While most of us have not been paying attention, the genetic engineering industry, assisted by the US government, has been making moves that will soon put the fate (and the currency) of the world in their hands. Patented engineered crops have been pushed through to the market with no responsible testing on humans as to allergens or long-term effects, and no regard for the consequences to the ecosystem when they "escape" and spread.

Monsanto, "The World’s Bread-basket"?

Chemical giant Monsanto stands as a prime example of blatant bad behavior. Their executives regularly cycle in and out of top positions in the FDA (in 1992, over 150 FDA officials owned stock in the drug/biotech companies they regulated!), and consequently the FDA enacts whatever policies will further Monsanto’s interests.

Monsanto’s biggest cash-cow ($1.5 billion per year) has been the popular herbicide Roundup. The use of Roundup is the third most commonly reported cause of illness among agricultural workers in California; for landscape maintenance workers, it ranks highest. It also destroys soil life and leaves residues that show up in food planted a year after the soil was sprayed.

Roundup is currently used only to kill weeds around the edges of crops, but Monsanto is betting the farm on its new line of "Roundup Ready" crops, which are specifically engineered to withstand massive dousing with Roundup (and only Roundup). In fact, a year’s supply of Roundup is sold as a package with the seeds -- for which farmers must sign a contract promising not to sell or give away any seeds or save them for next year's planting, with Monsanto inspecting its customers' farms for violations.

Monsanto expects that its sales of Roundup will increase to $4 billion per year in 5 years. By early in the next century, Monsanto fully expects to be THE source of the world’s food and is doing whatever it takes to make its dream come true. Other agribiz/biotech corporations are desperately fighting for "their share".

Where Will These Profits Come From?

The "Third World" countries are being ripped off in even more ways than the rest of the world, first as the unpaid sources for the genes that are being spliced into the new mega-profitable patented crops and again as they are made more and more dependent on big agribusiness. Small farmers in all countries can see their extinction on the horizon. It may be that, after cross-pollination occurs and spreads and after the drifting of ever-increasing clouds of crop-dusted pesticides kill off all non-resistant crops, patented crops become the only ones that will grow anymore (and only giant agribusiness concerns will be able to afford the patented seed and accompanying pesticides that allow these crops to flourish), and there will be no other way for anyone in the world to get food than to get in line at the agribusiness foodstand.

So What IS Wrong with Frankenfoods, Anyway?

Because of lack of testing, there will be currently unknowable consequences on human and animal health. However, we do know that if you have any food allergies, you soon will not be able to tell if that unlabeled (and bio-engineered foods are not required to be labeled as such) vegetable or food product you are buying contains genes from something you are allergic to. (Are you prepared to grow all of your own food supply?)

One imminent result from a new product already on the market, "Maximizer" corn, which contains an ampicillin antibiotic resistant gene, is the increased spread of antibiotic resistance into animals and then humans. (Antibiotic resistance makes these sometimes crucial drugs less and less effective when they are really needed.) Probable consequences include increased strain on immune systems, more new diseases, and increased cancer rates.

As for the stories telling us that bioengineered crops will be able to use less pesticide or less-toxic pesticides and herbicides, such reports have been greatly exaggerated by PR firms receiving mega-bucks from agribusiness. It’s notable that many times more research is being done on ways to use greater quantities of highly toxic chemicals than on "less-toxic" methods.

Boo-boos and Surprises

What has reached the market so far is only the start of an onslaught of products, as biotech companies rush to cash in on their patented products and to develop more. And already this April, one "boo-boo" that supposedly "could never happen because of tight quality control and regulations" came to light: Monsanto had to recall some seed that contained an incorrect gene which had been inserted by accident. Research done in Denmark has shown that genetically-manipulated genes in crops can make their way into nearby weeds under field conditions. In this way, "genetic errors can propagate into the environment and permanently alter the natural world in ways that no one is prepared to understand" (Peter Montague, "Rachel’s Environment and Health Weekly, #549").

Another surprise is the speed with which insects are meeting the challenge of bio-engineering through their capacity to mutate. It had been hoped that bio-engineering toxins into crops would repel insects without need for external application of pesticides, but the insects turn out to be more than equal to the threat, adapting in one generation to toxins that were supposed to fend them off for four generations.

Note that there are non-toxic ways to deal with weeds and insects, but since promoting these ways would not funnel large amounts of money into the pockets of industry, they are not likely to get much respect from agribusiness.

Other Countries Fight US Agribusiness

Meeting at its World Congress in Geneva on April 15-18, the International Union of Food and Allied Workers' Associations (IUF) threw the weight of its 320 affiliated unions in 112 countries behind a call for a ban on gene-altered foods.

Egypt is proposing an import ban on transgenic (genetically-altered) foods, but because of US pressure has agreed to suspend it for three months.

European Union (EU) members have stated for years that they do not want bio-engineered food. But since their protests were ignored by US agribusiness, their next demand was that bio-engineered food must be labeled as such. However, they are finding that the US intends to go ahead and ram its products down their throats, because "separating the sources of crops is not economically feasible."

In June, major US agribiz companies signed a letter to President Clinton urging him to threaten the European Union with sanctions in order to force genetically modified crops on the European market. The letter instructs the President that the EU’s objections are based on emotions, not science, and clearly states "that segregation of bulk commodities is not scientifically justified and is economically unrealistic."

Regulatory authorities in European countries such as the UK, Austria, Luxembourg and Denmark objected to the approval of transgenic maize because of the possible spread of antibiotic resistance. However they were overruled by the EU Commission under massive pressure from the USA.

The Clinton administration is guilty of collusion in this money-grabbing scheme, force-feeding bio-engineering to the world by promoting it as another "end to world hunger", while in fact it is one of the biggest scams going today – a scam to steal the resources, control, and most probably the health of the peoples of the world.

Different Approaches in Other Countries

Patent laws in Brazil, India, and Argentina forbid the patenting of pharmaceuticals on the grounds that drugs are of such great importance that no one should have the right to monopolize them. Colombian researcher Dr. Manuel Patarroyo recently gave the World Health Organization exclusive royalty-free rights on an antimalaria vaccine he developed. "We wanted to do this for the benefit of humanity," he explained.

Ironically, the European attitude toward bioengineering is influenced by their history of colonialism and the taking of many resources from the "new world" without payment. They say that to now claim that such things can be patented and to require payment for their use would be contrary to their historical actions.

According to a Dutch Green Party member of the European Parliament, "Ninety percent of the genetic resources which are used in our agricultural production come from the Third World. We have never asked if we ought to pay anything for them. And now for the biotechnology industry to demand monopoly property rights over them is utterly unjustifiable. Whether wild species or crop plants, genetic resources are the common heritage of humankind. All farmers must be guaranteed free access to them."

Ethics? What Ethics?

Bioengineers have set aside the ethical question of tampering with the cycle of life as an old-fashioned idea. Be that as it may, to presume that the current level of knowledge is adequate to allow us to "play god" with impunity seems incredibly foolish.

Why Say No:

According to GRAIN (Genetics Resources Action International), a European nonprofit organization promoting sustainable agriculture throughout the world, there are "12 reasons to say no to life patents."

To Storm Center

To Art Only