Based on recent rulings, the genetic engineering industry seems victorious in the battle over organics and genetically engineered crops. "The administration has announced a trio of decisions that have clouded the future of organics and boosted the position of genetically engineered crops," Lyndsey Layton of The Washington Post reports. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack "approved genetically modified alfalfa and a modified corn to be made into ethanol, and he gave limited approval to GE sugar beets," Layton notes.
Some supporters of organics say they have been disappointed by the administration, which they hoped would be friendlier to their interests. "It was boom, boom boom," Walter Robb, co-chief executive of Whole Foods Markets, a major player in organics, told Layton. "These were deeply disappointing. They were such one-sided decisions."
The argument centers on concerns about contamination. Organics supporters fear that pollen and seeds from GE crops could drift across fields to nearby organic crops. "Contamination can cost organic growers — some overseas markets, for example, have rejected organic products when tests showed they carried even trace amounts of GE material," Layton writes. GE crop advocates say the industry's farmers "should be free to grow the crops because they do not harm other plants," Layton writes.
Jim Greenwood, head of the Biotechnology Industry Organization, told Layton, "Biotechnology can help crops thrive in drought-prone areas, improve the nutrition content of foods, grow alternative energy sources and improve the lives of farmers and rural communities around the globe."
Vilsack seemed poised to restrict genetically engineered crops prior to the alfalfa ruling, but he said "ultimately regulations prevented him from restricting GE crops," Layton writes. Despite the recent rulings, Vilsack told Layton he hopes the two sides can co-exist. "I had no expectation that the dialogue was going to end in some grand understanding or a kum-ba-ya moment," he said. "This is going to require a lot of work by reasonable, smart people to get this done. It’s in the interest of the country for these folks to stop fighting and get together and figure out how to live in the same neighborhood." (Read more)
Some supporters of organics say they have been disappointed by the administration, which they hoped would be friendlier to their interests. "It was boom, boom boom," Walter Robb, co-chief executive of Whole Foods Markets, a major player in organics, told Layton. "These were deeply disappointing. They were such one-sided decisions."
The argument centers on concerns about contamination. Organics supporters fear that pollen and seeds from GE crops could drift across fields to nearby organic crops. "Contamination can cost organic growers — some overseas markets, for example, have rejected organic products when tests showed they carried even trace amounts of GE material," Layton writes. GE crop advocates say the industry's farmers "should be free to grow the crops because they do not harm other plants," Layton writes.
Jim Greenwood, head of the Biotechnology Industry Organization, told Layton, "Biotechnology can help crops thrive in drought-prone areas, improve the nutrition content of foods, grow alternative energy sources and improve the lives of farmers and rural communities around the globe."
Vilsack seemed poised to restrict genetically engineered crops prior to the alfalfa ruling, but he said "ultimately regulations prevented him from restricting GE crops," Layton writes. Despite the recent rulings, Vilsack told Layton he hopes the two sides can co-exist. "I had no expectation that the dialogue was going to end in some grand understanding or a kum-ba-ya moment," he said. "This is going to require a lot of work by reasonable, smart people to get this done. It’s in the interest of the country for these folks to stop fighting and get together and figure out how to live in the same neighborhood." (Read more)
No comments:
Post a Comment