Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

permaculture - FW: Food Supply Update: June 5, '98

permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: permaculture

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: CK Valois/B Brummitt <lilacmn@eot.com>
  • To: permaculture@listserv.oit.unc.edu
  • Subject: FW: Food Supply Update: June 5, '98
  • Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 19:04:57 -0500 (CDT)


This was sent to me...curious as to whether it is true or not...
Bruce

Cheryl Valois and Bruce Brummitt
<lilacmn@eot.com>
46N56' 95W20'
Visit the Natural Building Gallery
<http://www.zianet.com/blackrange>


----------
From: buchner@wcta.net (David Buchner)
To: lilacmn@eot.com
Subject: Food Supply Update: June 5, '98
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 11:38:14 -0500

A little something to help you sleep better, in case you haven't already
read it somewhere else...

> Newsgroups: misc.rural
> Subject: Food Supply Update: June 5, '98
> Date: 05 Jun 1998 22:31:38 EDT
> Organization: The Ark Institute
>
> Food Supply Update: June 5, 1998
>
> Seed Terminator and Mega-Merger Threaten Food and Freedom
>
> Copyright © 1998, by Geri Guidetti
>
>
> There have been times in human history when the line between genius and
> insanity was so fine that it was barely perceptible. In the world of
> biotechnology and food, that line has just been obliterated.
> Announcements made over the past 90 days suggest that an ingenius
> scientific achievement and subsequent, related business developments
> threaten to terminate the natural, God-given right and ability of
> people everywhere to freely grow food to feed themselves and others.
> Never before has man created such an insidiously dangerous, far-reaching
> and potentially "perfect" plan to control the livelihoods, food supply
> and even survival of all humans on the planet. Overstatement? Judge for
> yourself.
>
> On March 3, 1998, the U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the
> Delta and Pine Land Company, a Mississippi firm and the largest cotton
> seed company in the world, announced that they had jointly developed and
> received a patent (US patent number 5,723,765) on a new, agricultural
> biotechnology. Benignly titled, "Control of Plant Gene Expression", the
> new patent will permit its owners and licensees to create sterile seed
> by cleverly and selectively programming a plant’s DNA to kill its own
> embryos. The patent applies to plants and seeds of all species. The
> result? If saved at harvest for future crops, the seed produced by
> these plants will not grow. Pea pods, tomatoes, peppers, heads of wheat
> and ears of corn will essentially become seed morgues. In one broad,
> brazen stroke of his hand, man will have irretrievably broken the plant
> - to - seed - to - plant - to - seed - cycle, THE cycle that supports
> most life on the planet. No seed, no food—unless—unless you buy more
> seed. This is obviously good for seed companies. As it turns out, it
> is also good for the US Department of Agriculture.
>
> In a recent interview with RAFI, the Canada-based Rural Advancement
> Foundation International, US Department of Agriculture (USDA)
> spokesman, Willard Phelps, explained that the USDA wants this
> technology to be "widely licensed and made expeditiously available to
> many seed companies." The goal, he said, is "to increase the value of
> proprietary seed owned by US seed companies and to open up new markets
> in Second and Third World countries." The USDA and Delta & Pine Land Co.
> have applied for patents on the terminator technology in at least 78
> countries!
> Once the technology is commercialized, the USDA will earn royalties of
> about 5% of net sales. "I think it will be profitable for USDA," Phelps
> said. (Royalties? Profits? For a Department of the US Federal
> Government? What’s wrong with this picture?)
>
> The Terminator Technology was created to prevent farmers from saving
> non-hybrid, open-pollinated or genetically altered seed sold by seed
> companies. Open-pollinated varieties of crops like wheat and
> rice—staples for most of the world’s population—are typical examples.
> The stated logic for Terminator Technology is simple, really. A seed
> company invests money to develop and produce new varieties of seed. It
> hopes to sell a lot of that seed to recoup monies spent on crop research
> and seed development, and then to realize a profit on their investment.
> Fair enough, it would seem, but there are BIG concerns around the world
> about how much profit, how much control many of these multinational seed
> companies actually seek. Many of their proprietary seeds are no more
> than genetically altered versions of older, reliable, conventionally
> bred strains that have been in the public domain for many, many years.
> Change a gene to give a seed resistance to some new strain of disease,
> the logic goes, and the seed no longer belongs to the people to grow
> and save as they like, but to the seed company. In the past several
> years the world community has been outraged as some multinational seed
> companies have brazenly tried to claim ownership of whole species of
> food plants based on the logic that they had altered a gene in a member
> of that species and, hence, now owned its whole genome!
>
> In a world of burgeoning population growth and, hence, demand for food,
> giant, multi-national seed companies hope to sell a lot of proprietary,
> genetically engineered seed. Food is a BIG business that will only get
> bigger, and they want farmers around the world to need to come back to
> them, year after year, to buy the seed and, in some cases, even the
> chemicals, to grow it. Plant patents, gene licensing agreements,
> intellectual property laws, investigations and lawsuits brought against
> farm families for infringing on a seed company’s monopoly on seed
> varieties are some of the means now used to protect their interests.
>
> The new Terminator Technology could render even these modern, legal
> measures of control obsolete, as it is potentially so powerful, so
> effective and so flawless in its applicability that its corporate owners
> and licensees will literally have complete biological control over the
> food crops in which it is applied. Seed companies have been working
> hard to prevent farmers around the world from saving their own seed from
> plants originally grown with seed purchased from these companies. They
> are also trying to find ways to encourage farmers around the world—in
> the U.S., Europe and especially the huge market represented by farmers
> in South America, Mexico and Asia, to switch to genetically engineered,
> proprietary seed instead of relying on the eons-old practice of saving
> their own locally produced and conventionally bred seed. If they can
> produce and offer their "improved" seed cheaply enough to convince even
> poorer, Second and Third World farmers to switch, they will have
> captured much of the global market. The Terminator will ensure that
> this market—these farmers and the communities and countries they
> feed—will be completely dependent on the company in order to continue
> to eat.
>
> There is another potential dark side to the Terminator. Molecular
> biologists reviewing the technology are divided on whether or not there
> is a risk of the Terminator function escaping the genome of the crops
> into which it has been intentionally incorporated and moving into
> surrounding open-pollinated crops or wild, related plants in fields
> nearby. The means of this "infection" would be via pollen from
> Terminator-altered plants. Given Nature’s incredible adaptability, and
> the fact that the technology has never been tested on a large scale, the
> possibility that the Terminator may spread to surrounding food crops or
> to the natural environment MUST be taken seriously. The gradual spread
> of sterility in seeding plants would result in a global catastrophe that
> could eventually wipe out higher life forms, including humans, from the
> planet.
>
> According to USDA researchers, they have spent about $190,000 over four
> years working on the joint project. (Yes, you and I supported this
> research.) For its share, the Delta & Pine Land Company has reportedly
> devoted $275,000 of in-house expenses, plus an additional $255,000.
> Combined, these dollars are a mere drop in the bucket compared to the
> potential profitability of the technology to its owners. According to
> USDA’s Willard Phelps, the Delta & Pine Land Co. retains the option to
> exclusively license the jointly-developed technology. In its March 3rd
> press release, the company claimed that the new technology has "the
> prospect of opening significant worldwide seed markets to the sale of
> transgenic technology for crops in which seed currently is saved and
> used in subsequent plantings." In a recent communique, RAFI states:
> "If the Terminator Technology is widely utilized, it will give the
> multinational seed and agrochemical industry an unprecedented and
> extremely dangerous capacity to control the world’s food supply." That
> fear may be realized much sooner than anyone could have imagined.
>
> At the time of the March 3 announcement of the US government-supported
> technology, it was common knowledge that multinational seed and
> pesticides giant, Monsanto, was a minor (8%) shareholder in the Delta &
> Pine Land Co. The two jointly have a cotton seed venture in China. On
> May 11th, a mere nine weeks after the announcement of the Terminator
> Technology, Monsanto bought the Delta & Pine Land Co. and, with it,
> the complete control of the Terminator Technology. For an even bigger
> picture of the implications of this acquisition, here’s a summary of
> some published information on Monsanto’s current agricultural holdings
> and activities:
>
> · The purchase of Delta & Pine now gives Monsanto an overwhelming 85%
> share of the US cotton seed market and a dominant global position in
> this crop.
> · On May 11th, Monsanto also announced the take-over of Dekalb, the
> second largest maize (corn) company in the US.
> · In January of 1997, Monsanto acquired Holden’s Foundation Seeds. A
> company spokesman said at the time that its goal was to get its
> bioengineered seed on at least half of the then 40 million acres that
> Monsanto had access to via its acquisitions.
> It is estimated that 25-35% of US corn acreage is planted with Holden’s
> products.
> The Holden and Dekalb acquisitions make Monsanto the dominant player in
> the
> corn market.
> · In November, Monsanto acquired Brazilian seed company, Sementes
> Agroceres. This acquisition gave Monsanto 30% of the Brazilian corn
> seed business. Brazilian
> farmers who have been breeding and saving their own seed for centuries
> are
> considered primary targets for terminator and apomictic (below) corn
> seed products.
> · On January 20th, the USDA won another patent—no. 5,710,367—covering
> "apomictic maize". This corn trait speeds hybrid seed production by
> allowing the plant to produce hybrid clones, lowering the price of
> hybrid seed. Third World farmers unable to afford more expensive hybrid
> seed could potentially buy these less expensive clones. Unlike other
> hybrids, apomictic corn can be regrown but its genetic uniformity
> (remember, clones) would make it more likely to lose its disease
> resistance more frequently, forcing farmers to buy seed more often.
> There are fears that Monsanto will obtain these license rights from the
> USDA. Monsanto’s recent corn company acquisitions and, now, near
> monopoly in corn, make this a critical concern.
> · A Washington connection, according to RAFI: "In the past two years, a
> number of high-ranking White House and USDA officials have left
> Washngton for the allure of Monsanto’s headquarters in St. Louis,
> Missouri."
> · "In October 1997, Monsanto and Millenium Pharmaceuticals (another
> US-based genomics company) announced a 5 year collaborative agreement
> worth over US $118 million, including the creation of a new Monsanto
> subsidiary with about 100 scientists to work exclusively with Millenium
> to use genomic technologies. The exclusive agreement is not limited to
> a single crop or geographic location – it covers all crop plants in all
> countries. Monsanto considers the new subsidiary ‘an integral part of
> its life sciences strategy’ and hopes to gain a competitive edge in the
> search for patentable – and likely ‘Terminator-able’ crop genes."
> · Monsanto has pioneered enforcement strategies for protection of its
> plant patents. Much of this pioneering has been centered on its
> genetically altered soybeans which have the ability to withstand
> spraying with the company’s leading herbicide, Roundup. (Weeds and
> other native plants die, beans live.) In 1996 the company set a new
> precedent requiring farmers buying its genetically engineered "Roundup
> Ready Soybeans" to sign and adhere to the terms of its "1996 Roundup
> Ready Gene Agreement." Terms: The farmer must pay a $5 per bag
> "technology fee"; the farmer must give Monsanto the right to inspect,
> monitor and test his/her fields for up to 3 years; the farmer must use
> only Monsanto’s brand of the glyphosate herbicide it calls Roundup;
> the farmer must give up his/her right to save and replant the patented
> seed; the farmer must agree not to sell or otherwise supply the seed to
> "any other person or entity." The farmer must also agree, in writing,
> to pay Monsanto "...100 times the then applicable fee for the Roundup
> Ready gene, times the number of units of transferred seed, plus
> reasonable attorney’s fees and expenses..." should he violate any
> portion of the agreement. The farmers’ outcry against the stringent
> inspection and monitoring of their private property caused Monsanto to
> modify that part of the agreement in 1997.
> · The company has used a similar licensing agreement for its genetically
> engineered cotton and, according to a spokeswoman, plans to introduce
> licensing agreements with all genetically engineered seeds Monsanto
> brings to market. These will include Roundup Ready canola (canola oil),
> corn, sugarbeets, etc. (Keep in mind that now Monsanto has Terminator
> Technology to license, as well. It is applicable to all food crops
> according to its primary inventor.)
>
> Four days ago, the scope of the potential impact of the Terminator
> Technology on global agriculture broadened explosively with the
> announcement that American Home Products Corporation (AHP) had agreed to
> buy Monsanto Co. for $33.9 billion in stock. "AHP," according to its
> press release, "is one of the world’s largest research-based
> pharmaceutical and health care products companies....It is also a global
> leader in vaccines, biotechnology, agricultural products and animal
> health care." Reuters reports that the acquisition will create "a
> powerful pharmaceutical company with a massive presence in the growing
> market for genetically engieered agricultural products."
>
> Actually, AHP is a family of companies including American Cyanamid,
> Cyamid Agricultural Products Group, Wyeth Ayerst, and others. It is the
> third largest in the US in herbicides, insecticides and fungicides but,
> with its acquisition of Monsanto, it is now estimated that the combined
> companies will become the largest agrochemical/life industries company
> in the world, beating Swiss global giant, Novartis. It does not take a
> giant mental leap to see the massive potential for the application and
> marketing of Monsanto’s Roundup Ready seed and licensing agreements and
> the Terminator Technology to an increasing number of companies and food
> crops. If the Terminator technology is not globally banned, its
> eventual incorporation into all genetically engineered and
> open-pollinated, non-hybrid food crops is predictable.
>
> As most of you are aware, I have often fretted in these pages about the
> vulnerabilities of our increasingly centralized, computer-based,
> bottom-line driven, large corporation-dominated food production,
> processing and distribution system. Extreme weather patterns, toxic
> waste-contaminated fertilizers, epidemic bacterial contamination of food
> and the year-2000 crash of computers responsible for keeping the whole,
> complex system running have been big concerns. I have warned you of
> the planned disappearance of non-hybrid, open-pollinated seeds—seeds
> that let you retain the means of growing your own food if you want or
> need to—seeds that ensure protective biodiversity—seeds that may provide
> personal food security in insecure times. Now the Terminator threatens
> even these.
>
> Make no mistake about it—widespread global adoption of the newly
> patented Terminator Technology will ensure absolute dependence of
> farmers, and the people they feed, on multinational corporations for
> their seed and food. Dependence does not foster freedom. On the
> contrary, dependence fosters a loss of freedom. Dependence does not
> increase personal power, it diminishes it. When you are dependent, you
> relinquish control. History is full of examples of peoples and cultures
> who lost fundamental freedoms—who were controlled—by their need for
> food. This shouldn’t happen to Second and Third World farmers. It
> shouldn’t happen in any of the 78 countries in which the patent has been
> applied for. It shouldn’t happen here.
>
> The Terminator Technology is brilliant science and arguably "good
> business", but it has crossed the line—the tenuous line between genius
> and insanity. It is a dangerous, bad idea that should be banned.
> Period..........Geri Guidetti, The Ark Institute
> **********************************************************************
> Visit The Ark Institute’s web site @ http://www.arkinstitute.com for
> archived Food and Grain Supply Updates. To be placed on Geri
> Guidetti’s free Food Supply Update email list, send an email with "list"
> in the subject box to: arkinst@concentric.net
> To receive a free email catalog, write "catalog" in the subject box.
> Mailing address: The Ark Institute, PO Box 142, Oxford, Ohio 45064

--
David
buchner@wcta.net
http://www.wcta.net/buchner
Osage, MN, USA





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page