Our Food under threat

In late 2007, the NSW and Victorian State Governments announced that they would let their bans on genetically engineered (GE) food crops expire in early 2008. The South Australian and Tasmanian Governments are also currently reviewing whether to let their bans expire. The lifting of the bans will mean that GE canola can be grown commercially and the first plantings could be as early as April 2008. GE canola poses a serious threat to the environment, animal and human health, and will cost farmers their GE-free reputation and their markets.

Canola oil is used in many of the common foods we eat, from margarine and bread through to dips and processed foods. GE canola will find its way into our food, as GE canola oil and meal, yet will remain unlabelled.

Currently, the world’s big agrochemical firms – notably Monsanto and Bayer – are investing million of dollars every year to promote their GE technology. But the truth is that farmers that have grown GE canola in other countries have yet to see any of the yields and profit benefits promised by the agrochemical companies.

In this briefing, we take six of the GE industry’s biggest greenwash statements and show the reality behind the growing and consumption of GE canola. The analysis shows that the best option for farmers, beekeepers, governments, food companies, and consumers is to reject GE canola.

What is Genetic Engineering?

Genetically engineered organisms (GE organisms), also known as genetically modified organisms (GMOs), are new life forms which could not occur naturally. Genetic engineering breaks down the natural boundaries that exist between species. For instance, a fish and strawberry will not breed in nature, but in the laboratory, scientists can take a gene from fish, insert it into a strawberry, and essentially create an entirely new organism. Once these man-made organisms are released into the environment and the food chain, they reproduce and contaminate conventional and organic crops. No one knows what the long-term effects of GE organisms on the environment will be, as before the mid 1990s they had never been released into the environment on a large scale. GE canola is already out of control overseas, growing wild on roadsides, wharves, and invading GE free fields.

MYTH 1: GE canola is safe for the environment
REALITY: There is growing scientific evidence that GE crops are harmful to the environment

Furthermore, once GE crops are released into the environment they cannot be recalled – as living organisms they can reproduce and pollute indefinitely.

In the 12 years since the introduction of GE canola to Canada, there has been a pronounced increase in both herbicide use and weed resistance problems. GE canola ‘superweeds’, resistant to up to three different sorts of herbicide, are becoming a serious problem and farmers are resorting to highly toxic herbicides such as 2,4 D to control them. As well as being a weed in its own right, there is also a danger that if GE canola is introduced to Australia it may hybridise with noxious weeds such as wild radish (Raphanus raphanistrum).

A four-year-study by the UK Government found evidence of serious biodiversity impacts associated with the cultivation of GE canola. The CSIRO has pointed out the need to conduct similar studies in Australia, however, such studies have yet to be conducted.

MYTH 2: GE canola is safe to eat
REALITY: There have been no long-term studies looking at the impacts of GE food on human health. Studies that have been done raise serious concerns

These studies included a peer reviewed paper, published in 2007, which found evidence of liver and kidney toxicity in rats fed a variety of GE corn that had been approved for human consumption. One of the canola varieties approved for commercial growing in Australia. One of the canola varieties approved for commercial growing in Australia, Monsanto’s Roundup ready GT73, resulted in increased liver sizes of 15% when it was fed to rats in a Monsanto feeding trial. No follow up studies have been conducted to determine what the implications of this could be for human health.

Concerns over the safety of consuming GE foods include:

The use of antibiotic resistance genes in GE plants, which may lead to antibiotic-resistance bacteria in us

Exposure to unfamiliar or unexpected proteins, toxins, and allergens, and

Greater levels of herbicides and pesticides in our food.

In Australia, Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) is responsible for assessing the safety of GE foods. An independent review of FSANZ report concludes that their tests are inadequate and that most GE foods have never been tested on humans.

MYTH 3: Drought-resistant GE crops are needed to cope with climate change
REALITY: Non-GE techniques are much more effective for developing drought resistant crops

Despite all the spin by the biotechnology industry, drought resistant GE crops are not likely to be available for at least ten years, if at all. Furthermore, drought resistant crops are much more easily developed using traditional breeding or modern techniques such as marker assisted selection (MAS).

MAS does not result in a GE crop, but utilises our knowledge of DNA and the genome to breed new plant varieties. MAS is much better suited than genetic engineering to develop complex traits such as drought resistance because they usually involve multiple genes.

Genetic engineering cannot manipulate the expression of multiple genes. Why use a risky technology when other, better technologies that do not entail the same risks can be used instead? MAS has already been successfully used to develop non-GE drought tolerant canola in Victoria, which should be available to farmers this year.

MYTH 4: GE canola brings economic benefits
REALITY: The worldwide rejection of GE food by consumers, retailers, food companies, and governments has turned the production of GE crops into economic uncertainty

Polls consistently show that the majority of Australians don’t want to eat GE food. And the same is true for our major export markets, such as Japan and Europe. For example, consumer rejection of GE canola resulted in the loss of Canada’s entire canola seed export market to Europe. Australia picked up this market because of its GE-free status. Canadian canola farmers are now dependent on heavy government subsidies.

In 2006, Australian canola attracted a premium of $50 a tonne because of its GE-free guarantee. By adopting GE canola farmers will lose this premium as well as preferential access to markets such as Japan and Europe. A recent report by the Network of Concerned Farmers (NCF) revealed that the introduction of GE canola will cause a loss to Australian canola farmers of over $143 million a year.

Studies that argue that GE crops will be more profitable for farmers, invariably ignore key costs, such as the segregation of GE and conventional crops, and make erroneous assumptions regarding increased yields and the ready availability of markets. There is no evidence that GE crops increase yields, or that farmers will be any better off if GE canola is introduced into Australia. In fact, evidence has emerged of decreased yields following the continued use of GE crops in countries such as the US.

MYTH 5: GE crops will help to reduce hunger
REALITY: Hunger is a problem of food distribution, lack of access to land, water and income, not the availability of food

The real problem is that too many people do not have enough income to get access to the available food and too few people have the land to grow food for themselves. Introducing GE seed and allowing agrochemical companies to control the seed and grain supply do not solve these problems.

On the contrary, GE crops are likely to aggravate the hunger problem and indebtedness of farmers, because they require high investments in expensive seeds and pesticides. They also promote extreme monoculture and ignore traditional farming techniques developed over generations. Most importantly of all, the introduction of GE seeds will mean that farmers can no longer save their own seed to replant in subsequent years, as they have been doing for many generations.

MYTH 6: Coexistence between GE and non-GE crops is perfectly possible
REALITY: Segregation is impossible and contamination is inevitable wherever GE crops are grown

A Western Australian Parliamentary inquiry into genetic engineering formed the view that “contamination of non-GM crops by GM crops is inevitable, segregation is not practical and identity preservation can be achieved, but at a significant cost”. GE canola id one of the most difficult GE crops to segregate, since it is extremely prolific, persistent and commonly grows as a weed. GE canola has been found to cross-pollinate with non-GE canola more than 26km away.

The segregation of non-GE canola in Canada has failed, leading to the collapse of its non-GE and organic canola industries. The extent of contamination in Canada is such that 90% of certified non-GE canola seed examples contain GE material. The Canadian experience proves GE contamination cannot be contained.

GE canola, unnecessary, and unwanted

GE crops pose unacceptable risks to human health, the environment and the economy. The State and Federal Governments should act unanimously to keep GE crops out of our fields and our food. They should also introduce liability legislation to hold biotechnology companies responsible for the damage caused by their products. They owe this to the majority of Australian farmers, food businesses and consumers who want to stay GE-free.

Source: Genetically Engineered Canola: The Reality Behind the Myths, Newsletter January 2008, Greenpeace.