Page 287 - Environment: The Science Behind the Stories

less information about the GM content of their food than
Europeans or citizens of nations like China, Russia, and Saudi
Arabia. This is despite the fact that polls consistently show
that a large majority of Americans would like their food to be
labeled. A petition requesting labeling sent to the U.S. Food
and Drug Administration in 2011 garnered over 1 million
signatures. In 2012, a proposition on the statewide ballot in
California to mandate labeling of GM food was favored to
pass. It ended up failing by a 53–47% vote after food, bio-
tech, and pesticide industries funneled over $45 million into
the campaign to defeat the measure, outspending proponents
5 to 1. The defeat in California motivated labeling advocates
around the country, however, and soon labeling bills were
being considered by legislators in half of U.S. states.
Proponents of labeling argue that consumers have a right
to know what’s in the food they buy. Opponents of labeling
argue that doing so implies that labeled foods are dangerous,
whereas research has not shown that to be the case. They also
say that consumers wishing to avoid GM foods can do so by
Figure 10.28 Saskatchewan farmer Percy Schmeiser became buying organic foods and that labeling will entail expense. In
a hero to small farmers and opponents of biotech foods after
fighting back against the Monsanto Company in court. nations where labeling has been allowed, stores have ended
up eliminating some GM foods from their shelves because of
consumer aversion to them. If this were to occur in the United
States, it could pressure food producers to avoid using—and
Today there is widespread concern that the burgeoning
organic food market will be hindered if organic farms are con- farmers to avoid growing—GM foods.
taminated with pollen or seed from GM plants. An organic
farmer suffering such cross-breeding would not be able to sell
his or her produce as organic. For this reason, organic farmers WeIGhING the IssUes
in 2011 launched a class-action lawsuit against Monsanto to dO yOU WANt yOUR FOOd lABeled? How would you have
try to remove the threat of being sued for unintentional patent voted in the California ballot initiative to label genetically modi-
infringement. A U.S. Court of Appeals ruled in Monsanto’s fied foods? Given that well over 70% of processed food now
favor in 2013. contains GM ingredients, labeling GM foods would add costs
Given such developments, the future of GM foods seems and might force these foods off store shelves. Yet dozens of
likely to hinge on social, economic, legal, and political factors other nations currently label such foods. Do you want your
as well as scientific ones—and these factors vary in different food to be labeled to indicate whether it is genetically modi-
nations. In Europe, consumers have expressed widespread unease fied? Would you choose among foods based on such labe-
about genetic engineering. In contrast, American consumers have ling? Why or why not?
largely accepted GMOs, generally without even realizing that the
majority of the food they eat contains GM products.
Opposition to GM foods in Europe blocked the import
of hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. agricultural prod- Sustainable Food Production
ucts from 1998 to 2003. The United States complained that
the European Union was hindering free trade and brought a Growing enough food for our burgeoning population while
successful case before the World Trade Organization (p. 197). maintaining the integrity of the environmental systems that
In 2013, exports of the $8-billion U.S. wheat crop were threat- support our agriculture is a tremendous challenge. Fortunately,
ened after unapproved GM wheat plants were found on an there are a variety of approaches we can follow.
Oregon farm, an apparent vestige of Monsanto field trials. Employing biotechnology to increase crop yields while
Japan and South Korea suspended purchases of U.S. wheat in reducing environmental impacts is one strategy that can lead
response, and Europe geared up to begin testing U.S. wheat. toward more sustainable food production. Although the con-
To date, the United States remains one of the few nations not tributions of genetic engineering to sustainable agriculture
to sign the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, a treaty that lays thus far are debatable, the approach has tremendous potential
out guidelines for open information about exported crops. for the future if we can harness and direct it toward serv-
ing people’s needs. Biotechnology gives us one way we can
Many nations label GM foods make our agriculture more sustainable by modifying aspects
within the currently dominant industrial model.
More than 60 nations require that GM foods be labeled so that At the other end of the spectrum, organic agriculture pro-
consumers know what they are buying. In contrast, the United motes sustainability by largely rejecting the industrial model. By
States does not label GM foods and has for years opposed eliminating inputs of fossil-fuel-based chemicals and fertilizers,
286 other nations’ efforts to do so. As a result, Americans receive organic agriculture reduces impacts on the land and on our health.

M10_WITH7428_05_SE_C10.indd 286 12/12/14 2:59 PM