Genetic Engineering and Agriculture

OTA endorses the National Organic Standards Board’s recommendation that the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and their derivatives be prohibited in organic production and handling systems. The use of GMOs is an unproven technology and one that an organic agricultural system does not need in order to grow high quality and nutritious food. Furthermore, there is insufficient scientific data regarding the long-term effects GMOs may have on the environment or on human health. Due to concerns about the impact of GMOs on the environment and organic production, OTA has called for a moratorium on their use in all agriculture.

A GMO is "an organism that has been modified by the insertion of DNA by human intention. It is usually DNA which has been modified or ‘engineered’ to suit a particular purpose (recombinant DNA is the same thing). The DNA can be from a foreign organism, from the same organism or it may be a sequence synthesized in a laboratory." (Lynn M. Hartweek, Ph.D., Agronomy Department, University of Wisconsin, Madison, May 1997)

GMOs are "made with techniques that alter the molecular or cell biology of an organism by means that are not possible under natural conditions or processes."(National Organic Standards Board)

An ABCNews.com random poll of 1,024 adults conducted nationwide during June 2001 showed that 93% favor mandatory labels on genetically modified foods, with 57% saying they’d be less likely to buy foods labeled as genetically modified, and 5% saying they’d be more likely to purchase it. At the same time, 52% said they’d be more likely to buy food that is labeled as having been produced organically.

Seventy-five percent of Americans polled in a January 2001 survey for the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology said they want to know whether their food contains GE ingredients. Of those polled, 46% did not know what to think about the safety of GE foods; of those with an opinion, half believed GE foods are safe, and half believed they are unsafe. Full survey results were posted at http://www.pewagbiotech.org/  In a subsequent survey conducted in June 2001 for the Pew Initiative, 45% of poll respondents said they were not confident in the government’s ability to ensure consumer safety of GE foods.

The large biotechnology companies are the ones who benefit from the production of GE crops, and have a vested interest in selling their products to the world. They are taking steps to make farmers more dependent on their seeds and chemicals through such developments as Terminator and Traitor technologies. Terminator technology renders crops sterile after one growing season. Traitor technology makes crops "commit suicide" unless the farmer sprays a particular chemical on them. Certainly the developers of these products are not putting farmers first.

Also, there are many uncertainties over long-term ecological consequences of using genetic engineering in agriculture. For instance, a study at the Max-Planck-Institut für Züchtungsforschung in Germany showed that planting genetically modified potatoes changes the bacterial communities in soil. [Thomas Lukow, Peter F. Dunfield, and Werner Liesak, "Use of the T-RFLP technique to assess spatial and temporal changes in the bacterial community structure within an agricultural soil planted with transgenic and non-transgenic potato plants," FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 32 (3), 241-247 (2000)]

Historically, selected use of Bt as a crop application both in conventional and organic farming has been very effective against such pests as the European corn borer, cotton bollworm and tobacco budworm. However, by inserting the Bt bacteria into the DNA of crops, scientists have created synthetic pest-protected plants. These patented seed crops contain the Bt pesticide in their stalk, leaves and pollen, and generate the toxic effects of Bt for their entire life, including during decomposition. Researchers at New York University and the Venezuelan Institute of Scientific Investigators have shown that Bt toxin is exuded into the soil by the roots of Bt corn. Their results (Nature, Dec. 2, 1999) found the toxin persisted in various soils for at least 234 days.

Another concern is that if bugs become resistant to Bt, organic growers will lose the use of natural Bt as a pest control. Without Bt, organic farmers will be left with far fewer effective strategies, while conventional farmers, who also have relied on Bt sprays, will have to turn to pesticides that are more toxic.

There are other ecological uncertainties. Still unresolved is the debate over potential ill effects of Bt-engineered corn on monarch butterflies. Although study findings published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences web site (http://www.pnas.org/) in September 2001 implied the risk might be negligible, University of Minnesota ecologist Karen Oberhauser (one of the researchers) noted, "We still don’t have the data to come to the conclusion that the risks are negligible." Many of the studies occurred in laboratories and looked only at pollen. In cornfields, plants shed part of the anthers (the structures that produce pollen), and anthers tend to have higher concentrations of Bt than pollen does. "If an event that hurts monarchs or their host plant, milkweeds, should occur in cornfields, it could have population-wide impacts," she noted.

There is also the real threat of contamination of organic crops from genetic drift of genetically engineered pollen. As long as genetic engineering of crops is allowed, organic producers are at risk of their crops being exposed to background levels of GMOs.

Even the Ecological Society of America (ESA), a professional scientific society whose members are leaders in ecological research and education, have warned that scientists and governments should proceed with caution. ESA cited such potentially negative effects as creating new or more vigorous pests and pathogens, exacerbating the effects of existing pests through hybridization with related GE plants or animals, harm to non-target species (such as soil organisms, non-pest insects, birds and other animals), disruptive effects on biotic communities, and irreparable loss or changes in species diversity and genetic diversity within a species.

Despite claims that GE crops will boost food production, some researchers question whether GE seeds significantly increase the yield of crops. Indeed, in more than 8,200 field trials, Monsanto’s Roundup Ready seeds produced fewer bushels of soybeans than similar unmodified varieties, according to a study by Charles Benbrook, the former director of the Board on Agriculture at the National Academy of Sciences. [AgBiotech InfoNet Technical Paper #1, July 13, 1999]

The Organic Trade Association is the leading business association representing the organic industry in the United States, Canada, and Mexico. Its more than 1200 members include growers, processors, shippers, retailers, certification organizations and others involved in the business of producing and selling certified organic products.

© 2001, Organic Trade Association.