A somewhat ridiculous argument by natural food advocates (from
the article below):
>>>
Another concern is the toxic effects of chemically engineered Bt.
The active toxin released by Bt-enhanced plants is more potent than
naturally occurring Bt and could have serious, negative impacts on
populations of beneficial insects, butterflies, and moths.
Based on a story in the London Times (October 22, 1997), ladybugs
have already been affected. Scottish scientists from the Scottish
Crop Research Institute, in Dundee, found female ladybugs whose
reproductive systems were altered after eating aphids that had fed
on genetically modified potatoes.
The ladybugs laid fewer eggs and had a life span half as long an
average ladybug.
>>>
My comment:
The logic here is ridiculous. Bt-enhanced plants REDUCE the need for
pesticides. Put another way, if pesticides were applied instead, The
FRIGGING LADYBUG (and almost all insects in the whole field) would
be DEAD. At least this way, the ladybug and other beneficial insects
live.
(the full article)
Why organic business fears genetic farming Widespread use of inbred
pesticide may spawn resistant mutants that organic crops won't tolerate
======================================================================
Imagine a world where plants produce their own pesticides? Sound
too far-fetched, like something out of a futuristic movie? Well,
it's not. Genetically engineered crops are growing right here in
Washington state.
Public attitude toward genetically engineered products and their
effect on the environment, natural food businesses, and world food
supplies varies widely. At the two extreme ends of the spectrum are
people who see positive potential for these products and those who
call them an environmental nightmare.
Genetically engineered foods are created by taking a trait or gene
from one organism and incorporating it into another organism.
Changes in plant gene structure are developed with several goals in
mind: To alter the ripening process and enhance fresh market value;
to increase crop resistance to herbicides, pests, and viruses; and
to increase harvests by accelerating growth in crops such as
soybeans, tomatoes, corn, and potatoes.
People involved with the organic food market believe their
livelihood is being threatened by genetically engineered crops that
contain a gene from bacteria called Bt or Bacillus thuringiensis
which creates a toxin. The engineered plant then produces its own
pesticide. When an insect pest bites into this genetically
engineered plant it ingests the Bt toxin and soon dies.
Puget Consumers Co-operative, the largest food cooperative in the
country, has been selling organic produce to Seattleites for 36
years.
Certified organic farmers are inspected by the state at least once
a year to make sure no synthetic fertilizers or pesticides were put
on the land in the three years prior to harvest.
Under U.S. organic certification programs, organic farmers are
allowed to use naturally-occurring Bt. Because the natural form of
Bt's toxin is only activated under special circumstances, this
bacteria is short-lived and considered safe. As Goldie Caughlan,
PCC's nutrition educator, points out, "It is one of the limited
things organic farmers can use. In many instances, it is the only
thing they can use to control insect pests."
The main concern organic farmers, environmentalists, and natural
food stores have regarding the potential widespread cultivation of
Bt-enhanced crops by non-organic farmers is that Bt may quickly lose
its effectiveness in killing insect pests. Explains Caughlan:
"Because Bt is being bred into plants, it is being put out there in
more places, and affecting a multitude of insects. It is quite
likely insects will build up a Bt-resistance more quickly than they
would have in the limited ways organic farmers use it."
Put another way, Bt could lose its effectiveness on plant pests in
the same way antibiotics are losing their efficiency with overuse,
according to Don Foster, director of molecular biology for
ZymoGenetics, in Seattle.
The numbers indicate organic farming is becoming more mainstream
in Washington state where sales have grown 20 percent to 30 percent
each year since 1993, according to the state Department of
Agriculture, and sales this year are expected to exceed $40 million.
Karen Marshall, a representative for Monsanto, the company that
holds the patent for Bt-altered seeds for corn, cotton, tomatoes,
and potatoes, counters these arguments.
Monsanto believes these products will reduce the amount of
insecticides farmers need to use, and for potato growers this was
true. Farmers who used Bt-enhanced New Leaf potato seeds in 1996
were able to reduce their pesticide inputs by about 42 percent- a
major savings in money and time.
The outcome of this debate is critical to the survival of the
organic food industry. "The desire of customers at Puget Consumers
Co-operative to buy organic produce, directly drives our business,"
says Caughlan.
Another concern is the toxic effects of chemically engineered Bt.
The active toxin released by Bt-enhanced plants is more potent than
naturally occurring Bt and could have serious, negative impacts on
populations of beneficial insects, butterflies, and moths.
Based on a story in the London Times (October 22, 1997), ladybugs
have already been affected. Scottish scientists from the Scottish
Crop Research Institute, in Dundee, found female ladybugs whose
reproductive systems were altered after eating aphids that had fed
on genetically modified potatoes.
The ladybugs laid fewer eggs and had a life span half as long an
average ladybug.
The advent of gene-altered plants raises several questions. Could
herbicide-resistant plants transfer their immunity to weeds, thereby
creating super weeds? Can the pollen from a farm growing Bt-enhanced
potatoes migrate across the field to a farm growing organic potatoes
and alter that crop's genetic make-up? The answer is no to the first
question and yes to the second.
Foster says crops of different species, such as potatoes and
weeds, cannot cross-pollinate, but crops of the same species can
cross-pollinate. And therein lies a potential problem for organic
farmers who more often than not share boundaries with non-organic
farms.
"Nature has evolved a way of confining gene transfer to staying
within the same species," explains Foster.
When farmers were asked if their genetically engineered crops were
a good value, they told Monsanto the crops were a better economic
value than their traditional seeds and herbicide programs.
"Even though the seeds themselves are more expensive, due to low
supplies and high demand," says Marshall. "Beyond the pure financial
cost of seeds or chemicals, these seeds give the farmers cleaner
fields, making harvest easier, with less foreign matter in the
harvest."
Nass Huber looks at the question of cost from two sides. He
worked as a research chemist for ten years and now runs his own
organic farm, Dungeness Farms. "I am not opposed to genetic
engineering," adds Huber. "We have been manipulating the genes in
sweet corn, to make it sweeter, for years. But we have to take a
look at the overall cost of genetically altered crops to the whole
world system. Not just the individual farmer."
Sources: Food and Drug Administration Press Office, (202)
205-4144; Monsanto Co., 1-800-332-3111; Union of Concerned
Scientists, (202) 332-0900; Pure Food Campaign, 1-800-253-0681. |
