By TIM THORNBERRY
Kentucky Correspondent

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The idea of genetically modified (GMO) crops strikes fear in many and excitement in others; it is fair to say the subject remains controversial. The latest debate comes as the USDA is considering a petition from Syngenta Seeds, Inc. to deregulate a corn variety known as Event 3272, which would be used for ethanol production only.

The idea of crop modification is relatively new, having gained momentum in the 1990s. Biotech companies worked to create varieties of plants that could withstand everything from insects to cold weather.

Intentions may have been good; acceptance, however, has been mixed. Many feel altering the genetic makeup of crops is messing with nature and asking for trouble, while others see it as a boon for food production.

The Center for Food Safety (CFS) is one group serving as a watchdog over the creation and use of GMO crops, and touting organic and other forms of sustainable agriculture.

The CFS is asking the Obama administration to “refrain from approving” the use of Event 3272, noting concerns the biofuel corn will make its way into the food chain. This is something Syngenta said would not happen but Bill Freese, CFS science policy analyst, said one doesn’t have to look too far back in history to see a similar scenario that ended in a contaminated food supply.

Fewer than 10 years ago, the food industry found itself scrambling to contain another GMO variety of corn known as StarLink which produced protein Cry9C.

The corn was approved for animal feed only and was never intended to be introduced into the human food chain. Cry9C was thought to trigger allergic reactions.

Once the protein was discovered in food products, massive recalls created a logistics nightmare for food manufactures, grain elevators and producers. The end result saw the corn variety taken off the market and millions of dollars in compensation paid to producers.

“From a farmer’s perspective, there should be huge concern,” said Freese. “This corn from Syngenta has a lot of similarities to StarLink. Syngenta has claimed there will be a closed-loop system and it will be routed only to ethanol plants.”

Freese added that the manufacturer of StarLink was required to keep that out of the food chain, too, and it failed “disastrously.

“I think we are going to see exactly the same thing if this Syngenta corn gets approved,” he said. 

“The Bush Administration’s USDA rushed this GE (genetically engineered) corn to the brink of approval without giving any serious consideration to its potential impacts on human health, the environment or the economy.”

In its comments to the USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) about the variety, the CFS noted, “Its approval is unnecessary. The only stated need and reason for this crop is to help meet U.S. statutorily created biofuel goals, but output is already well ahead and meeting those goals without Event 3272.

“Ethanol production from corn surpassed the 2012 target for ethanol production (7.5 billion gallons) in 2007 (more than 8 billion). And with 10 billion gallons of ethanol produced in 2008, the country is well on the way to achieving the mandate for 2022 without the introduction of Event 3272 corn.”

The CFS went on to report in its comments: “The APHIS approval will contaminate the food supply, causing economic harm to organic and conventional farmers, export markets and endangering the public’s right to choose. USDA proposes unconditional approval for Event 3272, relying on the corn’s developer, Syngenta, to protect non-industrial corn from contamination.

“APHIS does not include any measures of its own to prevent contamination, or even analyze the efficacy of Syngenta’s proposed stewardship measures.

But past experience with genetically engineered StarLink corn leaves no doubt that this arrangement will result in substantial contamination of organic and conventional corn; likely cause considerable economic losses to US farmers, corn exporters and the food industry; and endanger consumers’ right to choose uncontaminated corn products.

“If we learned anything from the StarLink episode, it is that voluntary, industry-led agreements to curtail contamination do not work in the real world.”

Freese opined it is surprising and a bit unnerving that more attention has not been paid to the fact that most of the major seed manufacturers have been bought by chemical companies. Not only will the companies be selling the seeds but the herbicides to go with them, he said.

Jan. 20 was the last day for public comment to the USDA concerning Event 3272. So far, there is no word on the fate of the new corn variety but whatever the outcome, arguments will continue as to whether GMO crops are the wave of the future or the downfall of the food chain.