Search OCA
Get Local!
Frankenfoods Are Not the Answer to World Hunger

Frankenfoods Are Not the
Answer to World Hunger


Earth Island Journal
December 2001

Are Genetically Altered Foods The Answer to World Hunger?

By: John Robbins

Biotechnology is one of tomorrow's tools in our hands today. Slowing its
acceptance is a luxury our hungry world cannot afford.
-- Monsanto advertisement

Genetically engineered crops were created not because they're productive but
because they're patentable. Their economic value is oriented not toward
helping subsistence farmers to feed themselves but toward feeding more
livestock for the already overfed rich. -- Amory and Hunter Lovins, Founders
of the Rocky Mountain Institute

The global acreage planted in genetically engineered foods grew nearly
25-fold in the three years after 1996, the first year of large-scale
commercialization. Yet this enormous growth took place almost entirely in
only three countries.

In 1999, the United States by itself accounted for 72 percent of the crops.
Argentina was responsible for another 17 percent and Canada weighed in with
another 10 percent. These three countries together accounted for 99 percent
of the entire planet's genetically engineered plantings.

Monsanto and other proponents of biotechnology continually tell the public
that genetic engineering is necessary if the world's food supply is to keep
up with population growth. But even with nearly 100 million acres planted,
their products have yet to do a thing to reverse the spread of hunger. There
is no more food available for the world's less fortunate. In fact, most of
the fields were growing transgenic soybeans and corn that are destined for
livestock feed.

One of the clearest independent voices in the sometimes raucous debate about
genetically modified foods is Rachel's Environment and Health Weekly
[Environmental Research Foundation, Annapolis, PO Box 5036, Annapolis, MD
21403-7036, (888) 272-2435, fax: (410) 263-8944, www.rachel.org]. In 1999,
the journal noted that "Neither Monsanto nor any of the other genetic
engineering companies appears to be developing genetically engineered crops
that might solve global food shortages." If genetically engineered crops
were aimed at feeding the hungry, Rachel's noted, Monsanto would be
developing seeds with certain predictable characteristics including:

* able to grow on substandard or marginal soils;
* able to produce more high-quality protein with increased per-acre yield,
without the need for expensive machinery, chemicals, fertilizers or water;
* engineered to favor small farms over larger farms;
* cheap and freely available without restrictive licensing; and
* designed for crops that feed people, not meat animals.
"None of the genetically engineered crops now available, or in development
(to the extent that these have been announced) has any of these desirable
characteristics," Rachel's reports. "The genetic engineering revolution has
nothing to do with feeding the world's hungry."

If genetically engineered (GE) plants were designed to reverse world hunger,
you would expect them to bring higher yields. But there is increasing
evidence that they do just the opposite. Ed Oplinger, a professor of
agronomy at the University of Wisconsin, has been conducting performance
trials for soybean varieties for the past 25 years. In 1999, he compared the
soybean yields in the 12 states that grew 80 percent of US soybeans and
found that the yields from genetically modified soybeans were 4 percent
lower than conventional varieties.

When other researchers compared the performance of Monsanto's transgenic
soybeans (the world's number-one GE crop in terms of acreage planted) with
those of conventional varieties grown under the same conditions, they found
nearly a 10 percent yield reduction for the genetically engineered soybeans.
And research done by the University of Nebraska in 2000 found the yields of
GE soybeans were 6 to 11 percent lower than conventional plants.

Not that this research has hampered Dick Goddown, vice-president of the
Biotechnology Industry Organization, from repeating the refrain that genetic
engineering "is the best hope we have, as denizens of this planet, of being
able to feed the people who are going to be on it."

If genetically modified foods really were an answer to world hunger, it
would be a powerful .and persuasive argument in their favor. How could
anyone stand in the way of feeding desperate and starving people? But Dr.
Vandana Shiva, one of the world's foremost experts on world hunger and
transgenic crops, claims that the argument that biotechnology will help feed
the world "is on every level a deception ... Soybeans go to feed the pigs
and the cattle of the North. All the investments in agriculture are about
increasing chemical sales and increasing monopoly control. All this is
taking place in the private domain, by corporations that are not in the
business of charity. They are in the business of selling. The food they will
produce will be even more costly."

Similarly, delegates from 18 African countries at a meeting of the UN Food
and Agriculture Organization responded to Monsanto's advertisements with a
clear statement: "We ... strongly object that the image of the poor and
hungry from our countries is being used by giant multinational corporations
to push a technology that is neither safe, environmentally friendly, nor
economically beneficial to us. We do not believe that such companies or gene
technologies will help our farmers to produce the food that is needed ... On
the contrary ... it will undermine our capacity to feed ourselves."
In 2000, a coalition of biotech companies began a $ 50 million media
campaign to keep fears about genetically altered foods from spreading
through the US. Bankrolling the campaign (which included $ 32 million in TV
and print advertising) were Monsanto, Dow Chemical, DuPont, Swiss-based
Novartis, the British Zeneca, Germany's BASF and Aventis of France. The ads,
complete with soft-focus fields and smiling children, pitched "solutions
that could improve our world tomorrow" and could help end world hunger.
John Robbins is the author of Diet for a New America and founder of Earth
Save International. Excerpted with permission from Food Revolution: How Your
Diet Can Save your Life and the World [Conari Press, 2550 Ninth St., Suite
101, Berkeley, CA 94710, (510) 649-7175].


Home | News | Organics | GE Food | Health | Environment | Food Safety | Fair Trade | Peace | Farm Issues | Politics
Forum | Español | Campaigns | Buying Guide | Press | Search | Volunteer | Donate | About Us | Contact Us | Email This Page

Organic Consumers Association - 6771 South Silver Hill Drive, Finland MN 55603
E-mail: Staff · Activist or Media Inquiries: 218-226-4164 · Fax: 218-353-7652
Please support our work. Send a tax-deductible donation to the OCA

Fair Use Notice: The material on this site is provided for educational and informational purposes. It may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. It is being made available in an effort to advance the understanding of scientific, environmental, economic, social justice and human rights issues etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have an interest in using the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. The information on this site does not constitute legal or technical advice.
Please Support Our Sponsors!

Organic Valley

Organic
Valley

Dr. Bronner's Magic Soaps

Dr. Bronner's
Magic Soaps

Botani Organic

Botani
Organic

Aloha Bay

Aloha Bay

Eden Organics

Eden Foods

Frey Vineyards

Frey
Vineyards

Intelligent Nutrients

Intelligent
Nutrients