would make kudzu and purple loosestrife look like so many summer
dandelions."
http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2000/01/pandora.html

BTW, the latter above is a very good article, and, I think, fairly
evenhanded, especially for Mother Jones.

And don't buy the line about using less pesticide. Can you say
marketspeak?:
"Monsanto's "Roundup Ready" soybeans, for example, have been developed
to withstand doses of pesticides that were once lethal. Far from
reducing pesticide use, these crops actually encourage it. This creates
a boon for the pesticide manufacturers initiating the "gene revolution",
but is a kiss of death for groundwater and drinking water supplies that
are already contaminated with agricultural chemicals. A report by
Benbrook Consulting in July 1999, which reviewed more than 8,200
university-run field tests on herbicide-resistant crops, found that
farmers planting Roundup Ready soybeans used two to five times more
herbicide than conventional soybean farmers."

For one, I think we need:
-- much stronger testing requirements, at least the equivalent of that
for a food additive, but preferably for that of a drug.
-- far more restriction on how such testing is conducted (I like the
sealed greenhouse proposal someone mentioned)
-- absolutely required labeling of any food product that contains GM
organic matter, or at least any transgenics.
-- and a complete review/revision of laws relating to the accidental
spread of GM crops, to protect those who want to grow organic.

Just my 2 cents.
Paula





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page