THIS ARTICLE FIRST APPEARED IN WHOLE LIFE TIMES.

CORPORATE CONTROL OF THE GLOBAL FOOD SUPPLY
Terminator imperils farmers and food

By Barbara Keeler and Shirley Watson DC, CCN, DACBN, QME

Bony children stare wide-eyed from gaunt faces, their pleading eyes underscoring the TV narrators' compelling message about world hunger. The heartbreaking facts are real. Every day, about 30,000 people die of hunger that is chronic, pervasive, unrelenting, and largely unreported. Ads may be placed by relief organizations, but others are pitches of a powerful biotechnology firm, with messages similar to this excerpt from a Monsanto public relations document.

"...biotechnology and the promising advances it offers for our future. Healthier, more abundant food. Less expensive crops... With these advances we prosper; without them we cannot thrive. As we stand on the edge of a new millennium, we dream of a tomorrow without hunger."

Monsanto cares. So do the other multinational corporations that dominate research and development in plant genetic engineering-- DuPont, Novartis, Austra-Zeneca (Zeneca is the pesticide-producing arm of Imperial Chemical Company), and Aventis (merger of Rhone Poulenc with shareholders of AgrEvo: Hoechst and Schering). So much do they care about world hunger that they are reported to be developing various forms of Gene Use Restriction Technology (GURT). GURT prevents farmers from saving and replanting seed, forcing them to buy seeds and chemicals each year from these multinational giants. These seeds can potentially kill seeds in neighboring conventional crops as well. Just what impoverished farmers need in the developing world.

In GURT, seeds are engineered to produce deadly proteins late in their cycle, so they cannot germinate, or so that they will not germinate or grow properly unless exposed to a specific chemical made by the company engineering the seeds.

Most GE seeds tolerate specific herbicides made by the company engineering the seeds; for example, Monsanto's Roundup Ready soybeans. Not only are herbicide-tolerant seeds more expensive than conventional seeds--they offer no benefit to farmers who cannot afford herbicides. Most other GE plants produce pesticides in their cells throughout their life cycle.

Little research targets the needs of less developed countries: cheap, robust, high-yielding staples for human food, produced by labor-intensive methods which create employment so people can afford the food so grown. Seed engineering focusses on labor-saving production by large farms in industrialized countries for developed markets.

Having invested heavily in GE seeds, biotech companies have adopted aggressive tactics to protect their patents and insure annual purchases of seeds. Their contracts prohibit replanting or selling seed--a concept foreign to farmers, who for millennia have regarded seed they grow as their own property.

Many US farmers clung to the time-honored and economical practice of seed-saving, so Monsanto used private detectives and prosecuted hundreds of so-called seed piracy cases. In a typical judgement, seed-saving farmer David Chancy must pay Monsanto $35,000, and keep his records open to Monsanto for five years, according THE OWNERSHIP OF ALL LIFE, by Jon Rappoport, who launched the Great Boycott against the products and stock of the eight leading multinational producers of pesticides and genetically engineered (GE) food seeds--Dow, DuPont, Monsanto, Rhone Poulenc, Bayer, Hoechst, CIBA-Geigy, Imperial Chemical Industries (ICI). (SEE sidebar)

In 1997, Monsanto ran a full page advertisement expounding on the costs of biotech research and the need to patent seed, ending with this pitch:

"....In short, these few growers who save and replant patented seed jeopardize the future availability of innovative biotechnology for all growers. And that's not fair to anyone."

According to Christian Aid Reports, Monsanto set up a free phone line so farmers can inform on others who might be growing patented seeds. The International Herald Tribune reports that Monsanto attempted to shame seed-saving farmers by broadcasting their names in radio ads.

Challenged by the logistics and expense of policing farmers who clung to the notion that what they raise is their own, Monsanto and other GE companies moved to snatch the options from the farmers entirely. They engineered seeds that would not grow without applications of the company's own chemicals, or that would grow sterile plants.

THE GE PROCESS

A gene codes for production of a protein, which in turn causes a chemical reaction in a plant. Understanding terminator technology requires a general understanding of the typical GE process.

  1. First, genetic engineers identify a gene that conveys the desired trait, such as herbicide tolerance. The transgene, the gene to be transferred, is isolated and spliced to a promoter. A promoter is a DNA sequence that switches a transgene on and determines where and when the gene is expressed in the new GE plant. This first step can be performed with precision.

  2. By various methods, the new spliced gene is inserted into a conventional organism's DNA, usually in cultured cells or seed embryos. The transgenes can be injected with a tiny needle, or attached to small metal particles and shot into the cells with a gun. Viruses and bacteria can be engineered to infect cells with the DNA, or plants cells can be soaked in DNA and electrically shocked. Regardless of method, the transgenes cannot be directed to a specific location on the host DNA, meaning the locations are anybody's guess. Only a small percentage of treated cells manage to incorporate the transgenes. To identify the cells that actually contain transgenes, marker genes are linked to the transgenes during step 1. Genes resistant to antibiotics or herbicides are the markers of choice. After the gene transfer, scientists add antibiotics or herbicides, which kill all cells except those with the resistant transgenes.

  3. The transformed cells grow into mature plants.

How Does Terminator Technology work?

Terminator is one example of "switch" technology, which uses chemicals to turn specific genes in plants on or off at specific times. To render plants sterile, GE scientists set up a complex interaction between three genes that are added to the GE seeds:

  1. A toxin gene to kill the seed late in development.

  2. A piece of DNA between the toxin gene and the promoter that activates it. The gene cannot code for its toxin with the block in place.

  3. A "scissors" gene that makes an enzyme called recombinase. Recombinase can cut the blocking DNA, so the promoter can turn on the toxin gene.

  4. A repressor for the "scissors" gene, which prevents it from producing recombinase.

  5. A chemical, usually tetracycline, which is applied just before the seeds are planted.

Applied just before the sale of the terminator seed, tetracycline keeps the repressor proteins from shutting down the scissors gene. The freed scissors gene cuts the DNA block, and the promoter triggers the toxin gene. Like an activated time bomb, the toxin gene causes the plant to make a toxin late in its cycle, killing the seed.

Your Tax Dollars at Work

Triggering particular outrage over terminator is the source of the funding. The technology, which confers no benefits on farmers or consumers, and carries potential adverse impact on the environment and global food security, was developed in part with public funds. The original Terminator patent is owned jointly by the USDA and Delta & Pine Land Co, soon to be acquired by Monsanto. (see OAL pp 34, 52-53).

Apparently ignoring the public outcry, USDA continues to support GURT with taxpayer dollars. According to RAFI, a new patent reveals that USDA funding supports additional Terminator research at Purdue University in Indiana.

Risks of Terminator

Beyond the obvious risks of the antibiotics and antibiotic resistant genes, will the toxins in the seeds affect the health of people and animals who consume them? The part of the plant humans and livestock eat in most GE crops are the seeds. Soy and corn are the most common GE foods. Canola and cotton seeds derivatives end up in food stuffs and livestock feed.

According to Dr. Martha Crouch, associate professor of biology at Indiana University, "the effects of the toxin on the uses of the seed are a serious question." On page 8 of the patent, the authors acknowledge the toxicity problem, saying "[i]n cotton that would be grown commercially only selected lethal genes could be used since these proteins could impact the final quality of seeds....If the seed is not a factor in the commercial value of a crop (e.g., in forage crops, ornamentals or plants grown for the floral industry) any lethal gene should be acceptable."

According to Crouch, this logic ignores how a particular toxin will affect other organisms that eat or infect the seeds, and the soil. "Further, a floral or ornamental crop with Terminator may happen to grow near a related crop where the seeds are used." For example, an ornamental sunflower could spread Terminator to an oilseed variety, and the toxin could end up, unsuspected, in edible oil or meal.

Crouch also warns, "There also may be nutritional changes in seeds that are killed late in development. Although most of their oils and proteins are present, it is possible that seeds will start to deteriorate or will lack some minor component that is important."

Crouch adds, "It is likely that Terminator will kill the seeds of neighboring plants of the same species, under certain conditions." Pollen from terminator plants will carry the toxin gene. If it pollinates a conventional crop, the toxin gene will be activated in the new seed. The seed will die, but the conventional farmer will not know until the planted seed fails to germinate.

In most cases, sterile seeds would confine terminator gene pollution to the first generation. However, according to Crouch, an unpredictable process called gene silencing could allow transferred terminator genes to be carried into future generations. GE experiments show that introduced genes can suddenly stop working. Plants containing "silenced" terminator genes could reproduce, perhaps for several generations. Terminator genes could then activate unexpectedly at later time.

The Global Food Supply

Terminator technology threatens the food supply of a hungry world. Even Gordon Conway, president of the biotech-friendly Rockefeller Foundation, publicly asked Monsanto to refrain from marketing terminator, because the possible consequences for Third World farmers outweigh any social benefits in protecting innovation.

According to Rural Advancement Foundation International (RAFI), the previously listed companies that dominate food engineering also account for 60% of the global pesticide market and 23% of the global seed market. Monsanto continues to gobble up seed companies aggressively, including the international seed operations of the seed giant, Cargill. Many of these corporations' activities are obscured by their countless subsidiaries. Stock ownerships, partnerships, and joint ventures have extended both their influence and their control of the food supply.

Some of these agricultural and biotech giants also own large food processing subsidiaries. Gerber, for example, is a subsidiary of Novartis. The growing linkage of seed, agrochemical, and food-processing companies could reduce the diversity of food products that reach the markets--restricting choice to what the controllers of the global food supply choose to offer.

Already, US consumer choice is restricted. Short of consuming organic foods exclusively, US consumers cannot avoid unlabeled GE foods. Terminator seeds are not yet on the market, and both Austra-Zeneca and Monsanto have announced that due to public opposition, they will not market terminator for the present. However, other companies are developing similar technology, and Monsanto says it will continues research on seed sterilization. Austra-Zeneca has switched to seeds that will not grow without periodic applications of its chemicals.

Terminator aside, at least 35 percent of this year's soy crop and 25 percent of the corn crop are GE. Furthermore, reading a few labels will reveal soy and corn derivatives in most processed foods.

Are they safe? Who knows? FDA does not require safety testing of GE food crops, recommending only voluntary testing by the seed companies. Seed companies are to be responsible for determining the safety of their products, essentially on the honor system--the honor of companies that gave us such products as Agent Orange; the now-banned PCB pesticides still found in America's land, water, humans, and animals; and the now-banned pesticide DBCP, which caused sterility in agricultural workers.

A corporate world order that programs organisms to self-destruct and serve corporate ends--it sounds like a plot for a science fiction movie. Even so, it is developing at this very moment.

Barbara Keeler has focussed on health, nutrition, the environment, and regulatory affairs as a journalist and author.

Shirley Watson is Director of Education for the American Chiropractors Association's Council on Nutrition