-
- In Part I of this Food Supply Update (July), I told
you about the decision by Seminis, the world's largest vegetable seed corporation
and controller of 40% of the US vegetable seed market, to eliminate 2,000
varieties of food seeds from its commercial offerings as part of a "global
restructuring and optimization plan." Though no longer available
commercially, the 2000 varieties would remain available to the company's
own breeders, according to a company spokesperson. You may also remember
that Seminis is a leader in genetic engineering of vegetables and owns,
at last count, 79 patents on the vegetables it modified, so the fact that
the 2000 pulled varieties would remain available to Seminis's own breeders
is no comfort. In fact, many consider it alarming. (Read Part I at http://www.arkinstitute.com )
-
- Our ongoing discussion of genetic modification of food
crop seeds and the potential for the virtual control of the global food
supply is not meant to single out any one company. The global, corporate
frenzy to patent genes of food and fiber plants as proprietary, that is,
as a company's legally defensible "intellectual property, continues
at warp speed despite mounting international protest from individuals,
organizations, scientists and governments who are aware of the potential
for abuse of such ownership. This is a global, ultra-high-biotech-lubricated
race to herd as many economically important food and fiber genes as possible
into individual corporations, intellectual property corrals. Witness one
of the latest:
-
- PRNewswire, September 7, 2000: "Ceres, Inc., a dedicated
plant genomics company, and Genset, a leading human genomics company, announced
today that they have completed a major gene sequencing project characterizing
several tens of thousands of genes in corn (Zea mays). Corn is economically
the most important crop in the United States with over 77 million acres
planted last year and a market value at the farm level of over $18 billion.
-
- Ceres president, Walter De Logi, states, "...Having
access to the sequences as well as the full-length physical clones of so
many corn genes will speed up our product development efforts in this economically
valuable crop.....Ceres continues to pursue an aggressive intellectual
property strategy and has filed patent applications covering several tens
of thousands of full-length genes, their regulatory regions and their functions
in various plant species. (Underlined for emphasis.)
-
- Wow! Patent applications on tens of thousands of full-length
plant genes and the regions that control them. That's a lot of intellectual
property! Note, too, his reference to their "functions in various
plant species and "their regulatory regions. Regulatory regions of
genes can be selectively manipulated to turn them on or off, effectively
dictating whether and when they will direct the synthesis of the proteins
they code for, how much, etc., and because many plants share the same
or similar genes, what you own and patent in corn could very well extend
your control of these same genes to other crops. If granted, it appears
the ownership and control of tens of thousands of corn and other plant
genes will legally change hands--from Creation to corporation.
-
- Legally, such patents would remove these plant genes
from the public domain. No longer would they be available for research
by public or private science laboratories bent on producing drought resistant
or higher yield crops for hungry regions of the world. It will be very
interesting to read all of these patent applications. Did they make a proprietary
molecular change to each full-length gene it sequenced in order to claim
each a unique, patent-worthy, manmade "invention, or did they simply
apply for a patent on God's own version of all "tens of thousands
of genes? Either way, the legal control will amount to the same thing.
-
- It is quite clear that there is a new global business
paradigm at work here. In the early part of the last century, the ultra-wealthy
became rich and powerful by the ownership and sales of tangible property--land
and oil. Cheap land provided the foundation, and oil the energy and lubrication
for building the most materially rich, industrialized societies the world
has ever known. Today's and tomorrow's super-rich and powerful are building
their empires on the ownership and sales (or lease) of intangible intellectual
property. Instead of building fences encompassing massive tracts of cheap
land, or pumping millions of gallons of black crude into corporate tanks,
biotech wizards corral the details of molecular structure and function
and seek to control elements of Nature's genius within the legal fences
of patents. DNA is the code, the software of life, itself, and we all
know how profitable it can be to own software with nearly universal application.
-
- Intellectual properties in the world of agriculture--genes
and the technologies designed to manipulate and control them, and chemicals
to kill weeds and stimulate or repress them--provide the financial incentive,
the motivation, the "lubrication of protected future profit engines
in return for the development of new crops. These crops are and will be
marketed as genetically improved, proprietary "inventions with higher
yields to feed current and future billions of mouths; crops to produce
vitamin A enhanced grains that could end diet-based blindness; crops to
produce more economical, easy to administer vaccines and drugs; crops to
produce new bio-fuels to replace dwindling oil supplies. The growing list
and possibilities, are nearly endless, and their stated intents altruistic,
even noble.
-
- Yet, we see in the Terminator, Verminator and other genetic
use restriction technologies (GURTS), the potential dark side of the genetic
intellectual property picture. These technologies boil down to genetically
programmed control of seed germination and/or chemicals that must be used
to ensure growth. Others involve a willful destruction of a plant's natural
disease resistance that can only be reactivated by buying a corporation's
chemicals. Inevitably they control people, especially the poor. The self-admitted
targets of most of the patent owners are 78 countries worldwide, especially
developing countries where seed is often saved by farmers and replanted,
making purchases unnecessary for years at a time. (If you aren't familiar
with Terminator and GURTs, see archived Updates at http://www.arkinstitute.com
. Also note there that The Ark Institute is still giving away its non-hybrid
seed. )
-
- Science, the same marvelous science that brings us medical
and technological miracles every day, also made these technologies possible.
How do the world's top scientists weigh in on the explosion of the corporate
intellectual property and genetically modified food issues? In my last
Update I promised you a report on July's high level working meeting of
scientists from seven top science academies, including five from developing
countries. The academies and the numbers of scientists who represented
the Councils of each Academy, the latter in parentheses, follow:
-
- Brazilian Academy of Sciences (4) Chinese Academy of
Sciences (3) Indian National Academy of Sciences (2) and (8) reviewers
Mexican Academy of Sciences (3) Royal Society of London (5) Third World
Academy of Science (1) United States National Academy of Sciences (5) and
(1) Staff Officer to the NAS Delegation
-
- Among the U.S. delegation were Harvard educated molecular
biologist and president of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, Bruce
Alberts, Nobel Laureate chemist, F. Sherwood Rowland, and a wheat researcher,
R. James Cook. Yes, it was a top-notch working group. Here are some relevant
excerpts from the white paper released by all of the global scientists
at the conclusion of the conference:
-
- "It is essential that we improve food production
and distribution in order to feed and free from hunger a growing world
population, while reducing environmental impacts and providing productive
employment in low-income areas....Goods can be produced through the use
of GM technology that are more nutritious, stable in storage, and in principle
health promoting bringing benefits to consumers in both industrialized
and developing nations. On intellectual property and patents, they said:
-
- "Private corporations and research institutions
should make arrangements to share GM technology, now held under strict
patents and licensing agreements, with responsible scientists for use for
hunger alleviation and to enhance food security in developing countries.
And.....
-
- "An important consideration regarding such intellectual
property rights in inventions and discoveries resulting from genomic research
and from other applications of biotechnology is that overly broad intellectual
property rights should not be granted.....it is important to consider the
impact of intellectual property rights on developing countries. To benefit
the growing populations of the developing world, new plant varieties will
have to be developed through a variety of sources, including: (i)farmers
who select plants that succeed best in their particular locality for the
retention of seed for future use or sale; (ii) public or pro bono research
institutions financed out of taxes or charitable grants that provide improved
varieties to appropriate users free or at cost; and (iii) for-profit companies
interested in creating new products and markets that develop new varieties
financed through profits from seed sales.... (underlined for emphasis)
-
- I think it is interesting to note that our own tax-funded,
public research institution, the USDA, has collaborated with a private,
for-profit company to patent Terminator technologies for mutual profit
(see original article at our web site) from seed sales, not to "provide
improved varieties to appropriate users free or at cost as suggested by
the scientists. We, the people of the United States, have literally funded
the creation of intellectual property holdings that can be used to deprive
farmers both here and abroad of public domain seed stocks. Do you think
this is an exaggeration? Here is a press release dated June 18, 2000:
-
- "Bolivia's National Association of Quinoa Producers
(ANAPQUI) is asking two professors at Colorado State University to abandon
their controversial patent on one of the country's most important food
crops, quinoa, a crop that feeds millions throughout the Andes, including
many Aymara and Quechua Indigenous People.
-
- "Our intellectual integrity has been violated by
this patent, said Luis Oscar Mamami, ANAPQUI's President. "Quinoa
has been developed by Andean farmers for millennia, it was not invented,
by researchers in North America...We demand that the patent be dropped
and that all countries of the world refuse to recognize its validity.
The president was scheduled to appeal to a Special Session of the General
Assembly of the United nations and presented the quinoa patent as a violation
of Human Rights before the International People's Tribunal on Human Rights
and the Environment.
-
- US Patent No. 5,304,718 grants CSU professors Duane Johnson
and Sarah Ward "exclusive monopoly control over a traditional Bolivian
variety know as Apelawa,.....the patent, issued in 1994, is valid until
the year 2011... According to the patent, this might include many traditional
varieties grown by peasant farmers in Bolivia, Peru, Ecuador and Chile
as well as varieties important in Bolivia's quinoa export market....Though
little known outside of the Andes, quinoa is becoming increasingly popular
in North America and Europe as an exceptionally nutritious food crop. Johnson
and Ward believe that their technique for hybridizing quinoa will increase
the crop's yield, making it better suited for commercial production in
the North.
-
- "The quinoa patent is a shocking example of bio-piracy,
RAFI's Executive Director Pat Mooney was quoted as saying. "Bolivian
farmers and researchers were stunned to learn of its existence. After
all, they freely shared their quinoa seeds and knowledge with the Colorado
State professors. (Colorado State University in Fort Collins, Colorado,
is that state's land-grant institution and, as such, is funded by government
for agricultural research.)
-
- Edward Hammond of RAFI was quoted, "There's something
terribly wrong when patent offices grant monopoly patents on food crops...This
is a dangerous and disturbing precedent, and it must not be allowed to
stand. Access to food and the universal Right to Food should not be left
in the hands of those who control patents on technology and germplasm.
(emphasis mine)
-
- The meeting of global academies of science also addressed
the issue of genetically modified food safety. They said there was a need
for "concerted, organized efforts on a global scale to quickly identify
potential health and environmental risks from GM crops. They said, "...public
health regulatory systems need to be put in place in every country to identify
and monitor any potential adverse human health effects of transgenic plants,
as for any other new variety.
-
- When I read this, "quickly identify potential health....risks,
I immediately thought of recent news concerning our current food inspection
programs. From this week's September 11th issue of Business Week....
-
- "There are only 126 USDA inspectors handling the
import of 16.7 million animals, mostly livestock and poultry, annually;
and only 91 U.S. Fish & Wildlife inspectors for some 21 million wild
animals200 million including fish. Also, USDA lab facilities are in dire
need of repair. According to a recent report, virtually every critical
system, including bio-containment, is antiquated....Could disaster strike
here? Experts say it's a matter of when, not if, pointing to several recent
catastrophes around the world.... They go on to cite mad cow disease in
Great Britain among a growing list of international food crises.
-
- Do you have faith that the USDA, with its now obvious
vested interest in the marketing of genetically modified seed and food,
will effectively monitor the entire national food supply--and any changes
in the health of the U.S. population--for "potential adverse human
health effects of transgenic (GM) plants? As I write this, CNN just reported
that genetically modified corn not approved for human consumption has just
been found in Taco Bell meals. The report claims the genetic modification
renders the corn difficult to digest in humans and could cause allergic
reactions. If accurate, this is the first in what may soon be thousands
of similar reports and, perhaps, lawsuits following GM food supply "accidents.
How will the USDA and even the FDA monitor all of these modified foods?
Here is a very recent example of current monitoring for already proven
risks of bacterial contamination ......
-
- (New York Times, August 27, 2000) "Agriculture
Department officials say they are discussing the possibility of loosening
their new standards for preventing salmonella contamination in ground beef
used for the nation's school lunch program.....Since June, the department,
which provides 70 percent of the ground beef used in schools, has required
that every batch it buys be free of salmonella. Before that there were
no standards for any pathogens, including salmonella, bacteria responsible
for about 600 deaths and 1.4 million illnesses last year... Meat processors
have been claiming that the standards are too difficult to meet and that
proper cooking kills the Salmonella anyway. "Faced with industry criticism,
department officials began to reconsider salmonella rules, according to
the NY Times article. Here's one more:
-
- Wednesday, September 6th, Reuters: "Americans face
a growing risk of eating feces, vomit and metal shards in meat and poultry
because the US Agriculture Department is allowing companies to perform
more of their own food safety inspections, two consumer groups and a labor
union said on Tuesday. Their survey of 451 federal inspectors showed many
were concerned that too much contaminated meat and poultry was slipping
through company production lines under the government's new safety procedures....Federal
inspectors check paperwork, not food, and are prohibited from removing
feces and other contaminants before products are stamped with the purple
USDA seal of approval, said Felicia Nestor, food safety director for the
Government Accountability project.
-
- It is obvious that we have problems with the contamination
and safety of our current food supply "just in terms of foreign substances
and bacterial contamination. Yet, U.S. supermarkets are already stocked
with a dizzying array of unidentified, genetically modified foods despite
our frightening lack of knowledge of their potential health hazards, and
our government's frequent failure to successfully monitor and regulate
them.
-
- The biotech genie is out of the bottle, and it is doubtful
it will ever be put back. It is far too powerful, and its potential for
good and for profit are far too great for man to ignore. Like the "oil
genie before it, it is lubricating whole industries, granting wishes for
soaring stocks and rich bottom lines. It might even be compared to nuclear
energy with its theoretical potential for both good and evil, but which
proliferated before we knew how to control it, dispose of its waste and
limit its spread. We still don't know!
-
- Biotechnology is a whole new power, creating a whole
new set of capabilities and worries. It is time our legislators and leaders
know that we demand the right to choose to buy GM seeds and foods or not--that
we want labels that clearly tell us if there are GM components in that
food. With such label information, the people will "vote" on
the issue with their wallets, and the food industry will respond accordingly.
We need to tell our representatives that there is so much we do not know
about the implications of genetically modifying our seed and food, that
we cannot afford to continue awarding profitable patents on life's software.
We may discover, all too late, that in the name of progress and profit,
we have irreparably damaged the code........Geri Guidetti, The Ark Institute
-
-
- MainPage
http://www.rense.com
-
-
-
- This
Site Served by TheHostPros
|