Genetically Modified Foods
The terms genetically-modified (GM) or genetically-engineered
(GE) foods and genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) refer to
crop plants created for human or animal consumption using the
latest molecular biology techniques. These techniques of modern
genetics have made possible the direct manipulation of the
genetic
makeup of
organisms. Combining genes from different organisms is known as
recombinant DNA technology and the resulting organism is said to
be "genetically modified," "genetically
engineered," or "transgenic." Cambridge Scientific
Abstracts has an excellent introduction to this topic entitled: Genetically
Modified Foods: Harmful or Helpful? (by Deborah B.
Whitman, April 2000). Like most human planetary management issues
today, such as global climate change, the GM foods issue is
hugely complex. GM foods have great promise and great dangers.
AAEA leans in the direction of aggressive market production with
needed oversight regulations in a global management context. If
all goes well, one thing is certain, we will have to feed about
12 billion people everyday in the next 50 years.
Good and evil are moral choices humans are free to make. As applied to technology, these moral choices present great opportunities and great dangers. We manipulate atoms to light our buildings and to make weapons of mass destruction. Companies produce chemicals to make our lives easier, but sometimes cut corners in the management, storage and disposal to maximize profits. We utilize coal, oil and gas for our cars, businesses and utility needs, but these same natural resources pollute our air and water without adequate protections. Twenty first century choices face us in stem cell research, cloning and genetically modified foods. Proponents and opponents present their cases and policy-makers are faced with protecting the public interest. Unfortunately, human history is littered with cases of indiscretions by people with evil intentions. It is within this context that we look at the case for genetically modified and engineered organisims and foods.
We support prudent use of genetically modified
foods. We believe that labels should be placed on all GM
products. We also understand the risks involved, but 
believe the
benefits far outweigh the costs. Starvation is much more
dangerous to more people than any threat presented by GM foods.
Droughts and famine are increasing throughout the world,
particularly on the continent of Africa. Although some
traditional environmental groups insist that they are simply
providing facts about potential health and environmental effects
of GM foods, others oppose it as a Frankenstein product. Of
course, none of these groups have programs to feed the world's
hungry. Some USA based social justice groups, such as the Africa
Faith & Justice Network are opposing USA policies that impose
GM food aid on southern African countries facing severe drought
and famine. In addition to concerns about health effects, they
think it is a tactic to blatantly benefit agri-business, not poor
and hungry people. We understand the health concerns, but see
nothing wrong with agri-business profiting from such exchanges.
Captialism feeds America. In fact, Americans are suffering more
from overeating than lack of food. As planetary managers, we must
understand that there are no benign systems that can provide for
human needs and we are obligated to protect the planet to the
maximum extent possible. One major advantage of GM food is that
crops genetically engineered to resist weeds and bugs enable
farmers to decrease pesticide and herbicide use. Of course,
superweeds and bugs could also be inadvertently created.
Planetary management is very complex and serious business.
The fight over the use of genetically modified corn provides a
good example to illustrate the issues involved in the use of this
product. Interestingly, one of the leading opponents to new GM
produce, Europe, has preliminarily approved
(January 2004)
the sale of GM corn via the European Commission. The Council of
Ministers will make a final decision this year. Opponents promise
to sue to stop the use of GM corn in the EU. Environmental
opponents believe GM products threaten biodiversity and will
release potentially harmful contaminants into the environment. We
support Friend of the Earth's proposed "GM Contamination and
Liability Bill" being introduced in the British Parliament.
The bill calls for a strict approach to any future planting of GM
crops, including those planted for trial purposes. It stipulates
minimum separation distances between GM and organic/conventional
crops, clarifys liability issues if cross-contamination occurs,
and ensures the regulation of GM is simple and that all
overseeing bodies are self-funded. We do not support the Five
Year Freeze associated with the bill.
Genetically modified technology will not eliminate hunger and
malnutrition because dysfunctional governments and economies
create problems with production, access and distribution of food.
Flawed policies, greed and imcompetence will always keep some
people in ignorance and poverty. However, GM foods can improve
survivability and increase productivity of plants in inhospital
conditions. GM foods can also reduce the need to use large
quantities of herbicides and
pesticides. Of
course, this does not stop Mendocino County, California --
considered by some to be the center of America's
anti-biotechnology movement-- from holding a vote to prohibit GM
plants and animals from being raised or kept in the county. Such
anti-GM entitites consider it to be the biggest uncontrolled
biological experiment going on in the world today. Although proof
of serious harm to humans, animals and plants has yet to be
definitively proven, opponents fear that humans and the
environment could be damaged through accidental cross-pollination
of GM products with natural plants. This is a legitimate fear,
but is not sufficient to ban the use of all GM products.
Proponents point out that negative effects are nonexistent,
pointing out that not a single stomach ache has been reported
since the Food and Drug Administration first approved genetically
engineered crops for human consumption in 1994. Great Britain's
Food Standards Agency also favors the use of GM foods. Of course,
most health effects of concern, including cancer and the results
of long-term damage to the immune system take years to become
evident. And then there would be the complex task of directly
associating any damaging effects with GM products.
All types of foods and organisms have been
genetically engineered: corn, cotton, tomatoes, soybeans,
sugarbeets, oilseed rape, maize, salmon, pigs, cows, and the list
goes on. With about 6 billion people eating everyday, we need
every reasonable tool known to man to assure adequate nutrition
for Earth's residents. GM 
foods, property
utilized, can help meet these needs in a number of ways: pest
resistance, herbicide tolerance, disease resistance, cold
tolerance, drought tolerance and salinity toleranc, among others.
Many countries are growing GM crops: U.S., Canada, China,
Argentina, Australia, Bulgaria, France, Germany, Mexico, Romania,
South Africa, Spain and Uruguay. Interestingly, according the
USDA approximately 54% of all soybeans cultivated in the U.S. in
2000 were genetically-modified. In the U.S., three government
agencies have jurisdiction over GM foods: EPA evaluates GM plants
for environmental safety, the USDA evaluates whether the plant is
safe to grow, and the FDA evaluates whether the plant is safe to
eat. Mandatory food labeling is also a complex issue. The FDA's
current position on food labeling is govered by the Food, Drug
and Cosmetic Act, which is only concerned with food additives,
not whole foods or food products that are considered GRAS
(Generally Recognized As Safe). The FDA contends that GM foods
are substantially equivalent to non-GM foods, and therefore not
subject to more stringent labeling. If all GM foods and food
products are to be labeled, Congress must enact sweeping changes
in the existing food lableling policy. The Genetically Engineered
Food Right to Know Act (HR 2916) is probably a good place to
start for food labeling.
Just as AAEA supports nuclear power with the belief that there
should be serious oversight, we support the use of modified foods
in the same way. We believe that traditional environmental groups
go to far in calling for a ban on nuclear power and GM. They
could still provide 95% of the same constructive criticisms and
oversight in these areas, but are extremist when calling for bans
on useful, relatively safe products. We understand that part of
this extremism partially comes as a
reaction to the
extremism of greedy, unscrupulous capitalists abusers. As part of
a minority group with a long history of disadvantage, we do not
have time for these games. However, we have serious concerns
about human genetic engineering, particular cross species
modifications and cloning. We fear that the Hitlerian contingent
will take experiments with human DNA into an area of
manufacturing humans for some ungodly reason and mad scientists
will inexorably attempt to pierce the species genetic barrier and
mix humans with animals FOR IMPROVEMENTS. Cinema has caught these
images in The Matrix and The Island of Dr. Moreau.
We would join our extremist colleagues in the traditional
environmental movement in calling for a total ban on this type of
unethical and immoral activity.