Print

"We already know today that most of the problems that are to be addressed via Golden Rice and other GMOs can be resolved in matter of days, with the right political will." Hans Herren, winner of the World Food Prize 1995
---

Issue #7           G E A N   U p d a t e      Feb 17, 2001
Published by Genetic Engineering Action Network, USA
Editor: Andy Zimmerman, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

A while has passed since our last Update. And so much has been  going on! In this special issue we'll catch up with some of the major  events.

*It's been a long road since the Organic Food Production Act was  passed in 1990. But soon U.S. federal organic standards will go into  effect. In December, the Agriculture Department released an almost- final organic rule. It's not perfect, but it's far more honest effort than the  travesty released in 1997, which would have allowed genetic  engineering, irradiation and sewage sludge into organic food production.  More than 270,000 comments from citizens seem to have done the  trick. (Philip Brasher, "National Organic Standards Released,"  Associated Press, Dec. 21, 2000.)

*Also weighing in during the presidential interregnum was the Food and  Drug Administration, with its squirrely new proposed regulations for  genetically engineered foods. The FDA would make it compulsory for  companies to notify it when introducing a new genetically engineered  crop, but would require no new safety testing. And far from requiring  labels on engineered food, the regulations would prohibit the  designation "GMO free" - replacing it with bureaucratese like "not  derived through biotechnology."

As Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, said, "It seems the aim of this  proposal is purely public relations. It tries to convince consumers that  their government is protecting them. In fact, the government is  protecting industry." Activist groups have called on their supporters to  make their opinions known. (Tina Hesman, "FDA Rejects Mandatory  Labeling of Biotech Food," St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Jan. 18, 2001;  Center for Food Safety, http://centerforfoodsafety.org/.)

*In issuing its proposals, FDA disregarded its own focus groups, which  it had convened to find out how ordinary folks feel about eating strange  genes. A secret FDA report leaked by U.S. Public Interest Research  Group reveals that participants reacted with "outrage that such a  change in the food supply could happen without them knowing about it."  (Mark Kaufman, "Consumers Want Engineered Food Labeled,"  Washington Post, Feb. 13, 2001.)

*If they become final, the FDA's new rules will cramp the efforts of  companies which are responding to growing public demand for GMO  free food. Gardenburger has announced that it will begin making its  soyburgers from non-GMO beans.  In response, Boca Foods, which is  owned by the Kraft Foods unit of Philip Morris, is offering an organic  line of soyburgers. (Gardenburger,  http://www.gardenburger.com/our_co/prg_12132000.html; Just-food.com, http://www.just-food.com/news_detail.asp?art=23088.)

*Meanwhile, a thorough review of the environmental effects of  transgenic crops raised more questions than it answered. The report,  published by two respected U.S. government scientists in Science  magazine, found that the basic research to address the dangers of  biotech agriculture has just not been done. In a pointed analysis for the  New York Times, Carol Kaesuk Yoon wonders whether it ever will  be. "For example," she writes, "some scientists have estimated that  that answering just a single question of risk for a single organism -  whether a type of biotech corn harms the monarch butterfly - would cost  $2 million to $3 million, more than the Agriculture Department typically  grants each year for the study of environmental risk." A spokesman for  the biotech industry told her that though more research on risks should  be done, the industry should not have to pay for it. (Carol Kaesuk  Yoon, "What's Next for Biotech Crops? Questions," New York Times,  Dec. 19, 2000.)

*StarLink, the rogue variety of corn that ends up everywhere it  shouldn't, has stayed in the news. Its producer, Aventis, has reached a  settlement with the attorneys general of seventeen states which will  result in the company paying somewhere between $100 million to $1  billion to farmers. After the settlement, further lawsuits by farmers  against Aventis will still be possible. ("Recompense Set on Altered  Corn," Associated Press, Jan. 24, 2001.)

*To mark the changing of the guard in Washington, Greenpeace  dumped a ton of StarLink outside new EPA administrator Christine  Todd Whitman's office. Whitman is reportedly about to appoint ex- Monsanto lobbyist Linda Fisher as her deputy. All in all, the pro-biotech  tilt of the new administration seems not too different from that of the old  one. Dan Glickman, who as Bill Clinton's Agriculture Secretary was a  staunch biotech advocate, has been rewarded with a position at the  influential lobbying firm Akin Gump. One of his responsibilities will be -  you guessed it - biotechnology. (True Food Network,  http://truefoodnow.org/inside_scoop/archives/010207-tf-dcdump.html; Al  Kamen, "Fisher Being Seconded to Whitman," Washington Post, Feb.  7, 2001; Judy Sarasohn, "Ex-USDA Chief Glickman Joins Akin Gump,"  Washington Post, Feb. 8, 2001.)

*New clouds of confusion have been wafting over biotechnology from  the direction of human genetics. The sequencing of the human genome,  hyped as one of the great scientific achievements of all time, turned out  to be an embarrassing anticlimax, as the bulk of the anticipated  100,000 human genes seem to have gone missing. Neither Craig  Venter, impresario of  Celera Genomics, nor the taxpayer-funded  Human Genome Project could find more than 30,000 or so. In fact,  Venter admitted that he has identified only three hundred human genes  which do not also appear in mice! (Nicholas Wade, "Genome's Riddle:  Few Genes, Much Complexity," "Genetic Sequence of Mouse Is Also  Decoded," New York Times, Feb. 13, 2001.)

The very definition of the word "gene" was suddenly in play, as Venter's  rival, William Haseltine of Human Genome Sciences, held fast to his  claim of having identified 100,000 genes using a different method. The  showmen sparred, to the chagrin of journalists and investors who had  been led to believe that this drama was very much further along than it  is. (Andrew Pollack, "Double Helix with a Twist," New York Times, Feb.  13, 2001.)

Once fervent genetic determinists are now beginning to mute their  views, realizing that we've barely begun to understand the complex  relationships between an organism, its genes and its environment. As  Venter himself recently conceded, "We don't know shit about biology."  (Ralph Brave, "Decoding the Genome," salon.com, Jan. 9, 2001.)

*Yet we continue to fool around with it. A rhesus monkey has now been  cloned in Oregon. Monkeys, of course, are higher primates - our close  cousins. Gerald Schatten, the leader of the project, has disclaimed any  interest in making designer babies. (Maggie Fox, "Scientists  Genetically Engineer a Monkey," Reuters, Jan. 11, 2001.)

*Not so shy is Panos Zavos, the latest entry in the human cloning  sweepstakes. Zavos seems more serious than other aspiring cloners  like physicist Richard Seed or the Raelian cult. A professor of  reproductive physiology, Zavos runs a Kentucky fertility clinic with his  wife, who is an obstetrician and gynecologist. He plans to perform his  experiments somewhere in the Mediterranean region an with  international team of researchers. Asked about the human suffering that  would ensue if something went wrong with the procedure, Zavos  replied, "Tell me any invention that didn't have its failures first." (Rick  Weiss, "U.S. Fertility Expert Announces Effort to Clone a Human,"  Washington Post, Jan. 27, 2001.)

*With so many scoundrels on the scene, it's pleasant to be able to be  able to report on a hero. That would be Jose Bove, the fiery French sheep  farmer who's taken his global crusade against corporatization of  agriculture to Brazil. On January 26, while attending the World Social  Forum, a response to the World Economic Forum in Switzerland, Bove  joined more than a thousand members of the Landless Workers  Movement as they took over a Monsanto experimental farm and pulled  up genetically engineered corn and soybean plants. Though biotech  crops are illegal in Brazil, Monsanto was growing them through a  controversial arrangement with the federal government. ("French  Activist Arrested in Brazil," Associated Press, Jan. 30, 2000.)

Jose Bove came to prominence after serving time in jail for trashing  a McDonald's that was under construction. He was protesting punitive  American tariffs against Roquefort cheese, imposed in retaliation  against France's refusal to accept American hormone-raised beef.   Later, Bove played an important part in the Seattle protest against the  World Trade Organization. He's likely to turn up in Quebec City, where  massive anti-globalization protests are planned against the April  negotiations on the Free Trade Agreement for the Americas.

*Next weekend you'll be able to meet an amazing number of heroes in  one place. The International Forum on Globalization is coming to New  York City with a teach-in on Technology and Globalization. It will be an  opportunity to constellate with some of the brightest lights of our  movement. We'll mention a few who have worked on biotech issues -  Jeremy Rifkin, Vandana Shiva, Andrew Kimbrell, Maude Barlow, David  Suzuki, Richard Hayes, Joan Gussow, Debra Harry, Martin Teitel,  Anuradha Mittal, Pat Roy Mooney, Arpad Pusztai, John Stauber. If  you're with in striking distance of New York, it would be a shame to  miss this. Feb. 24 and 25, Hunter College, 695 Park Ave. at 68th St.  For more info, contact 212 219 2527 ext. 110 or 888 629 9269 or  This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. (International Forum on Globalization,  http://www.ifg.org/nyc.html.)

The Genetic Engineering Action Network, USA exists to support and  further the work of those organizations and individuals working to  address the risks to the environment, biodiversity and human health, as  well as the socioeconomic and ethical consequences of genetic  engineering. To contact GEAN, e-mail us at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or  visit us on the web at http://www.geaction.org/.