Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0271.433 2012-2014 07/01/13 '14 COUNTY CLERK Hawaii County Council ` COUNTY OF HAWAI'I 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Hwy., Building A RECEIVED pry Kailua Kona, HI 96740 Time B 1 r t1 Date Z I Re: SUPPORT FOR BILL 79 To The Hawaii County Council: I am an organic farmer living and working in Hawi,Hi. My organic products along with those of many other local organic farmers are sold weekly at the Hawi Farmers Market. There is now overwhelming scientific evidence that clearly demonstrates the dangers associated with the mass proliferation of transgenic and genetically modified plants, seeds, trees and livestock (GMOs) and we do not want them in Hawaii County. It is also painfully obvious that there has been no prudent, and time-tested exploration of the un-reversible and extremely dangerous consequences of the farming practices implemented by profit-focused corporations. Sadly, even our courts seem beholden to corporate interests, at least in regard to the now obvious effect of genetic drift (Rogue GMO wheat found in Oregon June 2013) on organic farms adjacent to Monsanto's crops. Please keep the Big Island from becoming another laboratory for corporate greed and hubris. Regardless of what the law says, corporations are not people. I am a real human however, I vote, and I support Bill 79! In response to misleading testimony made at the 14 May 2013 hearings by Monsanto lobbyist, Alicia Muluafiti and other pro GMO advocates, I have prepared this brief statement along with attached evidence (http://earthopensource.org/files/pdfs/GMO Myths and Truths/GMO Myths and Truths 1.3b.pdf)that clearly refutes the claims that there is "no science" or "scientific data" behind the arguments supporting this bill. The credentials of the authors speak volumes with respect to the quality of the science. Please keep in mind that I could have attached many other studies like this one but I have chosen not to overwhelm the County Council in hope of having just this one study available for your scrutiny. In the name of God, please do your duty and review all the facts presented here! Your decision is of monumental importance and each and every individual vote on the broad issue of GMOs will most certainly be recorded in the annals of history. Please weigh in on the side of caution and complete knowledge. Malamalama. Malama'aina! Respectful, , ames Land JAMES LAND • 55-716 Hawi Rd, Hawi, HI 96719 PO Box 551699, Kapa'au, HI 96755 71 1/33 Home: (808) 889-5715 Comm. No. E-mail: herenowjim @gmail.com �f To l'/R514 2013 Reef. Date A ri- evid . he claims safety and e ' ! I fie .- *fief cro I' ichael An Claire Robins John Fagan une • hi a• GMO Myths and Truths An evidence-based examination of the claims made for the safety and efficacy of genetically modified crops Version 1.3b by Michael Antoniou Claire Robinson John Fagan ©Earth Open Source www.earthopensource.org 2nd Floor 145-157,St John Street,London EC1V 4PY,United Kingdom Contact email:claire.robinson @earthopensource.org June 2012 Disclaimer The views and opinions expressed in this paper,or otherwise published by EOS,are those of the authors and do not represent the official policy,position,or views of other organizations,universities, companies,or corporations that the authors maybe affiliated with. GMO Myths and Truths 2 About the authors Michael Antoniou,PhD is reader in molecular genetics and head,Gene Expression and Therapy Group, King's College London School of Medicine,London,UK.He has 28 years'experience in the use of genetic engineering technology investigating gene organisation and control,with over 40 peer reviewed publications of original work,and holds inventor status on a number of gene expression biotechnology patents.Dr Antoniou has a large network of collaborators in industry and academia who are making use of his discoveries in gene control mechanisms for the production of research,diagnostic and therapeutic products and safe and efficacious human somatic gene therapy for inherited and acquired genetic disorders. Claire Robinson,MPhil,is research director at Earth Open Source.She has a background in investigative reporting and the communication of topics relating to public health,science and policy,and the environment.She is an editor at GMWatch(www.gmwatch.org),a public information service on issues relating to genetic modification,and was formerly managing editor at SpinProfiles(now Powerbase.org). John Fagan,PhD is a leading authority on sustainability in the food system,biosafety,and GMO testing. He is founder and chief scientific officer of one of the world's first GMO testing and certification companies, through which he has pioneered the development of innovative tools to verify and advance food purity, safety and sustainability. He co-founded Earth Open Source,which uses open source collaboration to advance sustainable food production.Earlier,he conducted cancer research at the US National Institutes of Health.He holds a PhD in biochemistry and molecular and cell biology from Cornell University. Earth Open Source Earth Open Source is a not-for-profit organization dedicated to assuring the sustainability,security, and safety of the global food system.It supports agroecological,farmer-based systems that conserve soil,water,and energy and that produce healthy and nutritious food free from unnecessary toxins. It challenges the use of pesticides,artificial fertilizer and genetically modified organisms(GMOs)on the grounds of the scientifically proven hazards that they pose to health and the environment and because of the negative social and economic impacts of these technologies.Earth Open Source holds that our crop seeds and food system are common goods that belong in the hands of farmers and citizens,not of the GMO and chemical industry. Earth Open Source has established three lines of action,each of which fulfils a specific aspect of its mission: • Science and policy platform • Scientific research • Sustainable rural development. Science and policy Because the quality of our food supply is intimately connected with political and regulatory decisions,for example,on pesticides and GMOs,Earth Open Source functions as a science and policy platform to provide input to decision-makers on issues relating to the safety,security and sustainability of our food system. Earth Open Source has published and co-published several reports that have had impact internationally: • Roundup and birth defects:Is the public being kept in the dark? • GM Soy:Sustainable?Responsible? • Conflicts on the menu:A decade of industry influence at the European Food Safety Authority(EFSA) • Europe's pesticide and food safety regulators—Who do they work for? Scientific research and sustainable rural development Earth Open Source has laboratory and field research projects under way on several continents. Farmer- led agricultural development projects are ongoing in Asia.Details will be released as these projects come to fruition. GMO Myths and Truths 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive summary 8 1.The genetic engineering technique 9 1.1.Myth: Genetic engineering is just an extension of natural breeding Truth:Genetic engineering is different from natural breeding and poses special risks 9 Muddying the waters with imprecise terms 10 1.2.Myth: Genetic engineering is precise and the results are predictable Truth:Genetic engineering is crude and imprecise,and the results are unpredictable 11 1.3.Myth:GM is just another form of mutation breeding and is nothing to worry about Truth:Mutation breeding brings its own problems and should be strictly regulated 12 1.3.1.What is mutation breeding? 12 1.3.2.Where did radiation-induced mutation breeding come from? 12 1.3.3. Is mutation breeding widely used? 12 1.3.4. How does GM create mutations? 13 1.3.5.Is GM technology becoming more precise? 15 1.3.6.Why worry about mutations caused in genetic engineering? 16 1.4.Myth: Cisgenics/intragenics is a safe form of GM because no foreign genes are involved Truth:Cisgenic/intragenic foods are just as risky as any other GM food 20 Conclusion to Section 1 21 References to Section 1 22 2.Science and regulation 23 2.1.Myth:GM foods are strictly regulated for safety Truth:GM food regulation in most countries varies from non-existent to weak 23 2.1.1.The regulatory process in the USA 23 2.1.2.The sham of substantial equivalence 24 2.1.3.The US government is not impartial regarding GM crops 25 2.1.4.The regulatory process in Europe and the rest of the world 25 2.1.5.Europe's comparative safety assessment:Substantial equivalence by another name 27 2.1.6. GM foods would not pass an objective comparative safety assessment 27 2.1.7.Weakening comparative assessment further by widening the range of comparison 28 2.1.8. GM corporations and the US government have designed the GMO regulatory process around the world 29 2.1.9. Independent research on GM foods is suppressed 29 2.1.10.Researchers who publish studies that find harm from GM crops are attacked 30 Conclusion to Section 2 34 References to Section 2 34 3.Health hazards of gm foods 37 3.1.Myth:GM foods are safe to eat Truth:Studies show that GM foods can be toxic or allergenic 37 3.1.1. Feeding studies on laboratory and farm animals 37 3.1.2.Masking statistical significance through the concept of"biological relevance" 39 3.1.3. How misuse of"biological relevance"places public health at risk:Monsanto GM maize study 40 3.1.4 Masking statistical significance through the concept of"normal variation" 41 GMO Myths and Truths 4 3.1.5.Regulators currently do not require long-term tests on GMOs 42 3.1.6.Stacked-trait crops are less rigorously tested than single-trait crops 42 3.2.Myth:EU research shows GM foods are safe Truth:EU research shows evidence of harm from GM foods 43 3.2.1.Poulsen(2007) 44 3.2.2. Schrader(2007) 45 3.2.3.Kroghsbo(2008) 45 3.2.4.Conclusion on the SAFOTEST studies 45 3.3.Myth:Those who claim that GM foods are unsafe are being selective with the data,since many other studies show safety Truth:Studies that claim safety for GM crops are more likely to be industry-linked and therefore biased 46 3.4.Myth: GM foods have been proven safe for human consumption Truth:The few studies that have been conducted on humans show problems 47 3.5.Myth:No one has ever been made ill by a GM food Truth:There is no scientific evidence to support this claim 48 3.5.1.Two outbreaks of illness linked to GM foods 48 3.5.2. Conclusion 50 3.6.Myth:GM Bt insecticidal crops only harm insects and are harmless to animals and people Truth:GM Bt insecticidal crops pose hazards to people and animals that eat them 51 3.6.1. Bt toxin does not only affect insect pests 51 3.6.2.Bt toxin protein may not be broken down harmlessly in the digestive tract 52 3.6.3. Conclusion 52 3.7.Myth:GM foods are properly tested for ability to cause allergic reactions Truth:No thorough allergenicity testing is conducted on GM foods 53 3.7.1. The EU system for assessing GM plants for allergenicity 53 3.7.2. Why the allergy assessment process is ineffective 53 3.7.3.Studies on GM foods confirm existing allergy assessments are inadequate 55 3.7.4. Conclusion 55 3.8.Myth: GM animal feed poses no risks to animal or human health Truth:GM feed affects the health of animals and may affect the humans who eat their products 56 3.9.Myth:Genetic engineering will deliver more nutritious crops Truth:No GM crop that is more nutritious than its non-GM counterpart has been commercialised and some GMOs are less nutritious 57 3.9.1.Golden Rice:More hype than hope? 57 3.9.2.Purple cancer-fighting tomato 58 3.9.3."Biofortified"crops are not a sensible solution to hunger 58 3.9.4.Non-GM biofortified crops are already available 59 Conclusion to Section 3 59 References to Section 3 60 4. Health hazards of Roundup and glyphosate 64 4.1.Myth:Roundup is a safe herbicide with low toxicity Truth:Roundup poses major health hazards 65 4.1.2.People who eat Roundup Ready crops may be eating toxic residues 65 4.1.3. Studies show toxic effects of glyphosate and Roundup 65 4.1.4.Epidemiological studies on Roundup show links with serious health problems 66 GMO Myths and Truths 5 4.1.5.People are widely exposed to glyphosate 66 4.1.6.People are not protected by the current regulations on glyphosate 67 4.1.7.Arguments that Roundup replaces more toxic herbicides are false 67 Conclusion to Section 4 68 References to Section 4 68 5.GM crops—impacts on the farm and environment 70 5.1. Myth:GM crops increase yield potential Truth:GM crops do not increase yield potential—and in many cases decrease it 72 5.2.Myth:GM crops decrease pesticide use Truth:GM crops increase pesticide use 74 5.2.1.Glyphosate-resistant superweeds 74 5.2.2. How are superweeds created? 75 5.2.3. GM industry"solution"to superweeds:More herbicides 75 Herbicide-tolerant crops undermine sustainable agriculture 76 5.2.4. Conclusion 76 5.3.Myth: No-till farming with GM crops is environmentally friendly Truth:Claims of environmental benefits from GM no-till farming are unsound 76 5.4.Myth:GM Bt crops reduce insecticide use Truth:GM Bt crops merely change the way in which insecticides are used 77 5.4.1. Resistant pests are making Bt technology redundant 77 5.4.2.The"refuge"concept breaks down 77 5.4.3. Secondary pests attack Bt crops 78 5.4.4.Bt cotton fanners don't always give up insecticides 78 5.4.5. Hidden chemical insecticides in Bt maize 79 5.4.6. Conclusion 79 5.5.Myth: GM Bt crops only affect target pests and their relatives Truth:GM Bt crops are not specific to pests but affect a range of organisms 80 5.5.1.Bt crops harm soil organisms 80 5.5.2.Bt crops harm non-target and beneficial insects 80 5.5.3.Bt crops harm aquatic organisms 80 5.5.4. Conclusion 80 5.6.Myth:Roundup is a benign and biodegradable herbicide Truth:Roundup persists in the environment and has toxic effects on wildlife 81 5.7.Myth:Roundup is a benign herbicide that makes life easier for farmers Truth:Roundup causes soil and plant problems that impact yield 82 5.7.1. Glyphosate causes or exacerbates plant diseases 82 5.7.2 Glyphosate makes nutrients unavailable to plants 82 5.7.3 Glyphosate impairs nitrogen fixation 82 5.7.4. Conclusion 83 5.8.Myth: GM crops help biodiversity Truth:The herbicides used with GM crops harm biodiversity 84 5.9.Myth: GM crops bring economic benefits to farmers Truth:Economic impacts of GM crops on farmers are variable 85 5.9.1.The rising cost of GM seed 85 5.9.2. Conclusion 86 5.10.Myth:GM crops can"coexist"with non-GM and organic crops GMO Myths and Truths 6 Truth:Co-existence means widespread contamination of non-GM and organic crops 87 5.10.1.Who is liable for GM contamination? 87 5.11.Myth:If GM contamination occurs,it is not a problem Truth:GM contamination has had severe economic consequences for farmers,food and feed companies,and markets 89 5.12.Myth:Horizontal gene transfer from GM crops is unlikely or of no consequence Truth:GM genes can escape into the environment by horizontal gene transfer with potentially serious consequences 90 5.12.1.DNA uptake by bacteria 90 5.12.2.DNA uptake during digestion of GM foods 91 5.12.3.Horizontal gene transfer by Agrobacterium tumefaciens 92 5.12.4.Gene transfer by viruses 93 5.12.5.Overall assessment of the risks of HGT by the above methods 94 Conclusion to Section 5 94 References to Section 5 95 6. Climate change and energy use 100 6.1.Myth:GM will deliver climate-ready crops Truth:Conventional breeding outstrips GM in delivering climate-ready crops 101 6.2.Myth:No-till farming as practised with GM crops is climate-friendly as it sequesters more carbon Truth:No-till farming does not sequester more carbon 102 6.3.Myth: GM will solve the nitrogen crisis Truth:GM has not delivered nitrogen-efficient crops 103 6.4.Myth: GM crops reduce energy use Truth:GM crops are energy-hungry 104 6.4.1.Peak oil and gas make GM crops redundant 104 Conclusion to Section 6 105 References to Section 6 105 7.Feeding the world 107 7.1.Myth:GM crops are needed to feed the world's growing population Truth:GM crops are irrelevant to feeding the world 107 7.1.2. GM crops for Africa: Catalogue of failure 108 7.1.3.The biofuels boom and the food crisis 109 7.1.4 Food speculation and hunger 111 7.2.Myth:GM crops are vital to achieve food security Truth:Agroecological farming is the key to food security 112 7.2.1. Small farms are more efficient 112 7.2.2.Sustainable agriculture can reduce poverty 112 7.2.3. Who owns food? 113 7.3.Myth: GM is needed to provide the crops that will enable us to survive the challenges ahead Truth:Non-GM breeding methods are more effective at creating crops with useful traits115 7.3.1.The GM successes that never were 115 7.3.2.Non-GM breeding successes show no need for GM 117 7.3.3. Conventional breeding is quicker and cheaper than GM 118 Conclusion to Section 7 118 References to Section 7 119 Conclusion 122 GMO Myths and Truths 7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Genetically modified(GM)crops are promoted on the basis of a range of far-reaching claims from the GM crop industry and its supporters.They say that GM crops: • Are an extension of natural breeding and do not pose different risks from naturally bred crops • Are safe to eat and can be more nutritious than naturally bred crops • Are strictly regulated for safety • Increase crop yields • Reduce pesticide use • Benefit farmers and make their lives easier • Bring economic benefits • Benefit the environment • Can help solve problems caused by climate change • Reduce energy use • Will help feed the world. However,a large and growing body of scientific and other authoritative evidence shows that these claims are not true.On the contrary,evidence presented in this report indicates that GM crops: • Are laboratory-made,using technology that is totally different from natural breeding methods, and pose different risks from non-GM crops • Can be toxic,allergenic or less nutritious than their natural counterparts • Are not adequately regulated to ensure safety • Do not increase yield potential • Do not reduce pesticide use but increase it • Create serious problems for farmers,including herbicide-tolerant"superweeds",compromised soil quality,and increased disease susceptibility in crops • Have mixed economic effects • Harm soil quality,disrupt ecosystems,and reduce biodiversity • Do not offer effective solutions to climate change • Are as energy-hungry as any other chemically-farmed crops • Cannot solve the problem of world hunger but distract from its real causes-poverty,lack of access to food and,increasingly,lack of access to land to grow it on. Based on the evidence presented in this report,there is no need to take risks with GM crops when effective,readily available,and sustainable solutions to the problems that GM technology is claimed to address already exist.Conventional plant breeding,in some cases helped by safe modern technologies like gene mapping and marker assisted selection,continues to outperform GM in producing high-yield, drought-tolerant,and pest-and disease-resistant crops that can meet our present and future food needs. GMO Myths and Truths 8