|
|
|
|
|
|
Genetically modified organisms (GMOs)
Genetically modified organisms are creatures whose genetic material has been altered by the direct introduction of DNA (specifically defined in EU legislation). These creatures are usually alive and have the ability to reproduce and contaminate other creatures of the same species, related species and unrelated species with their modified DNA. Live GMOs are also known as Modified Living Organisms (MLOs) in order to distinguish them from dead GMOs.
|
|
GMOs include viruses, bacteria, fungi, seeds, crops, trees, insects, fish, crustaceans and livestock.
Only one variety of GM crop (Monsanto's patented MON810 maize) is authorised for commercial release in the EU. But as of October 2007, this is banned in Austria, France, Greece, Hungary and Poland; and other EU member states may ban it soon. The total area of EU GM crop cultivation is 0.05% of arable land – a hundred times less than organic farming.
This page contains information about the Biosafety Protocol, the process of genetic modification, life patents, GMO crops, GMO trees, GMO livestock, GMO fish, and GMO bacteria.
Other sections of this web site contain information about GM animal feed, GM trees, GM fish, GM food, the proposed GMO potato experiment in Ireland, the health, environmental and legal risks of GM food and farming, and the WTO trade dispute filed against the EU for its reluctance to embrace GM food and farming.
"Low-tech 'sustainable agriculture,' shunning chemicals in favour of natural pest control and
fertiliser, is pushing up crop yields on poor farms across the world, often by 70 per cent or more... The findings will make sobering reading for people convinced that only genetically modified crops can feed the planet's hungry in the 21st century... A new science-based revolution is gaining strength built on real research into what works best on the small farms where a billion or more of the world's hungry live and work... It is time for the major agricultural research centres and their funding agencies to join the revolution."
|
|
– New Scientist editorial, February 3 2001
|
|
The Biosafety Protocol
International trade in living GMOs is regulated by the Biosafety Protocol to the United Nations Convention on Biodiversity, which recognises the precautionary principle whereby governments may ban GMOs before environmental damage occurs, when there is cause for concern.
Originally agreed at Cartagena, Colombia, in January 2000, the Biosafety Protocol provides basic international rules that allow Governments to regulate the safety of GM foods, crops and seeds. It has been ratified by 132 countries. But the three main countries that grow GM crops - the United States, Argentina and Canada - still refuse to support it.
In the European Union, the release of GMOs is regulated by a number of EC Directives, and in Ireland by the Environmental Protection Agency (for crops) and by the Food Safety Authority of Ireland (for food).
"Genetic engineering"
The term "genetic engineering", which is often used to describe the process of genetic modification, is a misnomer. As Amory Lovins points out in A Tale of Two Botanies, "engineering" implies understanding of the causal mechanisms that link actions to effects, but nobody understands the mechanisms by which genes, interacting with each other and the environment, express traits. Transgenic manipulation inserts foreign genes into random locations in a plant's DNA to see what happens. That's not engineering; it's the industrialization of life by people with a narrow understanding of it."
The biotech industry lobby's claims that GMOs are inherently safe rest on the outdated reductionist scientific paradigm which views biological organisms as if they were inanimate robots with interchangeable parts. This paradigm ignores thirty years of new scientific insights in genetics, molecular biology, cellular biology, immunology, ecology, complexity theory, and the emergent properties of complex systems. The new paradigm confirm the deeper systemic understanding that living organisms are extremely complex self-organising sentient beings, and that tinkering with their genetic codes will result in metabolic and ecological impacts that can not be predicted. One does not have to have a PdD in genetics to understand the risk; every schoolchild should be able to understand that releasing genetically modified organisms into our food chain and ecosystems is asking for trouble.
Most GMOs contain foreign genetic code taken from other biological kingdoms and species:
Genetic modification is qualitatively different from traditional breeding methods which only combine natural genetic material from the same or related species. Genetic modification involves the un-natural insertion of foreign DNA or transgenes typically taken from viruses, bacteria, and either a plant and/or an animal:
|
• |
DNA from viruses
Virus DNA is often used as a "promoter" to ensure that the genetically modified organism will fully "express" the other foreign DNA with the desired traits taken from one or more bacteria, plants and / or or animals)
|
• |
DNA from bacteria
Bacterial DNA is used in two ways. First, DNA from anti-biotic resistant bacteria is often used as a "marker" to enable scientists to determine if their attempt to introduce the foreign DNA package or "cassette" into the target organism has been successful. If the organism survives subsequent treatment with the same antibiotic, it is assumed that the rest of the modified DNA - including the DNA that will produce the desired traits - has been successfully taken up by the target organism.
The second way in which bacterial DNA is used in GMOs is to introduce a desired trait. The most common use, in crops, involves the insertion of DNA from the soil bacterium Bacillus thuringensis (or Bt) which produces a toxic substance that kills some insects. This is used in the so-called Bt crops to make them produce their own insecticides. There is a risk that these genes could survive digestion and become active in the bacteria which live inside the human gut, potentially turning the animals or humans who eat the modified crop into living pesticide factories.
|
• |
DNA from plants and/or animals
Plant or animal DNA is inserted to introduce the desired new trait into the recipient organism. Examples include DNA taken from spiders introduced into GMO potatoes to produce artificial silk; DNA from the flounder fish (which produces a kind of natural anti-freeze in this cold-water species) introduced into GMO fruits to provide greater frost-resistance; and DNA taken from a worm introduced into cloned GMO pigs to make them produce large amounts of omega-3 fatty acids believed to stave off heart disease.
|
|
The release of patented GMO seeds, crops, trees, fish and livestock is an extremely controversial issue fraught with health and environmental problems, crop failures, GM contamination, biotech industry lies, government cover-ups, the lack of any long-term health studies, insurance companies' refusal to cover disaster risks, product recalls, massive lawsuits against biotech companies by farmers who have been contaminated and/or had their traditional seeds patented (biopiracy), widespread consumer rejection, national and local laws banning their release, and a major WTO trade dispute filed against the European Union by the Governments of the USA, Canada and Argentina, which claim that the EU's reluctance to adopt GMO seeds and crops violates the WTO's so-called "free trade agreement."
GMOs and GM ingredients are already in our food and GM crops are growing in large areas of the USA, Canada, Argentina and other countries - yet we do not really know if they are safe. The companies that profit from (and governments which support) GM crops deny the existence of any scientific evidence that GMO have associated health and environmental risks. But there is now ample evidence that GM contamination of animal feed, seeds, crops and livestock reduces farm incomes, threatens biodiversity and human health, and robs consumers and farmers of their right to produce and choose safe GM-free food.
The biotech industry uses an incremental but brutal approach to marketing. This starts with GM animal feed, seeds and crops. Next come GM trees, livestock, fish, and pharmaceutical crops. Beyond that lies the brave new world of GM humans and human cloning. Countries which refuse GM crops have been contaminated against their will, offered GM food aid for famine relief, hauled before the WTO's secretive and undemocratic Trade Dispute Panel for impeding so-called "free trade", and threatened with punitive trade sanctions.
Patents on living organisms
The Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights agreement (TRIPS) enables individuals and corporations to obtain patents on living organisms – including those that have been genetically modified. The TRIPS agreement is a cornerstone of the so-called "Free Trade Agreement" set up by the World Trade Organisation (WTO). This enables companies like Monsanto to demand patent roylaties from farmers who use GMO seeds and crops, including farmers who have no wish to use them but who have been inadvertently contaminated.
For a first hand account of a GM patent infringement lawsuit, see our interview with Canadian farmer Percy Schmeiser. According to the Irish Patent Office, there is nothing in EU or Irish patent law to protect contaminated farmers from being sued for patent infringement.
The patenting of life provides a means for giant transnational corporations to control the global seed supply. Whoever controls the seeds controls the food.
A paper published in the journal Science in 2005 revealed that nearly 20% of human
genes have now been patented, mainly by commercial companies. Gene patents
allow companies to claim monopolies on future genetic tests and treatments, and
may restrict and distort research.
Transnational corporate control of agricultural seeds
As of 2005, worldwide, 10 companies controlled about 50 percent of the global seed business. At the top of the heap are just three companies, Monsanto, Dupont and Syngenta. Industry concentration is continuing to proceed apace. Monsanto is currently waiting for US antitrust approval to complete its merger with the 11th largest seed company, Delta Pine & Land. All three companies have been snapping up smaller firms at every opportunity.
GMO crops
Ten years after the first significant planting of GM crops, no plants with
benefits to consumers or the environment have materialized and GM crops have
failed to deliver the promises of the biotech industry.
Friends of the Earth International has published a report which concluded:
|
• |
GM crops are not green: Monsanto's GM soybeans, the most extensively grown
GM crop today, has led to an increase in herbicide use. The intensive
cultivation of soybeans in South America is fostering deforestation, and has
been associated with a decline in soil fertility and soil erosion.
|
• |
GM crops do not tackle hunger or poverty: Most GM crops commercialized so
far are destined for animal feed, not for food, and none have been
introduced to address hunger and poverty issues. In Argentina, the second
biggest producer of GM crops in the world, only 2% of the soya stays in the
country. Other developing countries, such as Indonesia and India, have
experienced substantial problems with Monsanto's GM crops, often leaving
farmers heavily indebted.
|
• |
The biotech industry has failed to introduce the promised "new generation"
of GM crops with consumer benefits: After 30 years of research, only two
modifications have made it to the marketplace on any scale: insect
resistance and herbicide tolerance.
|
|
GMO crops currently on the world market:
The only GM crops grown commercially on a large scale in 2005 were soybeans (60%), maize (24%), cotton (11%), and oilseed rape (4%). GM wheat was a failure. Other GM crops include papaya in Hawaii and squash in the USA. GM crops generally fall into four categories:
|
• |
crops resistant to weedkillers
These include "Roundup-ready" crops patented by Monsanto, and account for 71% of all GM crops currently being grown.
|
• |
crops that produce their own pesticides
These include "Bt" crops such as Bt maize, Bt cotton etc., and account for 18% of all GM crops currently being grown.
|
• |
crops that are resistant to weedkillers and also produce their own pesticides
These include some varieties of cotton and maize, and account for 11% of all GM crops currently being grown.
|
• |
crops that have other traits
Virtually no currently-grown GM crops are designed to increase yields, boost nutrition or survive harsh environmental conditions (e.g. drought).
|
|
Where are GMO crops being grown?
The biotech industry would have you believe that the global market for GM crops is huge, and that Ireland's refusal of GM crops would result in massive economic losses.
Both of these assertions are false. More than 80% of the
area cultivated with biotech crops is still concentrated in only three
countries: the US, Argentina and Canada. The estimated global market value of transgenic crops in 2003 was only €4.5 - 4.75 billion, including sales of transgenic seed plus technology fees (i.e. royalties) paid by farmers. This amounts to a mere 19% of the €25 billion market for organic food, which has been growing at 10% per annum for the past 12 years. 90% of GM crops were grown in just three countries (the USA, Canada, and Argentina.)
During 2005, 21 countries grew GM crops commercially on 90 million hectares, an 11%
increase on 2004 (see Table 1). The majority of this arises from increased acreage in Brazil.
Although the European Commission (EC) has given approval for nine GMO crops to be grown in Europe, only small amounts are being grown commercially in Romania, Spain, France, Portugal, the Czech Republic and Germany.
Contamination from GM seeds and crops
GMO seeds and crops easily contaminate both conventional and organic farmland and the food chain. The first report into the extent to which GMOs have 'leaked' into the environment reveals a disturbing picture of 113 cases of widespread contamination, illegal planting and negative agricultural side effects in 39 countries.
Contamination incidents include pork meat from GMO pigs being sold to consumers, ordinary crops being contaminated with GM crops containing pharmaceuticals, growing and international distribution of illegal antibiotic-resistant GM maize seeds, planting of outlawed GM crops which have been smuggled into countries, mixing of unapproved GM crops in food including shipments of food aid, and inadvertent mixing of different GM strains even in high profile scientific field trials.
For details visit the GM Contamination Register at www.gmcontaminationregister.org.
GMO crops in the pipe-line
Pharma crops designed for the production of medicines, plastics and industrial products are prohibited in the EU (except for a few field trials), but are widely grown in the USA, where no records are kept as to their exact location or contamination effects.
The field trials involved GM maize to produce a dog gastric lipase (an enzyme for therapeutic use), GM maize to produce a human anti-cancer antibody, and GM potatoes producing a spider silk protein which has great strength.
GMO trees
In 2004, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) carried out a preliminary study reviewing the global status and trends in forest biotechnology. It indicates that forest GMO activities (mainly in the laboratory or in contained field tests) occur in at least 36 countries, with most activities occurring in North America (48%) and Europe (32%), followed by Asia (14%), Oceania (5%), South America (1%) and Africa (1%). They are restricted largely to three genera (Populus, 47%; Pinus, 19%; Eucalyptus, 7%). Field trials of GM trees take place in 21 countries, the great majority in the United States.
Approximately half of all reported GMO activities are related to methods development (e.g. gene stability, gene expression) or basic biological questions (e.g. functional genomics, tissue culture). Of the remaining activities, herbicide tolerance (13%), biotic resistance (12%), wood chemistry (9%) and fertility issues (6%) dominate the traits that groups studied most. The commercial release of GM trees has been reported only in China (ca. 1.4 million poplar trees in 2002). These releases followed two stages of field trials and required government agencies regulatory approval.
Given the Irish Government's pro-GMO policy, there is growing concern that organisations such as Teagasc, and Coillte may be carrying out experiments with GMO trees.
For more information see the trees section of this website.
GMO livestock
Although transgenic animals (especially rats and mice) are used routinely for research purposes (particularly in the medical field), no GM animals have yet been released on the farm. Research has, however, been carried out on a wide range of modified traits involving the growth hormone gene (to increase growth rates), the phytase gene (to reduce phosphorous emissions from pigs) or keratin genes (to modifiy the properties of wool in sheep). Compared to crops, genetic modification of livestock has proceeded at a much slower pace for a variety of reasons such as poor efficiency of the gene transfer techniques, high costs and low animal reproductive rates.
Monsanto has applied for worldwide patents on GMO pigs.
In Europe, field trials with GM organisms other than crops included GM rats and mice modified to be sensitive to air pollutants, and GM viruses and bacteria for pollution research, gene therapy, vaccines, and control of fungal pathogens in wheat.
GMO fish
[Sources: Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, announcement for the Electronic Forum on Biotechnology in food and Agriculture, Conference 11 (17 January - 13 February 2005). Salmon imports curb welcomed, The Irish Times, 7 February 2005, and The Center for Food Safety.]
The §70 million Irish salmon farming industry currently produces 15,000 tonnes annually, and employs 600 full-time and 1,200 full-time equivalent employees. Some 20 per cent of Irish production is organic, focusing on quality markets on the Continent.Late last year, Irish fish farming representatives accepted that State aspirations to double production or expand to 50,000 tonnes annually were unrealistic, and the emphasis had to be placed on quality rather than quantity.
The introduction of GM salmon could destroy our industry. The trait of major interest is increased growth rate, although disease resistance and improved environmental tolerance are also being researched. GM fish from about 20 species, including carp, catfish, salmon and tilapia, have already been produced for experimental purposes. Although applications have been made for the regulatory approval of GM fish for food purposes, none have yet been approved. In 2003, the first GM fish was released commercially - a fluorescent zebrafish (Danio rerio) sold as a pet.
The world's leading GM salmon producer, Aqua Bounty (USA), claims GM salmon are six times biggger than conventional salmon and need half the time to grow. The US Centre for food safety said GM salmon characteristics inlcude early death, internnal and external deformities, and aggressive behaviour, leading to extinction of native species.]
Additional information on GM fish from the U.S. Center for Food Safety - www.centerforfoodsafety.org:
On May 9, 2001, the Center for Food Safety and a coalition of over 60 petitioners, consisting of consumer and environmental protection organizations along with fishing companies and fishermen, filed legal petitions with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), U.S. Department of Interior (DOI), U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC), U.S. Department of Defense (DOD), and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) demanding a moratorium on the domestic marketing and importation of transgenic fish until FDA adequately addresses the impacts to the environment and human food safety.
In addition, the petitions request that each US federal agency with jurisdiction over an aspect of aquaculture take regulatory action consistent with the requests in the petition.
Currently, there are over thirty-five species of transgenic fish being developed around the world and at least one company, A/F Protein, which is presently requesting approval from the FDA to market transgenic fish to consumers as food.
These transgenic fish grow as much as ten to thirty times faster than normal salmon! Unintended releases of transgenic fish into the world's waters may cause significant impacts to the environment and endangered species. New studies have shown that transgenic fish are more aggressive, eat more food, and will attract more mates than wild fish. In addition, these studies show that although transgenic fish will attract more mates, their offspring will be less fit and less likely to survive. As a result, scientists predict that transgenic fish will cause some species to become extinct within only a few generations. Once one species becomes extinct, other species will likely be affected. There are already 114 species of fish, including Atlantic salmon that are listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Allowing transgenic fish in ocean pens may significantly increase this number of listed species.
GMO bacteria
GMO bacteria are routinely used in sealed vats in contained secure laboratories for the production of pharmaceutical products such as insulin, yeast, and rennet (for cheese making).
The GM-free Ireland Network has no objection to the use of such GMOs, provided they do not escape into the environment, which could have potentially catastrophic consequences.
However, there are growing concerns due to the fact that biotech drugs made from GMO bacteria have already resulted in deaths and disease. In the 1980's a deadly epidemic in the USA was traced to batches of the food supplement L-Triptophan which were produced from GM bacteria. About 100 people died and an estimated 5-10,000 fell sick ó some were permanently disabled. For details, see http://www.seedsofdeception.com/Public/L-tryptophan/index.cfm. Biotech proponents successfully diverted the blame away from genetic engineering by attributing the disease to changes in the filtration system at the factory. It is now known, however, that hundreds had contracted the disease from genetically modified versions of L-tryptophan created during the four years prior to the change in the filter. The disease created by the contaminated L-tryptophan was acute, rare, and came on quickly. If all three of these characteristics had not been present, it is unlikely that doctors would have identified the supplement as the cause; it might still be on the market. This begs the question, Are there other genetically modified products on the market creating serious health problems that are not being traced?
In March 2006, the US-based company Parexel launched the first human trials of a new biotech drug called TGN1412 in the UK. The trial drug is not a chemical but a biological product, a genetically engineered "humanised" protein. The drug was manufactured by the German biotech company TeGenero "for the treatment of immunological diseases with a high unmet medical need, such as multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis and certain cancers". Within hours of the start of the clinical trial, all six healthy human volunteers suffered a massive inflammatory reaction. All went into intensive care, with two of them in critical condition. Scientists at the UK Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) were left contemplating the possibility that the dangerous side effects of this drug in humans had not been, and perhaps could not be, detected in the normal animal trials. It is increasingly likely that the drug itself, given at the right dose, was to blame - an explanation that could have very serious consequences for research into the biological drugs called monoclonal antibodies which are the bright hope for better treatments in the future.
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
