cross-posted at annoyedomnivore.wordpress.com
Scientists generally are people who tend to explore the natural world in a quest to gain knowledge and expanded understanding. Engineers simply apply gained knowledge to solve perceived and real problems, often with an eye towards optimizing cost and efficiency, but without thoroughly examining the consequences of their actions. People distinguish between the two undertakings, but it seems we’ve entered a time where scientists are behaving more and more like engineers.
I mused on this new breed of scientists as I came across a warning about genetically modified moths. I was actually shocked, a state of mind not diminished the more I read. Deliberately or no, a group of U.S. scientists conducted the first confined field test of a genetically modified moth shortly after 9/11. The nation was traumatized and certainly preoccupied, and so the test went largely unnoticed. Cautious, still, about a possible threat from rabid environmentalists, the field cages were fenced off and placed under guard. It was a confined test, but now the USDA wants to conduct an open-air, three year field test hosted by Cornell University.
The initial experiment intended to test the breeding ability of genetically modified pink bollworms, an invasive species from Asia that reached the U.S. in the 1920’s. This moth is a major pest in cotton fields. “Pink bollworm is the most important cotton pest in the world,” entomologist Thomas J. Henneberry declares. “It’s found in almost every cotton-producing country and has caused millions of dollars of damage and lost acreage in the last 35 years in the United States.” According to the National Cotton Council (NCC) Pink Bollworm Action Committee, total costs to cotton producers are more than $21 million annually in prevention, controls and lost yields. Infestation has traditionally been controlled by insecticide use, after-harvest plowing, and heavy irrigation intended to drown any remaining larvae.
But in 2002, the Agricultural Research Service (ARS), the USDA’s chief scientific research agency, released four eradication approaches that were to be tested in coming years. The first wanted to shorten the growing season, making it harder for the larvae to survive to the next season. Then they wanted to switch exclusively to Bt cotton, a transgenic pest resistant cotton. (Bollworms, as one would expect, developed a resistance to the Bt cotton, acknowledged by Monsanto in 2009.) The third technique was to somehow disrupt mating, and the last approach involved releasing sterile moths into cotton fields. In this regard, scientists hoped to insert a lethal gene from a bacterium into the moth which would kill the larvae. The hope was/is that the genetically modified moths would compete successfully with fertile moths and eventually decimate the population. Cornell University, in conjunction with the USDA, is also working to genetically modify the diamondback moth, a food crop pest.
Releasing genetically modified insects into the open air has been done before. Oxitec, a British biotech company, has already tested genetically modified insects in Malaysia, Brazil and the Cayman Islands. Now it wants permission to release GM mosquitos in Florida to fight dengue fever, despite the fact that dengue has not been seen in Florida since 1934, and continued methods employed by the Florida Keys Mosquito Control District have been effective thus far in controlling the mosquito population. These genetically modified insects, in theory, reproduce and pass on the lethal gene that kills their offspring. Oxitec’s down data, however, reveals a three to four percent survival rate of mosquito offspring and no environmental impact studies have been conducted.
The USDA is solely authorized to approve field tests on these super bugs, leaving the EPA and the FDA out of the loop when it comes to the study of environmental and human health impacts. The USDA has not considered or assessed the potential impact of animal and/or human consumption of these GM insects. They also have not looked into the effects of long distance dispersal of the insects on organic farms, which are not allowed to use GM organisms. And there is no possible plan in place to destroy released GM insects should they prove harmful. The Center for Food Safety, along with American Lands, Pesticide Action Network of North America, Department of Planet Earth and the International Center for Technology Assessment, are all opposed. An attorney for CFS, back in 2001, released a statement saying that, “It is shocking to see USDA treat this proposal so unprofessionally. USDA is supposed to look at the impacts and alternatives objectively, but it is incapable of that for the pink bollworm project because the agency is also the GE insects developer. The agency’s failure to do even the most basic environmental analysis demonstrates that the USDA review is completely biased.”
It is the inherent unsafety of these projects that is shocking. The USDA has already demonstrated its inability to track and address unintended results of GM plants; how will they ably track GM productions that can fly? It is worth listening to Dr. John Fagan, who is, albeit, a controversial anti-GM activist. He has a Ph.D. in molecular biology and biochemistry and is the author of Genetic Engineering: The Dangers. He states that “of all the technologies now in use, genetic engineering is especially dangerous because of the threat of unexpected, harmful side effects that cannot be reversed or corrected, but will afflict all future generations. The side effects caused by genetic manipulations are not just long-term. The are permanent.”
Recipe of the Week
The darker and cooler evenings lead one to think of stews and soups for dinner. This lentil stew takes a little time, but is easy. You can omit the sausage, but if you do, season the stew with a little dijon and balsamic vinegar.
Lentil Sausage Stew
1.5 cups lentils
6 cups homemade chicken stock
1.5 cups whole organic canned tomatoes, pureed
6 cloves garlic, minced
one onion, chopped
1 lb locally sourced bulk mild Italian sausage
3 tbls. olive oil
Heat the olive oil in a large stew pot. Add the sausage, breaking it up into pieces. Add the onion and cook until the sausage is cooked and the onions translucent. Add the garlic, tomatoes and stock. Bring to a boil, lower the heat and simmer until done. I cooked this for about two hours to reduce the sauce and bring out the flavors.