Franken Foods: U.S. awash with experimental GM crops - new report

[Guest guest]

GMW: U.S. awash with experimental GM crops - new report

" GM WATCH " <info

 

Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:08:17 +0100

 

 

 

U.S. awash with experimental GM crops - new report

More than 47,000 field tests were authorized between 1987 and 2004

 

 

GM WATCH daily

http://www.gmwatch.org

------

The US is awash with poorly regulated experimental GM crops, a new

report from the Texas Public Interest Research Group (TexPIRG) makes

clear.

 

More than 47,000 field tests were authorized between 1987 and 2004 by

the US Department of Agriculture - a government agency many consider

little more than the marketing branch of the industry it's supposed to be

regulating.

http://www.newstarget.com/001395.html

 

This casts new light on US plans to routinely allow unapproved

genetically engineered proteins that

contaminate US food crops and hence exports.

http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=5077

 

The report also reveals that nearly 70% of all field tests conducted in

the last year now contain secret genes classified as " Confidential

Business Information, " which means that the public has no access to

information about the experiments being conducted in their communities.

 

Press release and exective summary below, including very useful lists

of key findings.

 

To read the new report in full

http://www.pirg.org/alerts/route.asp?id2=16715

------

1.For Immediate Release: April 13, 2005

 

 

New Study Reveals Thousands of Field Tests of Genetically Engineered

Crops Across the U.S.

http://www.texpirg.org/TX.asp?id2=16756 & id3=TX &

 

More than 47,000 field tests of genetically engineered crops were

authorized by the Department of Agriculture between 1987 and 2004 despite

serious environmental threats and inadequate regulations in place to

monitor their impacts, according to a new report released today by

TexPIRG.

1494 of these field test sites are located in Texas. Crops tested

include corn, cotton, rice and potato.

 

Although USDA has yet to amend its regulations after being excoriated

by the National Academy of Sciences for inadequate expertise, PIRG's

analysis reveals a large increase in crops engineered to produce

pharmaceutical and industrial chemicals as well as large numbers of

experiments

of crops never tested before.

 

The report, Raising Risk: Field Testing of Genetically Engineered Crops

in the U.S., highlights potential risks associated with the release of

genetically engineered plants. The results of large scale field trials

conducted over many years were just published in the March 2005

Proceedings of the Royal Society demonstrating adverse effects on

wildlife,

but experiments conducted in the United States continue to be piecemeal

and short term. Scientists have criticized research in this country as

deliberately designed to hide any harm.

 

" Our environment is being used as a laboratory for widespread

experimentation on genetically engineered organisms with profound

risks that,

once released, can never be recalled, " said Field Organizer Bill Blome.

" Until proper safeguards are in place, this unchecked experiment should

stop. "

 

Findings of the new TexPIRG report include:

 

- As of January 2005, the fourteen states and territories that have

hosted the greatest number of field test sites are: Hawaii (5,413),

Illinois (5,092), Iowa (4,659), Puerto Rico (3,483), California (1,964),

Nebraska (1,960), Pennsylvania (1,707), Minnesota (1,701), Texas (1,494),

Indiana (1,489), Idaho (1,272), Wisconsin (1,246), Georgia (1,051), and

Mississippi (1,008).

 

- Since 1991, USDA has received 240 requests for 418 field releases of

crops engineered to produce pharmaceuticals, industrial chemicals, or

other so-called biopharmaceuticals; the number of requested field

releases of " biopharm " crops increased from 22 in 2003 to 55 in 2004.

 

- Nearly 70% of all field tests conducted in the last year now contain

secret genes classified as " Confidential Business Information, " which

means that the public has no access to information about experiments

being conducted in their communities.

 

- The ten crops authorized for the greatest number of field releases

are corn, soybean, cotton, potato, tomato, wheat, creeping bentgrass,

alfalfa, beet, and rice.

 

- USDA authorized field tests on several crops for the first time in

2003 and 2004, including American chestnut, American elm, avocado,

banana, eucalyptus, marigold, safflower, sorghum, and sugarbeet.

 

These experimental genetically engineered crops are grown in the open

environment to test the outcome and environmental impact of certain gene

combinations. The group charged that field testing genetically

engineered crops in such a widespread way poses serious threats to the

environment and neighboring farmers.

 

According to Joan Gundermann, owner and operator of Gundermann Farms,

local organic farmers are increasingly concerned about their

livelihoods. " As an organic farmer, I have to be able to certify that

my crops

meet certain criteria. The risk of pollen drift means that I might not be

able to sell my crops. If I can't sell my crops, I can't stay in

business—that's the hard reality. "

 

" Any new technology must be tested, but there are important scientific

issues that must be addressed before genetically engineered foods can

be released into the environment even in the context of testing, " said

Bill Blome. " To conduct field tests before this has been done is both

premature and hazardous. It's like carrying out clinical trials of a drug

before the laboratory tests are complete. "

 

A major goal of the field tests is to obtain information about

potential ecological risks associated with genetically engineered

organisms.

However, independent reviews of the data collected by the Department of

Agriculture demonstrate that very little information has been gathered.

As a result, despite the large number of field experiments that have

occurred, fundamental questions about their impact remain unanswered,

including long-term impacts on the soil and nontarget species.

 

" The evidence continues to mount that the U.S. regulatory system is

based on the principle of 'don't look, don't find,' " said Blome.

" Conducting field tests that are poorly designed is taking large risks

without

any benefits. "

 

TexPIRG has called for a moratorium on genetically engineered foods

unless:

 

- Independent testing demonstrates safety,

 

- Labeling for any products commercialized honors consumers' right to

know, and

 

- The biotechnology corporations are held accountable for any harm

resulting from the products.

 

For More Information:

 

Stephanie Carter

 

(512) 479-0388

 

Bill Blome

 

(713) 933-22

------

2.Raising Risk: Field Testing of Genetically Engineered Crops in the

United States April

2005 TexPIRG

Education Fund

 

Executive Summary

http://www.texpirg.org/TX.asp?id2=16715 & id3=TX &

 

Although genetically engineered crops are still poorly understood,

corporations and universities are growing them experimentally in the open

environment with little oversight and public notification. Never before

in the history of the planet have we been able to transfer genes across

natural species barriers, creating unheard of combinations like

tomatoes with fish genes, or even pigs with human genes. Contrary to

assertions made by proponents of the technology, genetic engineering

is not

precise. Scientists cannot control where the gene is inserted into the

host's genetic code, nor guarantee stable expression of the gene in the

new genetically engineered organism. As a result, genetic engineering

raises a host of ecological and human health risks, and these concerns

have not been adequately addressed.

 

The biotechnology industry began field testing genetically engineered

plants and crops in the 1980s. Field tests are supposed to determine the

impact of the new crops on the environment and how well the plants

function. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), however, failed to

adequately regulate these field tests from the start, and its oversight

has weakened over time. An analysis by the General Accounting Office (now

the Government

Accountability Office) in 1988 roundly criticized shortcomings in

USDA's oversight, echoing calls by prominent microbiologists, ecologists,

and others that certain regulatory decisions were " scientifically

indefensible. " USDA has continued to weaken its oversight of the

technology

despite little empirical evidence on which to base such decisions.

 

USDA's inadequate oversight of these field tests poses immediate risks.

Nonnative organisms can invade and degrade ecosystems. Plants

engineered to produce proteins with insecticidal properties may damage

the soil

or harm so-called non-target species. Plants engineered to be virus

resistant can cause new viral strains to evolve through

recombination or make existing viruses more severe. And if field

experiments are not properly monitored, genetic pollution can result,

putting

farmers' livelihoods, the environment, and human health at risk. In

essence, our environment is serving as the laboratory for widespread

experimentation of genetically engineered organisms with profound

risks that

can never be recalled once released.

 

Moreover, USDA has failed to require adequate data collection on field

tests of genetically engineered crops, leaving the true impacts of

these new creations still largely unknown. According to a review of

the 85

most recent reports of field tests available in 1995, some of the most

fundamental tests necessary to determine ecological effects, such as

impacts on nontarget insects, were never even conducted. As the authors

of the report concluded, this is a classic example of a " don't look,

don't find " regulatory framework. Similarly, the National Academy of

Sciences found serious shortcomings in USDA's oversight, saying the

agency at times " lacked scientific rigor, balance, transparency " and

chastising the agency for " inadequate expertise. "

 

Key Report Findings

 

Raising Risk examines USDA data on field tests of genetically

engineered crops in order to document the geographic breadth of these

open air

experiments and to demonstrate the implications of USDA's inadequate

oversight.

 

Key findings include:

 

- Between 1987 and 2004, USDA received 11,090 applications for field

releases of genetically engineered crops. USDA has approved 10,296 of

these applications, allowing 18,608 field releases comprised of 47,219

field test sites. Overall, USDA has served as a rubber stamp for

applications to conduct field tests, rejecting only 3.6 percent of all

applications submitted.

 

- As of December 2004, 14 states and territories have hosted more than

1,000 field test sites. They are Hawaii (5,413), Illinois (5,092), Iowa

(4,659), Puerto Rico (3,483), California (1,964), Nebraska (1,960),

Pennsylvania (1,707), Minnesota (1,701), Texas (1,494), Indiana (1,489),

Idaho (1,272), Wisconsin (1,246), Georgia (1,051), and Mississippi

(1,008).

 

- Since 1991, USDA has received 240 requests for 418 field releases of

crops engineered to produce pharmaceuticals, industrial chemicals, or

other so-called biopharmaceuticals; the number of requested field

releases of " biopharm " crops increased from 22 in 2003 to 55 in 2004.

 

- The ten crops authorized for the most field releases are corn,

soybean, cotton, potato, tomato, wheat, creeping bentgrass, alfalfa,

beet,

and rice.

 

- USDA authorized field tests on several crops for the first time in

2003 and 2004, including

American chestnut, American elm, avocado, banana, eucalyptus,

marigold, safflower, sorghum, and sugarbeet.

 

- Between 1987 through 2004, Monsanto (or a wholly-owned subsidiary)

submitted the most applications for field tests (4,279). The ten

universities submitting the most requests to conduct field tests are

Iowa State

(129), University of Idaho (102), Rutgers (102), University of Kentucky

(80), University of Florida (78), Oregon State (69), Stanford (63),

Michigan State (62), University of Arizona (55), and North Carolina State

(52).

 

-The percentage of field tests conducted with genes considered

Confidential Business Information and thus hidden from public scrutiny

has

increased dramatically, rising from 0 percent in 1987 to 70 percent in

2004.

 

Recommendations

 

Although USDA has authorized more than 47,000 field tests of

genetically engineered organisms, USDA, the Environmental Protection

Agency, and

the Food and Drug Administration have not adequately answered

fundamental questions about the human

health, environmental, social, and ethical implications of this

technology. Field tests of

genetically engineered crops only should occur within a thorough and

comprehensive ecological framework to assess their full impact. In order

to make progress toward this goal, we recommend a moratorium on the

commercialization of genetically engineered foods and crops unless:

 

- independent safety testing demonstrates they have no harmful effects

on human health or the environment;

 

- the public's right to know about field tests is improved and any

products commercialized are labeled; and

 

- the biotechnology corporations that manufacture them are held

accountable for any harm they may cause.

 

 

 

-----------