Biosafety and Environment Biotechnology
BIOTECHNOLOGY AND BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
IN THE FIELD OF AGRICULTURE AND FOOD PRODUCTION
Dr. Ashok Kumar Panigrahi, Balasore.
Technical challenge:
genetic change of agricultural seed, cotton, soybeans, corn, potato, rice and trees in the forest.
Prologue
The point of all the macabre covers much discussed today in the world is invasion of good science, "biotechnology" in almost every corner of the biosphere and almost turned bad science ", thanotechnology 'to each element of concern that they live and to accelerate the pace of total annihilation biosphere.It all started with a little-known episode in 1980, the decision of the Supreme Court in Diamond VRS. Chakrabarty, where most of the top U.S. court has decided that biological life was legally patentable.
History
Anand Mohan Chakrabraty a microbiologist and an employee General Electric Company (GE) has developed a type of bacteria that could ingest oil from oil spills. GE rushed a patent in 1971, which was rejected lower life forms are not patentable. GE to court and won. In 1985, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) ruled Chakrabraty that the decision could be extended to all plants, seeds and plant tissues or the entire plant kingdom.
U.S. company WR Grace was granted 50 U.S. patents India Neem tree, which they even patented the indigenous knowledge of medicinal uses of neem products (it has since stabilized "biopiracy"). In 1988, the PTO granted patents on animals Harvard professors, and Timothy A. Philip Lader Stewart, who had created a transgenic mouse with genes in chickens and humans. In 1991, the PTO for the grant of the patent human stem cells and later human genes. Biocyte obtained a European patent in all umbilical cord cells from fetuses and newborns, even without the permission of the donors. "European Patent Office (EPO) received applications from the University Baylor to the patentability of the women who had been genetically modified to produce proteins in their mammary glands of GE.
Baylor University essentially sought monopoly rights over the use of human mammary glands to manufacture pharmaceuticals. They also tried to patent blood cells of indigenous peoples of Panama, the Solomon Islands and Papua New Guinea. In a decade in power Chakrabarty the "Supreme Court U.S. has revolutionized research and development of biotechnology involving microbes to human beings who have led them to be stigmatized as bad science "Thanotechnology" in the next decade and hated in the world. Pharmaceutical Biotechnology companies involved in biotechnology rapidly Agriculture has been granted patents on seeds, small seed companies to buy, destruction of their arsenals Seeds and its replacement by genetically modified seeds. In the last decade, several companies have taken control of the monopoly on seeds from around the world, such as soy, corn and cotton (used in processed foods with cottonseed oil). Consequently, almost two thirds. these processed foods showed some GM ingredient has been in.
However, even without markings, referred to U.S. consumers were aware of these widespread food companies in biotechnology. Immediately, they were aware that a citizen is held away from genetically modified foods and have organized to convince regulators to require such markings. Surprisingly, risk assessors U.S. bureaucratic turned a blind eye to evil motives biotechnology companies.
The point of interest
All genetic changes based on technology Recombinant DNA. Today's society faces unprecedented challenges not only in the history of science but of all life on earth. GE's technology allows us to compare the benefits biotechnology companies focused on the ability to draw living organisms, products of three million years of evolution. In the words of Dr. George Wald, Nobel Nobel (1967), Higgins Professor of Biology at Harvard University, "potentially could breed of animal and plant diseases, new, new sources of cancer and novel.
The Register
In 1989, dozens of Americans killed and thousands more were affected and disturbances due to ingestion a version of GM food supplement L – tryptophan. A $ 2 billion was paid by Showa Denko, third in Japan. largest chemistry (Mayen and Gleich, 1994)
In 1996, Pioneer Hi-Bred splicing genes from Brazil nuts into soybeans. Some people are allergic to this nut if shock apoplectic that can cause death. Animal experiments have confirmed this danger and was quickly withdrawn from the market before there were deaths. In the words of Marion Nestle, HOD Nutrition at the University of New York ", the following case could be far from ideal and the public less fortunate."
In 1994 U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved Monsanto r-BGH, a GE growth hormone for dairy cows injected to improve milk production, despite experts warning that the resulting increased IGF-1, a chemical linked to powerful hormone 400-500% higher risk of breast cancer in humans, prostate and colon cancer. According to Dr. Samuel Epstein of the University of Chicago, "induces the malignant transformation of human mammary epithelial cells." Studies in rats confirmed the suspicions and have suffered internal organ damage from the ingestion of r-BGH. Even the FDA's own tests have shown an increase of spleen weight by 46%, a State which is a prelude of "leukemia. The argument that the substance is damaged by pasteurization was canceled by two Monsanto scientists Elasser own Ted and Brian McBride, who revealed only 19% of the hormone are destroyed after 30 minutes Boiling (pasteurization takes only 30 seconds.) Although Canada, the European Union Australia, New Zealand and even the UN Codex Alimentarius refuses to support GE hormones, it is sold freely in the United States by Monsanto. We found two U.S. bureaucrats namely, Margaret Miller and Michael Taylor in the U.S. FDA who helped Monsanto r-BGH pass the barrier of the risk factors were made early employees of Monsanto.
Several other GM products approved by the FDA in the United States means that herbicides are commonly called "carcinogens, ie -" bromoxiny'l use of Bt cotton, Monsanto "Round-up glufosinate or used in GM corn soya and canola. Sharyn Martin, a researcher, has expressed the view that a number of autoimmune diseases are enhanced by foreign DNA fragments that come with food GM is not completely digested in the stomach and intestine of man. These DNA fragments absorbed in the blood is mixed with normal DNA recombination and therefore unpredictable. These DNA fragments were found in the GM soy and other GM products on the market.
Fear Factor
Joe Cummins, Professor Emeritus of Genetics, University of Western Ontario, said, "the cultures of the resistant virus to become the pillar of the biotechnology industry. These crops adventitious viruses have genes that are genetically modified to allow the plants to resist virus attacks. Most fruits, vegetables and baby food market in the United States fall into this category. Laboratory. Experiments have shown that "the viral genes in GE foods potentially lead to new viruses – more lethal than the virus that crops have been protected, which is quite alarming.
In 1986, reported that genetically modified plants with TMV gene delayed development of the disease and this report has opened the floodgates to create resistance to a range of other viruses. But the fact is that the production of viral envelope proteins GE crops do not block the virus into the plant cell, rather than the transgene nucleic acids are exposed to many viruses that are brought to the plant by insects vectors. Some of the results of the study are there to demonstrate that plant viruses can acquire a variety of viral genes by genetically modified plants recombination.
For examples,
* The defective gene red mosaic virus itself is not moving from one cell to another and is not contagious, but is recombined with a copy of this gene in transgenic Nicotiana benthamiana plants, regenerated the RCMVirus infectious.
* GE Brassica napus and Nicotiana bigelovii containing "gene-vi" a
activator virus cauliflower mosaic translation (CaMV), which
recombined with the complementary part of a virus disappeared from the gene, and
produce new infectious virus in all GE plants.
* N. benthamiana expressing a segment of cowpea chlorotic mottle virus (VMAC) gene recombinant protein layer more often with the defective virus lacking this gene.
* N. benthamiana was transformed with three different constructs containing the coat protein sequence coding of Africa cassava mosaic virus (ACMV). The transformed plants were inoculated with a deletion of capsid protein mutant CAMV induces mild systemic symptoms in control plants. Several of these transgenic lines inoculated plants developed systemic symptoms typical CAMV confirm recombination occurred between the mutant viral DNA and DNA integrated construction of the production of progeny virus recombined with "wild type virulence '.
CaMV recombination, when and where?
CaMV 35 S gene promoter, the viral sequence is omnipresent in all GM crops (GMOs) in the workshops that are already marketed or in field trials. This gene is necessary to all producers of GM crops, because it causes production messages from the genes of the inserted genes to provide herbicide tolerance, resistance to insect pest resistance, antibiotics and a number of other known functions to improve the quality of commercial harvest. In the absence of this gene promoter "," gene "inserted" inactive, while in the presence of gene activity remains a high level in all plant tissues, regardless of changing environmental conditions that could significantly affect the activity of "indigenous promoters of the harvest.
The two events in 1999 led by Professor Cummins and others to develop independent global attention industrial scientists alarming these diseases can be disastrous. In fact, Professor Cummins in 1994 had questioned the environmental safety of release of a CaMV 35 s promoter gene for GM plants. Experimental evidence is evidence that the frequency of genetic recombination of CaMV 35 S promoter of the gene was much higher than those of other viruses. When recombinant VMAC recovered from a 3% N. VMAC benthamiana transgenic sequences containing recombinant CaMV was recovered in 36% of N. begelovii GM.
Event -1. Scientists from the John Innes Research Institute published a paper showing that the CaMV 35 S has a recombination hotspot which means it is prone to break and re-associate with other pieces of genetic material, perhaps other viruses.
Event-2. Dr. Arpad Pusztai, a senior scientist who working in the UK Govt. funded Rowett Institute in Scotland was fired from his job because he revealed the results of feeding trials suggesting that potatoes transgenic dangerous. Lab. Rats fed genetically modified foods have increased in the cells of the intestinal mucosa shows damage to the intestine Individuals are not the viral infection.
Scientists Mae-Wan Ho and Ryan Angel published an article in October 1999, Journal of Microbial Ecology and Health disease warning that the CaMV 35 s is interchangeable with promoters of other plant and animal viruses and promiscuity and works effectively in all plants, green algae, yeast and E. coli. Their recombination hotspot is flanked on multiple grounds and is similar to other hot spots recombinant vector, such as T-DNA of Agrobacterium, the other most widely used gene in the production of transgenic plants. He also claimed to have demonstrated in the laboratory. recombination between transgenes viral and infectious virus.
In an article published online in the journal European Food Research and Technology (2006) authors (Marit R. Myhre, and ..) He claims to have constructed expression vectors with inserted CaMV 35 s against two reporter genes', encoding firefly luciferase and green fluorescent protein (GFP), respectively, and carried out transient transfection experiments in enterocytes of man – like cell line Caco – 2 and found that 35 genes CaMV s expression Drive two genes reporters "at significant levels.
Super Virus
Sponsor of the viral genes as CaMV 35 s can be mixed with other genes, viruses, bacteria and others, including retroviruses such as HIV and hepatitis B. CaMV is itself a retrovirus. With retro transposons genomes available in all facilities (which are mobile in nature) and a multitude of viruses with the CaMV 35 s, the possibility of some super virus origin.
In a Canadian study, a plant infected cucumber mosaic virus of patients (CuMV) that lacked a gene needed for the move between plant cells, the crippled CuMV became less active in two weeks – a test mixture of genes, having acquired the operations of large need of all – the test of "horizontal gene transfer.
The Agency International Biosafety Protocol signed by a majority of independent nations in Montreal in January 2000 will not help if things continue to go in that direction.
Threat to antibiotics by plants
A large part of the application uses a genetic marker "of the track where the gene comes in the cell. The use of GM corn plants a gene for ampicillin resistance. The British Royal Society has called for the prohibition of this marker, as threatens a vital antibiotic use.
The resurgence of infectious diseases
"The microbial ecology of health and disease," Journal reported in 1998 that food crop genetic changes can cause a resurgence of infectious diseases. He cited the case of antibiotic resistance, training strains of new, unknown viruses, reducing the immunity of the body through food, etc changed so dramatically impact of bio-engineering with the genes. Also indicated the presence of horizontal gene transfer of transgenic DNA in bacteria. He cited the case of bacteria in the mouth, pharynx and intestine Taking transgenic (Viral) DNA in their pets food that can be easily transmitted to humans through their milk and meat.
Increased allergies to food
The loss of biodiversity in our food has increased in parallel with the increase in food allergies. case studies show that the mass of cells of our body and the immune system appears to reject the excesses of "homogeneity of our
food. independent analysis of Monsanto soybean resistant to glyphosate has shown GM has a 28% increase Kuniz – trypsin inhibitor, a known allergen and an inhibitor of the nutrients.
Nutrition down
A study by Dr. Mark. Lappe in 1999 and published in the Journal of Medicinal Food has demonstrated that genetically modified foods have higher levels of nutrients – compounds of plant estrogen, in particular, "protect the body against heart disease and cancer. A study on the consumption of GM Vita Faba, a Jewish family in soybean, caused levels increased estrogen. This situation is alarming since it is used in baby foods. Milk from cows injected with r-BGH (GE GH) contains significantly higher levels of pus, bacteria and fat cells.
Unnatural Foods
Sometimes Back Monsanto announced it had found "Gene fragments unexpected" in its "Roundup Ready" soybeans. It is well known that proteins of the amendment is in all genetically modified protein consumed by humans ever. DFA own microbiologist Dr. Louis J. Pribyl had in 1992, warned that pleiotropic (unwanted and / or uncontrolled) effects occur in GE plants at frequencies exceeding 30% of known and unknown toxic substances and changes undesirable levels of nutrients that can escape to the attention of breeders. James Marayanski biotechnologist FDA also warned against the lack of consensus among scientists at the FDA about the "equality" of genetically modified foods compared to non-modified food genetically modified.
Environmental Impacts
Changes gene were detected in crops to increase production and reduce the use of toxic agrochemicals. But nothing
could be further from the truth. The Professor David Ehrenfield, Professor Biology, Rutgers University has rightly said, "which was released in the last decade with GM crops increase sales of agrochemicals and production of nutrients from food safely. Ontario (U.S.) Govt. study also showed that the use of herbicides has increased largely due to the cultivation of genetically modified plants.
Soil toxicity
All GM crops are designed to withstand all types of toxins such as herbicides and pesticides, etc, and these chemicals are sold by the biotechnology companies has been developed as genetically modified crops to increase sales of agrochemicals. Scientists like RJ Golburg predicted long ago that GM crops will triple sales of agrochemicals toxic, and over the years, it becomes correct. According to the Service of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, "chemical spray Round" Monsanto out " (A herbicide), which already threatens 74 endangered species in the United States. It will attack other plants photosynthetic activity. Malcolm Kane (former security chief food chain Sainsbury's Super Markets) has revealed that the U.S. Govt. Monsanto raised to reflect the limits of pesticide residues in food as 6 ppm to 20 ppm. According to a study published by the University of California, glyphosate (the active ingredient in "round-up") is the third major cause of farm workers. At least 14 people were killed ingestion of "round-up.
Soil infertility and pollution
In Oregon, scientists have found that bacteria Klebsiella planticola GM, designed for the distribution of agricultural waste to produce ethanol and waste components such as compost – rendered the soil sterile. It has removed essential nutrients such as nitrogen and nitrogen capture fungus died. A similar result has met with GM bacteria, Rhizobium melitoli. Professor Guenther Stotzky of New York University found that the same toxin that eliminates the Kings have also been released the roots of GM plants and contaminated soil, which lasted up to 18 months and soil microbial activity depressed. An Oregon study also showed that microbes GM soil killed wheat plants in the laboratory. when added to the soil.
The loss of seed sovereignty
Some time ago a U.S. magazine "Time" refers to the tendency massive seed companies to large companies buying small seeds, the destruction of varieties their seeds and their replacement by patented GM seeds and check marks as "death of birth." The GM seed companies also get farmers signed contracts not to put their seeds – the confiscation of their sovereign rights over seeds.
Super Weed
It has been shown GM Bt endotoxins are active in the soil at 18 months (Marc Lappe and Britt Bailey) and can be transported to the creation of evil super wild herbs that are resistant to pests – Thus offsetting the balance of nature. Studies in the UK (National Institute of Agricultural Botany) and Denmark (Mikkelsen, 1996) showed growth super weeds near a single generation. U.S. and UK studies have also shown that super weeds resistant to glufosinate (herbicide A). Another study U.S. showed 20 times more genetic difference with GM plants by horizontal gene transfer. A French study has shown that GM canola could transfer genes wild radish. According to the "new science", a farmer in Alberta, Canada, between 1997 and 1999, three fields planted with different canola seed genetically engineered to produce only three different mutant weeds were resistant to Monsanto's Roundup "Cyanamid" continuation "holder and "Freedom" means all proprietary herbicides.
GE super trees, the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem collapse
Trees GM has been developed to withstand super high doses of herbicides in the air to kill all surrounding life with the exception of GM trees. These trees are in bloom for most non-sterile. Monsanto even super trees emit toxic chemicals from their leaves to kill caterpillars, not only, but throughout the life of insects visit. In 2002, China planted millions of "poplar" super trees to combat deforestation, monoculture forestry. These toxins exuded trees without flowers would end in the elimination of all flying insects (bees and butterflies included) to reduce the world of insects books to ragweed and earwigs. Planting in nature, not only causes the collapse of forest ecosystems, including fungi, insects, earthworms, birds and mammals, but also cause genetic pollution through intensive gene flow transgenes in nature and affect animal and human health. The study cases of transgene flow and introgression of transgenes in the wild cultivar Reichman (JR and LS Watrud, Molecular Ecology, 2006) can be cited which established the existence transgenic plants in the wild in Oregon, USA. The case turned on glyphosate – resistant bentgrass (Agrostis stolonifera L.) expressing the CP4 EPSPS gene from Agrobacterium sp. Strain CP4, which confers resistance to the herbicide glyphosate, transgenes have been found in habitats not agronomic test plots in the experimental study of Oregon.
Super Pest
Laboratory. Evidence suggests that the cotton worm, a common plant pests become resistant to Bt sprays. The bug reporting the North Carolina outbreak of Georgia is believed to be related to the facilities of GE, loved by pests. Monsanto Company GE recommends one spray more chemicals lethal methyl-parathion to combat the pest. Transgenic Bt cotton and other crops not GE U.S. India and elsewhere, mainly due to pest problems, as well their desired and expected production failures. Bt cotton has been designed to kill pests such as caterpillars and worms caterpillars of America rose bud, but ended in the elimination of natural predators of these pests and parasites due to these super pests.
Kill beneficial insects
Several studies field has shown genetically change does not kill beneficial insects like Monarch butterflies, larvae (Cornell, 1999). Bt crops have killed lace wings are natural predators of cotton. Bees die when they feed on proteins in GM canola flowers and BT. cotton flowers.
Toxic to mammals
GM potatoes, spliced with DNA from the snowdrop plant to the viral promoter (CaMV 35 s) was found to be toxic to mammals (Like rats) damage to vital organs and immune system. Science has requested that all genetically modified by CaMV – 35 gene promoter that withdrawn from commercial production.
Genetic pollution
Some GM crops are not flowers, but not all. transgenic pollen transported by wind, rain, birds, bees and other insects, fungi and bacteria causesevere genetic contamination. GM canola pollen, GE rapeseed and BT. the cotton can be moved several hundred meters and contaminating non-GM varieties and wild relatives, even across species barriers causing the horizontal transfer of genes. It is postulated that ubiquitous promoter, CaMV 35 s, in fact, improve
horizontal gene transfer and recombination.
A U.S. study showed that 50% of wild straw berries that grow within 50 feet bay straw GM acquired the marker genes from GM and another study showed 25-38% of the sunflower wild growing near GM crops, GM gene markers. Similar studies in Germany related to the GE oilseed rape and Thailand with respect to Bt cotton confirmed the U.S. findings.
Study in England showed that GM-contaminated seed small wild honey
This means that bees carried pollen from genetically modified crops and organic plantations
Indians, who must show the transgenic elements in them.
Blue revolution a revolution in aquaculture is growing rapidly in
that commercial fishing, salmon, trout and catfish are genetically
modified for the rapid growth in size (up to 39 X). This, in turn, clean
cousins in the wild. There are no regulations for safety of non-GM and
native biodiversity and wildlife now.
Decline and Destruction of family farms and owners of small
In the U.S., the labor force in agriculture was 60% in 1850, 4% in 1950 and less than 2% today. In 1935, there were 7 million farms is now more than two million. decreases more or less they have taken place worldwide. But the fact remains that these family farms and small landowners among the products more than 60% of our food. This decline is rooted in the new GATT – WTO. Economic and legislative power were taken by new companies new agricultural order through the GATT – WTO-dominated world. Promotion of genetically modified products in food is the activity of these agro. A large number indigenous varieties of rice on the numbering of several thousand people have already been lost in India two agricultural revolutions. The new world order can delete 1,00,000 farmers Traditional vanilla from Madagascar and the Comoros through GM lakh more vanilla sugar cane farmers in the Third World by GE fructose. Sudan has long since lost its exports of gum arabic. A conservative estimate puts the figure at at least 14 billion U.S. dollars of synthetic substitutes for natural agricultural products of the third world. There are attempts to grow food in large laboratories that eliminates the need for seeds, soil and even plants and move the task food production in agricultural communities GE labs.
Control and dependency
Terminator Technology: –
seed companies transgenic were offered by the laws that farmers would not be entitled to save and exchange proprietary seed. No farmers in seed collection and storage of seeds, which have developed and established a technology widely known as terminator technology "to ensure that seed become sterile after harvest. These seeds contain "Suicide" genes for both male and female lines. Male infertility is caused by a gene (U.S. Patent no. 5,750,867 held by Aventis) from the bacterium called Bacillus amyloliquefeciens barnase 'coding for a ribonuclease that causes the pollen "dead" cells in the absence of pollen meiosis to halve their chromosomes. In addition, a pollen lethal gene is also used, which is expressed in complete development of male flowers in the pollen cells after meiosis, which prevents the pollen is formed. The female sterility gene (U.S. Patent no. 5,633,441 held by Aventis) is related with a selectable marker gene with its own promoter, so that the female sterile plants can be selected. Terminator genes, barnase protein also include papain active, or a fragment of the diphtheria toxin gene markers of herbicide resistance gene or genes are used that confer resistance to pests or disease, a gene for glucuronidase GUS, or thuringiensis Bt (Bacillus) endotoxins. The main problem associated with the process of genetic use different constructions is that it produces a large number of genes that are integrated interference and genetic engineers can not control their integration or multiplication, in turn, multiplies the uncertainties and unpredictable of GM crops. Many of the genes currently used in the production of transgenic crops, such as recombination and the terminator of the lethal genes are harmful to cells, including mammalian cells. Recombinase recombination sites involved in non-specific, which is causing genome large-scale assembly (ISIS News 7 / 8). In addition, GM synthetic genes and other buildings can be spread by horizontal transfer of genes from different species can not be controlled. This large-scale destruction of existing biodiversity evolved in nature to the forces of evolution.
Traitor technology: –
This is another patented bad marketed by modern farming certain crops for which GM technology have controlled their life cycle stages – the period of leaves, flowers and Fruit – under the influence of triggering certain chemicals. Therefore, a farmer is required to use these chemicals if he / she is a crop pushing the child to deeper levels of economic dependence or the debt.
less diversity, quality, quantity and profits
The hopes raised by most misleading GM technology companies is that only GM crops will solve world hunger. Worldwide studies have proven beyond doubt that the monoculture of any culture in any place always gives less per acre as compaired to the polyculture of several cultures – different seed dividers between rows of different locations in or near the same area. In a study of field trials, 8200 Round Roundup Ready soybeans produced fewer bushels of non-GM soy cousin (Charles Benbrook, former director of the Council of Agriculture, the National Academy of Sciences). The average yield for non-GM soy 51.21 bushels per acre, for the GM variety was 49.26. This was confirmed again in a study by the University of Nebraska Institute of Agriculture Resources. Five different strains of Monsanto soybean was planted in four different places with different environments and types of soil. Mr. Elmore noted that, on average, more expensive genetically modified seeds change produced 6% less than non-modified varieties genetically 11% less efficient than conventional crops. Even when the yield is higher (B. t. cotton in some field studies in the United States.) Cost of seed and fertilizers reduce the net benefits significantly decreasing the cost-benefit depleted (B: C) The rate of others. In agriculture, cost-benefit is a very important factor which means the farmer sustainability. Decreased B: C ratio indicates the economic downturn a farmer who makes no profit and can not continue for long in such agriculture.
Fragile future of agriculture: –
The loss of biodiversity makes agriculture agro fragile. The case of the Irish famine of 1840 is a clear example of the importance of cultural diversity factor. When some varieties Irish farmers crops, farmers in Peru were thousands of varieties and diversity if the constant recourse to the blight resistance in potato culture. In the recent past, a similar situation occurred in Russia, where a virulent plague strain – Papa delay – Russia threatened potatoes, generally have the ability to withstand the harsh Russian winter. Cancer Record Florida Citrus threatened $ 8,500,000,000 of the citrus industry in 2000. coca plants, mono-cultures and almost all identical, are also threatened by an international scourge. Therefore, the destruction rather than conservation of the populations of the diversity of crops by agro-GM seeds to create a very dangerous situation and the future of agriculture is extremely fragile.
More pesticides and diminishing returns: –
Contrary to the claims of Business field show that the best cultivation techniques GM – Using the rich natural resources can always produce better crops resistant aa higher yields and more B: C ratios that GM crops. GM crops, over the years has required 2-5 times more pounds per acre as biocides and non-GM varieties that leads to drastic alterations in the environment.
Economic, political and social factor
The monopolization of food production –
There are about 1,500 worlds major seed companies, but a dozen of these control 50% of world market commercial seed. Large seed companies buy small seed companies and use their faith clandestinely market. In 2000, five companies controlled 40% of soybean seed market, three companies control 90% of corn seed market two companies control 75% of the cotton seed market and, therefore, the company reduced and the monopolistic market control increases. Competing with the rules of the GATT-WTO news, not just the number of peasant families are falling sharply, but annual net farm income. The average annual income of small family farms in the U.S. / Europe have fallen in the last decade provided families survive below the poverty line.
Impact of food addiction: –
When food production is monopolized, the future of their supply is dependent on the decisions of a small number of companies and their stocks of seeds effectively. Crop diversity is declining – lost in the developed world and currently in third world countries, except for some pockets – like the potato in Peru and India rice varieties, particularly in the Third World. Grocery Researchers indicate that if these indigenous territories are still disturbed by the advances of biotechnology, the long-term vitality of all food supply the world will be lost forever.
Main Agro biotechnology companies and agricultural industries, 1999.
Total Corporate
Food Sales Seed Sales
Production Agreement (Global) Agro-
Classification of chemical sales (overall) pharmacist
Sales (his
Original business.) Research and
Investment Development
A. Group Life Sciences (involved primarily in the modification genetically different cultures
plants)
U.S. $ 20.5 billion Aventis $ 4,600,000,000 N / A $ 13.9 billion to three billion dollars a
Novartis
(Syngenta) 20.3 billion dollars $ 2,000,000,000 4.4 3 9.8 billion dollars $ 2,200,000,000
Monsanto (98) 8.6 billion 4 billion U.S. $ 2.8 billion 2 $ 3 $ 1,300,000,000
AstraZeneca
(Syngenta) $ 18400000000-2700000000 of $ 2,900,000,000 $ 6 $ 5 14,800,000,000
B. "Industrial Science Group (involved mainly in the production of various
agrochemicals)
27 billion dollars Bayer $ 3,100,000,000 N / A 6 $ 5 billion 2.1 billion
DuPont $ 26,900,000,000 $ 3,000,000,000 $ 1,600,000,000 1 April 1600 million U.S. dollars
18.9 billion dollars $ 2,300,000,000 —— —— Dow 0.85 billion U.S. dollars in August
BASF —— $ 29,500,000,000 $ 1,700,000,000 9 $ 2,500,000,000 $ 1,300,000,000
Biocolonisation: –
Colonization in the past was armed with superior technology. However, the new weapon in the hands of a superpower is a bit of a biological and that GM seed. When a person loses food self-sufficiency, which is entangled in an addiction to food. Therefore alert 5,00,000 Indian farmers have organized a protest against the new GATT in 1993 and now are opposed to genetically modified seeds, agricultural products genetically modified. Recently the European Communities launched the Slow Food movement, which is experiencing rapid growth in a global movement mainly to the reduction of modified transgenic crops and save the decline of biodiversity and
indigenous knowledge on farming techniques, organic-based agricultural biodiversity.
Dependence and slavery: –
The new rules are passed by the orders of the new world, the GATT – WTO, etc. empower the local economy can not be ignored completely. Foreign companies can buy and have all the local companies, seed water, land and resources natural, convert into cash exported, pushing the local economy's dependence and slavery.
Where does the future lead us?
Long ago the philosopher Descartes postulated that space can be universally
or infinitely separated. Not long ago designed the famous Einstein equation E = mc2, which led to the annihilation of two Japanese cities that was the end of World War II. Now is the time of genetic engineering or gene splicing, technology recombinant DNA, the introduction of foreign DNA – the promoters and markers – Genetic modification of all forms of life – not for the good of humanity, but using thanotechnology to make money badly. global sense prevailed destroy or limit the nuclear weapons that belonged to the two powers. But the madness is spreading rapidly as recombinant DNA technology applications in the living world that threatens their existence. Is there a Cartesian approach in a different way?
Is it better to be safe than cure?
In response to rapid advances in genetic engineering and
Application forms of life, the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety was negotiated and entered into force from September 2003. Protocol
establishing a system governing the international movement of genetically modified organisms
aim to protect global biodiversity against the adverse effects of GMOs. The
WTO covers only trade in GMOs, has a different purpose, namely for avoid
limits on the free movement of GMOs. Thus, the Protocol in a sense
conflict with the WTO. Therefore, the harmonization of these agreements is
desirable. The idea is that the protocol will be used by WTO as
Proof of the internationally recognized norms relating to GMOs. However,
unlikely WTO to accept the proposal. Is there a solution?
In 1999, approximately 28 million hectares of plantations worldwide were under GE on charges that were pests, disease resistant and provide enough food to end hunger.
The opinion of others is these crops have been released released without sufficient evidence and questioned its long-term safety with respect humans and the environment.
Governments around the world have been in a dilemma, to allow or not allow, a decision most likely heavily influenced by the bureaucrats in the absence of adequate scientific consensus on the issue of the threat to the biological world.
On the basis of the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Cartagena Protocol, which entered into force from 11 September 2003 was a regime that regards the international movement of all organisms (LMOs) that contain genetically modified organisms and other organisms created by the fusion of cells from different taxonomic categories – in accordance with the precautionary principle.
The Protocol applies to two categories LMO: –
1. LMOs intended for release into the environment, such as fish, plants and
seeds, etc. covered by the operational areas.
2. LMOs intended for use in food or feed or for processing, such as cereals,
soy milk, etc.
All living modified organisms are medicinal products Humans are excluded from the protocol,
has been challenged by the States of the European Union has declared its veto on the United States, but this objection.
Under the Protocol, trade in LMOs with non-parties (like the U.S.) should be performed the same way as with the parties.
Articles 12.7 of the Protocol, Advance Informed Agreement (AIA) has described as its backbone requires exporting countries to obtain the consent of the importing country before sending the lives of LMOs, for the first time in its national information. The importing country then you must acknowledge receipt of the notification and decide whether to accept the shipment within a certain period of time. Under the protocol, a risk assessment should be carried out for all decisions regarding the acceptance of shipments of LMOs. One of the party may accept the transfer of certain conditions, prohibit the import or request additional information from the exporter. The Protocol also establishes a "Clearing House" for the importing country should notify its decision on the import of a particular LMO within 270 days from the notification initial. However, under the Protocol to the lack of notification does not imply consent.
The United States, even if not a party to the Protocol exerted considerable influence on the scope of the protocol under negotiation. His intention was to ensure that the protocol was as limited as possible to protect the industry effect American biotechnology. The main objective of the United States was to subordinate the Protocol to WTO rules for international trade of GMOs not be broken.
Involving the United States, the 135 member countries previously divided into two groups ie. Like-Minded Group "for most countries developing, with the exception of Argentina, Chile and Uruguay and the "Miami Group", including countries such as Australia, Argentina, Chile, Uruguay and the United States, exporters and importers of GMOs. Miami Group in favor of a weakness of the Protocol, which does not disrupt international trade of GMOs.
The United States has attempted the question GMO trade moved to the mandate of the WTO. Only the lack of support from the EU to the WTO forced to lose value against the issue of GMOs, in turn, provided more weight to the Protocol.
At the insistence of the draft protocol of U.S. savings included the clause "A" in the "Preamble" not in the "device" and the United States in connection with paragraph 2 and ignoring the claims, third paragraph of this Treaty shall affect the rights and obligations of governments under the WTO rules.
Any conflict between the Protocol and the WTO would likely be subject to conflicts Group WTO, if a party to the dispute has not signed the agreement on the environment (such as USA). For example, if India, according to the protocol prohibited the import of some GMOs in the United States, the United States may take the dispute panel of the WTO dispute indicates that India had violated WTO rules and in such cases, the result can be predicted well because the role that the body of a dispute is to interpret the WTO agreement and the protocol.
Therefore, the question – Is it better to prevent cure? And the answer may be: "Sorry, it may be too late." We are half of globalization. We have already decided our destiny through legislation and policy decisions that maybe we can not go back. However, we have enough of biodiversity that we must support any how and at what cost.
About the Author
Author is an avid natrure analyst,has worked on & written books,research papers and short & large articles on several aspects of the nature such as farming,forest,food and water etc.
Chicago Counterpoint with Jeffery M. Leving (4-17)
