Lies of Biotech Industry: Don't Buy GE Red Herring

By Roberta Actor-Thomas
In his "Straight Poop" Green Chain column, Norm Benson uses a strange urban legend having nothing to do with labeling to confuse readers about the need to label GE food.

A basic rule of economics is that if buyers can't obtain complete and truthful information, it's not really a competitive free market. Neither big corporations nor the government can tell us that we aren't smart enough to be told what we're buying.

The "inconvenient truth" is that genetic engineering (GE) is not the same as selective breeding or natural cross-pollination. It's a new and dangerous technology that's causing health and environmental problems. Unlabeled GE food is banned in most countries where the government has to pay for people's health care -- just think about the implications of that.

The policies governing the release of GE crops into our food supply were written 20 years ago when many scientists still thought that one gene caused each genetic trait, a hypothesis that was disproved by the Human Genome Project. They thought 90 percent of our DNA was "junk DNA" that had no function.

Geneticists still know little about what is now called non-coding DNA, but it does perform essential functions such as regulation of protein-coding sequences. Guess it's true -- God doesn't make junk.

So why would anyone think it's a good idea to shoot genes into these complex molecules and then put them into our food when we don't even know what they do? Benson's article ignores the biotech industry's reckless disregard for scientific advances and the rush to profit regardless of the risks.

Incidentally, the proposed law doesn't require warnings on GE food. The ingredients will simply include the words "genetically modified" when the soy, corn, sugar or canola actually are genetically modified.

The Dangerously Deranged Ethics of Biotech Ag

By Steven McFadden
My unease about genetically engineered crops and animals dates back to the beginning. I had immediate concerns in the late 1980s and early 90s as I began to learn about the technology and associated marketplace machinations. Over the following decades as more and more facts emerged my concerns deepened.

Then just a couple of weeks ago my misgivings were rudely provoked to the forefront when I read an op-ed column by Nina Federoff, published in The New York Times. Her column amounted to a fact-deficient apologia for the GMO industry, and an exhortation to charge heedlessly forward with genetically engineered food. For me, and for millions of other people, this is a massively deranged and dangerous proposition.

So many factors are coming to a head now. Widespread famine, a global land grab, soaring food prices, a horde of profit-mad speculators, drought on the scale of the Dust Bowl, a host of other wildly wobbling environmental events, and a huge, well-organized, well-funded propaganda push by corporate industrial agriculture to claim that the only sensible way forward is with genetic engineering and its allied cauldron of petrochemical-based herbicides, fungicides, and pesticides. But it's not the only way forward. It is, instead, a profoundly perilous pathway encouraged by what I regard as dangerously deranged ethics.

After the Times published Federoff's column, well-reasoned rebuttals came swiftly from Anna Lappe writing for Civil Eats, from Tom Philpott in Grist, and from Marcia Ishii-Eiteman, Senior Scientist, Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA). Individually and collectively, their articles constitute a convincing, fact-backed refutation of Federoff's claims for GMO safety and suitability. They effectively assert the case for a global 21st century agrarian vision of human-scale organic sustainable farms and food.

DuPont Joins $20 Million PR Campaign to Defend Biotech and Chemical Ag

DuPont today joined an effort to bolster the image of agriculture and enhance public trust in the U.S. food production system. The initiative is led by the U.S. Farmers & Ranchers Alliance (USFRA), a new initiative represented by more than 40 of the leading farmer- and rancher-led agricultural organizations.

The USFRA was established in October 2010 and represents farmer and rancher organizations that reach nearly all aspects of U.S. agriculture. The Alliance will work to increase the role of U.S. farmers and ranchers as the voice of animal and crop agriculture on local, state and national food issues. It also will serve as a resource to food companies on the benefits of modern production agriculture and work with leading health, environmental and dietary organizations.

"DuPont is proud to support the U.S. Farmers & Ranchers Alliance as they bring together an unprecedented group that crosses all boundaries in modern agriculture with a single goal of building understanding about the dependable, abundant supply of food produced by today's farmers and ranchers," said DuPont Executive Vice President James C. Borel. "There is an increased need to reinforce the importance of agricultural contributions and its value to society, and promoting the merits of a career in agriculture also are essential to recruiting tomorrow's farmers and innovators."