 |
Tuesday July 20 1999
Winnipeg Free Press (Canada)Bio-tech worries crop up
DataSpecials Penni Mitchell Canada is plowing ahead with an
experimental harvest that could yield higher returns for farmers and
billions of dollars for the companies that own the seeds for
genetically modified (GM) canola, corn, soybeans.
Worries that GM crops might damage organisms or markets for some of
Canada's agricultural exports, however, continue to crop up.
The controversy hinges on the federal government's approval of about
40 GM varieties without long-term safety tests to determine whether
foreign DNA spliced into corn, canola, soy or potatoes might harm soil
micro-organisms, insects or us.
The bio-tech industry insists that transgenic crops are a natural
progression from traditional plant breeding, which involves combining
characteristics from the same species.
Biotechnology mixes DNA from species that would never make the genetic
jump on their own: a bacterial pesticide is spliced into GM potatoes
and corn; canola is genetically altered so that farmers can repeat
applications of a single company's herbicide without worrying about
killing the plant. In some cases, yields increase; other Manitoba
farmers report higher yields from conventional canola.
The Sierra Club of Canada says that consumers have no way of knowing
which foods they eat contain GM products. It's launched a campaign
encouraging consumers to demand grocery stores stop selling food
containing GM products. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency estimates
that up to 75 per cent of all processed foods are made with canola,
corn, or soy beans. About 57 per cent of the canola, 45 per cent of
corn, and 20 per cent of soy grown in Canada comes from genetically
modified seeds.
As early as 1996, Japan, Canada's chief canola importer, expressed
concerns about GM canola, according to Winnipeg journalist Ingeborg
Boyens in her new book, Unnatural Harvest. This year, concerns arose
over a Japanese study suggesting that rats fed Canadian canola (GM and
conventional canola are combined) had shorter life spans -- 40 per
cent shorter. The federal government's retort was that the Japanese
rats used were not representative of humans.
It's a familiar argument; in fact it's the same one Monsanto used to
explain why its genetically altered growth hormone for cows could
cause lab rats to develop cysts and immune deficiencies, but remain
safe for humans.
The same rationale might apply to the computer-controlled model of the
human stomach and intestines created recently by Dutch scientists, who
calculated that DNA from food genetically altered with
antibiotic-resistant genes can transfer to bacteria in the human gut,
increasing the risk of mutant superbugs.
Or to Scottish rats fed GM potatoes by Dr. Arpad Pusztai. He found
that those eating regular potatoes were fine; those fed GM potatoes
suffered damage to their immune systems, kidneys and spleens.
A study in Iowa that found GM corn had a lethal effect on insects
other than those corn pests the seed was created to repel has caught
the attention of University of Guelph researchers. They plan to find
out whether corn containing DNA from a pesticide bacteria called
bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), has a lethal effect in Canadian fields.
In Canada, it took a near revolt of senators to stop milk from cows
given a genetically altered growth hormone from going on the market.
The episode revealed the extent to which the bio-tech industry's
agenda has become government's.
In March, Canada helped sink plans to create an international protocol
that would put controls on GM commodity crops like soy, corn and
canola. With one third of Canada's exports coming from the agriculture
sector, Canada could become vulnerable to global demands for non-GM
products. A danger lies, according to the U.S. Secretary of
Agriculture, in putting all of our eggs in the bio-tech basket. "We
can't force these genetically engineered food products down people's
throats."
Forcing GM food on consumers against their will is fueling the
influential consumer and farmer-led revolt in Europe, Asia and South
America. Three of Europe's largest food producers are phasing out GM
ingredients; McDonalds in Britain has promised to go GM-free; Greece
has called for a Europe-wide boycott on GM trade. Markets in Europe
are increasing for Australia's non-GM canola and prompting a push for
organic farming.
Pat Mooney of the Rural Advancement Foundation International, a
watchdog on genetic engineering, told a Winnipeg audience on a warm
evening recently that Canada needs a full public debate. We need to
hear more from independent scientists, as well as food producers like
Galen Weston, the head of Canada's largest food-seller, who indicated
a willingness to consider labeling if consumers want it. The one thing
consumers don't want, NDP health critic Judy Wasylycia Leis says, is
to be guinea pigs for the bio-technology industry.
Penni Mitchell is co-ordinating editor of Herizons magazine. Her
column appears on Tuesdays. |