Rare corporate courage and common sense 
Wal-Mart stands up to activist intimidation, ensuring affordable, wholesome food for customers 
Paul Driessen 
Good  for Wal-Mart! Despite intense pressure by anti-biotechnology activists,  the retailing giant didn’t cave in to demands that it “reject”  Monsanto’s genetically engineered (GE) sweet corn (maize). 
Other  retailers had capitulated to intimidation campaigns by Food and Water  Watch, Greenpeace and similar anti-technology groups: McDonald’s, Heinz,  Frito-Lay, Trader Joe’s, Whole Foods. So this rare display of corporate  courage, ethics and common sense should be applauded. 
FWW  launched its campaign in January 2012, claiming GE corn “hasn’t been  tested for human safety” and contains DNA traits that “are potentially  unsafe.” What utter nonsense. 
All biotech crops, including GE sweet corn, have gone through years of testing,  studies and approval processes by the FDA’s Center for Food Safety and  Nutrition, Agriculture Department’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection  Service, Environmental Protection Agency and other labs, before being  placed on the market. In fact, biotech crops have been tested far more  rigorously than any other foods (including organic products), hundreds  of peer-reviewed studies have determined that they are safe to eat. In  the 16 years since such crops were first introduced in 1996, people have  eaten more than two trillion servings of foods containing biotech ingredients – without a single documented case of injury to a person. 
We  all want safe, nutritious food, grown under the best agricultural and  environmental practices. That’s what makes biotechnology so important.  By precisely inserting specific traits into the genetic makeup of  important food crops, scientists have been able to make many foods  safer, equally or more nutritious, and better for the environment. The  following traits are especially important. 
Herbicide resistance. Corn that is resistant to Roundup or other herbicides enables farmers  to employ no-till techniques to control weeds, instead of using  cultivators to bury them too deep to grow. This preserves soil nutrients  and organic matter, increases water absorption and retention, and  significantly reduces erosion – improving soil fertility and crop  yields, while reducing irrigation and fuel costs. 
Insect resistance. A single gene (derived from a natural soil bacterium, Bacillus thuringiensis,  or Bt, and inserted into the corn genome) enables corn plants to make a  protein that is harmless to humans, but disrupts the digestive system  of insects that munch on the plants’ roots or kernels, while leaving  ladybugs, butterflies and other beneficial insects unaffected. The Bt  gene augments corn plants’ natural defenses,  slashes insecticide spraying (by up to 85% for sweet corn),  dramatically reduces corn borer (caterpillar) and rootworm (beetle  larvae) damage, keeps roots healthy and plants alive, and minimizes the  amount of insect-damaged corn ears that are left to rot in fields or are  rejected by consumers and thrown out by grocers. 
By killing insect borers in the ears, Bt corn largely eliminates pathways for fungal contamination that leads to dangerous levels of fumonisin in corn meal. This fungal toxin causes fatal diseases in horses and is linked to esophageal cancer in people and neural tube defects (like spinal bifida) in developing fetuses. 
These  benefits are hugely important for US farmers; for consumers who want  safe, affordable, nutritious food; and especially for farmers and  consumers in poor, drought-stricken, insect-plagued regions like Africa. They mean less land must be devoted to crops, leaving more  for wildlife habitat, thereby improving biodiversity and ensuring  sustainable agriculture. They explain why 10% of US sweet corn is already Bt (Syngenta introduced its Bt sweet corn more than a decade ago), 70% of processed  foods in American diets contain ingredients from biotech crops  (including corn, squash, soybeans, canola, sugarbeets and papayas), 88% of all corn (field and sweet) grown in the USA is  biotech, and 17 million farmers in 29 nations (90% in developing  countries) grow biotech crops on 395 million acres. 
Wal-Mart  doubtless understood all or most of this – and was not going be  bamboozled or intimidated by a few noisy activists who did not represent  its customers, sound science or the public interest. 
Those  activists may actually believe their allegations. They certainly know  how to generate letters and phone calls, harass businesses, and frighten  urban consumers who’ve never been on a farm, know little about how  their food is produced, don’t understand genetics or biotechnology, and  are thus susceptible to clever hoaxes and ridiculous claims by activists, who are often enlisted and paid by  organic producers and retailers that profit mightily from their land and  labor-intensive alternatives to conventional food. 
In  any event, Wal-Mart didn’t cave. So a few months later Food and Water  Watch sent out a “we give up” letter, whining that Wal-Mart had “ignored  the petitions, calls and public pressure” it had orchestrated. (Its  370-word letter included nine separate pitches for contributions.) 
FWW  also announced that it was launching a new campaign – to get state and  federal laws passed, requiring that all GE foods be labeled. The  proclaimed justification for labeling is that “people have a right to  know what’s in their food and how it is produced.” The real reason is  that labels will make it easier for anti-biotech activists to single out  and stigmatize biotech products, generate consumer anxiety, and  intimidate grocers into taking nutritious and perfectly safe products  off their shelves. 
While  “progressive” (anti-business) states like California and Oregon may go  along with this nonsense, responsible legislators will tell the  activists to take a hike. Or they could require that all foods carry relevant (and spooky) safety labels, and consumers be  offered more detailed information (prepared by competitors). For  instance, lawmakers could mandate that organic products carry warnings  like these. 
* No studies have ever demonstrated that organic products are safer or more nutritious than milk, meat, fruits or vegetables produced by conventional or biotech methods. 
* Various organic crops were developed using gamma rays, x-rays and potent chemicals like colchicine, to induce numerous (mostly unknown) mutations in seeds, in the hope that a few might be beneficial. 
*  Many organic farmers regularly spray live Bt spores and proteins,  copper sulfate, petroleum oils and other insecticidal chemicals, to  control crop pests. Some secretly use chemical herbicides and  insecticides. 
* Random testing has found that biotech corn meal has fumonisin levels well below the 500 parts per billion regulatory limit, whereas pure (non-blended) organic corn meal is often far above the limit – with some organic corn meal testing at  9,000 or even 16,000 ppb: 18-32 times above safety standards. 
*  Mad cow disease was first found on an English organic farm – and some  organic dairy farmers continue milking cows infected with mastitis until  the animals die, rather than treating them with antibiotics. 
* The deadly spinach E. Coli outbreak several years ago was traced to a farm that was in transition  from conventional to organic. Organic produce is always more susceptible  to bacterial contamination, because the farmers rely on manure instead  of chemical fertilizers (many derived from nitrogen in the air). 
All  these statements are true – but largely irrelevant. Thanks to  regulations, inspections, and responsible practices by seed producers,  farmers, processors and retailers, America’s food is generally very  safe. The few occasional E. coli and salmonella  outbreaks could be prevented by irradiating the most susceptible fruits,  vegetables and meats – but anti-biotech activists also oppose  irradiation. Go figure. 
We’d all be  better off if these ridiculous attacks on conventional and biotech (and  organic) foods were simply thrown out with the garbage. Most critically,  Third World farmers and families would suffer far less poverty,  malnutrition, starvation, Vitamin A deficiency and deprivation, if  anti-biotech activists (especially in Europe) would end their fanatical  obsession about “potential” biotech “contamination” of conventional and  organic foods (and flowers!) imported from Africa and other impoverished  regions. 
Meanwhile, let’s all congratulate Wal-Mart for taking a principled, ethical, scientific stand. 
____________ 
Paul  Driessen is senior policy advisor for the Committee For A Constructive  Tomorrow and Congress of Racial Equality and author of Eco-Imperialism: Green power - Black death (www.Eco-Imperialism.com)

 
No comments:
Post a Comment