GEO Watch | Update on the Oregon GMO Labeling Vote
Moderator’s Note: Both Oregon
and Colorado are voting on citizen-initiated referendums that would require the
labeling of GMO foods. Colorado’s electorate is voting on Prop 105, which I
endorsed and addressed in an October 10 editorial. Oregon voters are deciding the outcome with a vote on Measure 92. Both laws are
reasonable and sensible first stepa toward insuring the right to know and the
ability for consumers to make educated choices about the foods they eat.
Numerous editorials have come out in support of Oregon’s Measure 92 but
Eecole Copen of Portland, Oregon, a registered dietician, has written the most
compelling of these missives. Copen emphasizes the need for us to “look at the
bigger picture” and this includes clearly addressing concerns about the
effectiveness of the proposed law and the opponents’ unsubstantiated claims
that labeling will increase the cost of food. Copen also provides an insightful
analysis of the strategies being used by biotechnology corporations (e.g.,
Syngenta) to make it difficult for nonGMO farmers to escape GMOs by following
what she describes as “checkerboard-plantings”. She does an outstanding job of
clarifying these issues. With Ms. Copen, we endorse Measure 92 and urge all our
readers in Oregon to vote “Yes”.
The Bigger Picture: Why
vote YES on 92
THOUGHTS ON LABELING
GMOS
Eecole Copen MS, RD |
Portand, OR | October 29, 2014
We need to look at the
bigger picture. Some are saying that measure 92 may not be written effectively
and that it may increase the cost of food, hitting poor families particularly
hard. People are afraid of the repercussions.
Let’s take a look at
the effectiveness of this bill first.
Whether or not Measure
92 is the perfectly written law, it is a great first step. If it weren’t going
to be effective on some level, Monsanto and their industrial allies would not
be spending over $14 million in attempts to make it fail. They could be putting
that $14 million into labeling, if their priorities were something other than
bottom line financial profiting. No, they are more concerned that GMOs continue
to progress without any barriers and this is critical for them, because they
need the next few years to take GMOs to the point of no return.
Just this last year,
Syngenta (Swiss company who makes GMO seeds) was found to be strategically
checkerboard-planting their genetically modified sugar beet seeds in Southern
Oregon. Whatever their reason, the inevitable was that all of the surrounding
family farmers who grew non-GMO or organic seed would find some portion of
their seeds crossed-pollinated with Syngenta’s GMO seed. According to Raymon
Seidler, Ph.D., former Senior Scientist at the Environmental Protection Agency,
these seeds have been known to contaminate fields 11 miles away. (http://www.prx.org/pieces/131881-food-sleuth-radio-raymon-seidler-interview). What are the
repercussions of this?
Family farms would no
longer be able to sell to the Organic or foreign export market. This puts
farmers out of business. This takes our opportunity to buy organic away. This
is sneaky and strategic. This was a secret.. until some farmers figured it out.
Then they banned GMO seeds from being planted in their county.
This is intentional.
GMO makers need to get their seeds dispersed far and wide, so they can claim
patent rights and ultimately, claim our food rights. We think it’s scary to
have our water privatized? Think if all of our food is privatized. It won’t
take long. GMO canola can cross with Brassicas... think broccoli, chard, kale,
brussel sprouts, and cauliflower. And until we decide that corporations are no
longer people, their patent interests will continue to take over our food
system. This is one hell of a greedy & hungry big brother.
And cross contamination
is just one scary road eerily travelled. Let’s talk about microbes,
pesticides and gene transfer.
Right now, the 2 major
genetic modifications approved by the FDA are “Round-up Ready” crops, which
confer resistance to the well known herbicide, Roundup (glyphosate), to corn,
alfalfa, soy, canola and sugar beets, and the Bt gene which enables corn, sweet
corn and potato plants themselves, to manufacture an internal pesticide that
kills unwanted pests. Round-Up ready crops depend on all surrounding
weeds to fall victim to Round-Up. However, studies tracking the use of
glyphosate (http://cahnrs.wsu.edu/news-release/2012/10/01/pesticide-use-rises-as-herbicide-resistant-weeds-undermine-performance-of-major-ge-crops-new-wsu-study-shows/)
show that the “annual increase in the herbicides required to deal with
tougher-to-control weeds on cropland planted to GE cultivars has grown from 1.5
million pounds in 1999 to about 90 million pounds in 2011.” And as of
Sept 17th, the USDA “plowed ahead with a highly controversial
decision to deregulate new seed varieties of “Agent Orange” corn and soybeans,
so-called for its ability to withstand the weed killer 2,4-D, a major
component in the infamous dioxin-laden defoliant used in Vietnam. The
USDA environmental impact study predicted that approval of the crops would lead
to a 200 to 600 percent increase in the use of 2,4-D nationally by 2020, but
deferred to the EPA for analysis of the effects of the increase.” (http://www.responsibletechnology.org/posts/the-color-orange-the-color-of-nightmares/).
The idea is that these seeds will have both genes to now resist 2 herbicides,
since they see the ultimate failure of Round-Up ready alone. When does it
stop? How much herbicide can our soils, our water system and ultimately our
bodies handle? There is no lack of evidence around the links between herbicides
and cancer, reduced fertility, fetal abnormalities, etc.. and..there is
an unfolding story on the horizon…
Bear with me through
this logic…
We’ve all heard that
gut bacteria play a role in our digestion. And now we are finding that
gut bacteria have many other jobs like harvesting energy, producing vitamins,
metabolizing drugs & modulating the immune system (Cerf-Bensussan and
Gaboriau-Routhiau, Nat Rev Immunol, 2010). And studies show that they likely
play a role in our body’s response to all sorts of issues, including hunger
signaling, chronic inflammation, auto-immune diseases, Irritable Bowel
Syndrome, and much more (read Dr. Gerard E Mullin, “The Inside Tract”).
There are even services now available to get your gut flora analyzed for $100 (http://humanfoodproject.com/americangut/).
We are finding that
certain bacteria predominate with certain diseases. Could it be that the kinds
of bacteria fostered by our bodies determine our health? What we know is that
diversity of gut flora increases resilience for our immune system. And where do
these bacteria come from?? Our food. Both literally attached to the food we
eat, the dirt on our fingers, & the soil our food is grown in. These are
called probiotics. Plus, food acts as food not just for us, but for the
bacteria in our guts, called pre-biotics. The kinds of foods we eat will
determine the kinds of bacteria that will proliferate.
Now consider that the
average farm is 441 acres and is usually planted with very few crops at a time,
essentially creating large swaths of land that are mono-cropped. In
2012, 88 percent of corn (maize) and 94 percent of soy
grown in the United States were genetically modified, according to the US
Department of Agriculture (http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/adoption-of-genetically-engineered-crops-in-the-us/recent-trends-in-ge-adoption.aspx#.VE0159TF-1s). The big farms are
filled with mostly GMO crops.
As mentioned, these
crops are requiring increasingly heavy doses of herbicides in these fields,
decimating bacterial diversity, and thus decreasing the resilience of the
soil’s immune system. As crops become more susceptible to disease, more
chemicals are needed to keep the pests out, and the plants growing. Does this
situation sound familiar? The health of our bodies is reflected in the
health of our soils. And literally, when we kill all the diversity in microbial
organisms in the soil, we diminish the diversity of bacteria available to our
own guts to help us resist disease. The more GMOs planted, the more
herbicides & pesticides needed to deal with super weeds and resistant bugs,
the less diversity in our soil bacteria, the less diversity in our gut
bacteria, the more risk both humans and plants have for disease.
There’s one more super
scary element. The Bt gene that helps the plant manufacture its own pesticide
originally comes from bacteria in the soil. Genes are exchanged all of the time
in the bacterial world. According to Dr. Robert Kremer, Ph.D., microbiologist
formerly with the USDA’s Agricultural Research Service and Adjunct Professor of
Soil Microbiology at the University of Missouri (http://www.prx.org/pieces/133670-food-sleuth-radio-robert-kremer-interview ) gene transfer is
totally possible from plant to other organisms. So, the feasibility exists that
our own gut bacteria could pick up the pesticide making genes, making our guts
into pesticide factories.
Is the research finalon all this? Not yet, and that is intentional too. Currently, research is
stymied by industry patents making obtaining seed for clinical- double blind
trials incredibly difficult in the non-industry funded academic setting
(watch “Scientists Under Attack- Genetic Engineering in the Magnetic
Field of Money”). Labeling GMOs is one of the few ways Europe has figured out
to track the effects of GMOs on health. The longer we wait for absolute
conclusions, the more time we give to industry to weave their GMO seeds into
our food system in this country. Many European countries have already banned
GMOs (http://www.organicconsumers.org/gefood/countrieswithbans.cfm)
and labeling happens in 64 countries around the world. We are one of the
only 1st world countries available to enable this industry’s
success. They need us. And they will do anything to keep the barriers from
forming.
Finally, the last
point is about whether poor families are going to spend hundreds of dollars per
year in extra food costs. Industry is malleable. They have an incredible amount
of flexibility to please the consumer. In 2014, General Mills’ net profit was
1.82 billion. If they see the consumer interest shift away from their
products, you better believe they will find a way to attract their customers
back. They don’t want to lose business.. and they won’t inflate their prices
and risk that loss. And, if 64 countries have already labeled GMOs, and the
poor didn’t go hungry there because of it, what makes us think it will be any
different here?
We can’t afford to
give industry any more time to spread their seeds via a technology that is
diminishing our capacity for health on so many levels. This has to be
stopped as soon as possible. We have an amazing opportunity to put up one of
America’s first major barriers to their progress while simultaneously creating
a tool to help track the health risks. Carpe Diem.. let’s seize this day
on November 4th and exert the power of our vote to stop this
harmful progress. Yes on Measure 92.
Eecole Copen MS, RD is
a Registered Dietitian has been working as an advocate for sustainable food
systems in an institutional setting for the past 10 years. Just last week, she
received the 2014 Hunger and Environmental Nutrition Excellence Award at the
national conference for dietitians in Atlanta, GA.
Comments
Post a Comment