Deregulate GMOs? So says Federoff

Nina Federoff's op-ed in the August 18 New York Times infuriates.  Her blatantly one-sided interpretation of the benefits of GMOs and the chemical fertilizers and pesticides that accompany them neglects to address the true issues surrounding not only GMOs but intensive, non-ecological farming as a whole.  While the growing population and their burgeoning desire for meat-based protein are relevant, pertinent issues which must be confronted, to neglect the benefits of sustainable, ecological, low-cost farming methods is atrocious.  Agroindustries and deregulated genetic modification are not the only solutions to the mounting problems of global warming and an ever increasing population.  Federoff grossly overlooks the proven problems that accompany GMOs.  Has she not read of the new superweeds that have become resistant to Round-Up (Monsanto's powerful herbicide which many GMO crops have been modified to withstand)?  An article in the Daily Mail refers to statistics from the journal Weed Science stating that 21 species of weeds have become resistant to glyphosate (the principal ingredient in Round-Up) and there are now 11 million acres in the U.S. (up from 2.4 million in 2007) infested with glyphosate resistant weeds. A quick search of Weed Science's current issue has countless articles relating to glyphosate resistance.  So that parked tractor that Federoff cites as a boon to the environment is actually busy 1. applying various herbicide cocktails to try to kill these weeds 2. plowing up the field to try and rid it of its invasive weeds 3. parked in the shade watching as the field of soybeans becomes worthlessly covered by superweeds.

Federoff's big push is the total deregulation of genetically modified organisms. She claims that there is "no scientifically credible evidence of harm."  While we can easily argue over the definition of "harm," one thing is clear: as long as industry is self-regulating and conducting it's own studies on the negative effects of gene modification, there will be no evidence of harm until it is too late. 

NY Times op-ed from August 18th, 2011


Letters in response to the op-ed


Anna Lappe's excellent rebuttal of Nina Federoff's op-ed