The following is a local mirror of the text of the PANNA GE introduction. 
If you want pictures and links that come with the original presentation, please visit PANNA at this link.

                      In a nutshell, the big
                      agricultural
                      biotechnology
                      corporations are

                          commercializing
                          genetically altered
                          crops and foods; 
                          creating
                          unprecedented risks
                          to health, the
                          environment and conventional and organic
                          farmers; 
                          misleading the public about benefits and
                          safety; and 
                          getting away with it because of inadequate
                          regulation, entailing the near complete
                          violation of consumers' right-to-know. 

                      This presentation provides a brief but
                      comprehensive overview of these far-reaching
                      issues.

What are genetically engineered crops
                      and foods?

                      Genetically engineered crops are plants with
                      DNA {Definition} in which bioengineers have
                      inserted one or more genes. Genetically
                      engineered foods contain ingredients made from
                      Genetically engineered crops or other uses of
                      genetic engineering.

                      Genes are templates that cells use to
                      create proteins, which determine many
                      of an organism's characteristics.
                      Changing an organism's genes,
                      therefore, can cause its cells to make new
                      proteins, causing it to exhibit a new trait.

                      For example, a gene that makes a fish resistant
                      to cold, can make a tomato plant create proteins
                      which may similarly give it greater resistance to
                      cold temperatures. 

Genetic engineering versus traditional
                      breeding

                      Traditional breeding is another way of getting
                      genes into an organism to cause it to exhibit a
                      new trait. Although the biotechnology industry
                      would have you believe that genetic engineering
                      is just like traditional breeding, it is radically
                      different.

                      In traditional breeding, members of
                      the same or very similar species are
                      crossed to create offspring with some
                      novel trait. This greatly limits the
                      genes that can be combined. Furthermore, when
                      different but similar species are crossed, their
                      offspring are generally infertile -- preventing
                      inter-species gene combinations from
                      propagating in the wild. For example, a donkey
                      and a mare can make a mule, but the mule will
                      be infertile, the end of the line for the combined
                      genes.

                                     Genetic
                                     engineering smashes these
                                     natural barriers! Using gene
                                     insertion, any gene from
                                     any plant, animal,
                                     bacterium, fungus or virus
                      can be inserted into the DNA in reproductive
                      cells of any other organism. If the resulting
                      organism survives, it generally can pass on its
                      altered DNA, along with and new traits, through
                      normal reproduction. For example, genetic
                      engineering enables scientists to create pigs
                      which have human genes, genes which will be
                      passed on to future generations. 

Inherent danger

                      Since an organism's genes serve as templates to
                      create proteins, which determine many of the
                      organism's characteristics, new genes are
                      inserted into an organism's DNA so that it
                      produces novel proteins and novel
                      characteristics. The inherent danger in creating
                      crops and foods in this way is that these novel
                      proteins may easily have unforeseeable
                      consequences

                      The likelihood of
                      unforeseeable consequences is
                      exacerbated by the fact that
                      gene insertion is actually
                      wildly imprecise. Scientists
                      cannot determine where, or
                      how many, genes end up in a
                      host organism's DNA. This
                      random insertion of genes can
                      create proteins that have never
                      existed before in nature. It can
                      also inactivate existing genes
                      (preventing them from expressing a normal
                      protein) or activate inactive genes (creating
                      proteins that normally are not expressed).

                      Environmental scientists discovered decades
                      after their introduction that synthetic pesticides
                      such as DDT (which do not exist in nature)
                      caused widespread harm to people and the
                      environment. {Note} Genetically engineered
                      foods (which contain proteins that do not exist
                      in nature) may prove to have similar
                      unpredictable impacts. As Richard Lacey,
                      microbiologist, medical doctor, and Professor
                      of Food Safety at Leeds University said, "The
                      fact is, it is virtually impossible to even
                      conceive of a testing procedure to assess the
                      health effects of genetically engineered foods."
                      {Source}

                                 The fundamental uncertainty
                                 involved in creating new genetic
                                 combinations that spread to future
                                 generations is raising profound
                                 objections. Nobel laureate and
                                 Harvard professor emeritus in
                                 biology Dr. George Wald put it
                      this way: "Our morality up to now has been to
                      go ahead without restriction to learn all that we
                      can about nature. Restructuring nature was not
                      part of the bargain." 

Genetic engineering applications

                      So how is the industry applying genetic
                      engineering to crops and foods? The most
                      common uses are:

                      Herbicide-tolerant crops.
                      These are crops engineered
                      to tolerate a weed killer so
                      that it can be applied without
                      harming the crop. For
                      example, Monsanto sells
                      Roundup Ready® crops,
                      which have been engineered to tolerate its
                      Roundup herbicide (glyphosate).
                      Herbicide-tolerant crops account for about 74%
                      of all genetically engineered crops. {Source}

                                Pesticide crops. Pesticide crops
                                are engineered to produce a
                                pesticide inside the plant. For
                                example, Bt corn contains a toxin
                      normally produced by the Bacillus
                      thuringiensis bacterium. {Note} These crops
                      account for about 19% of all genetically
                      engineered crops. {Source}

                      There are also crops that are herbicide-tolerant
                      and produce pesticide. These account for about
                      7% of all genetically engineered crops.
                      {Source}

                      Less prevalent applications of genetic
                      engineering include:

                      Production chemicals. Some
                      genetically engineered products
                      are chemicals used in food
                      production. For example, more than 30% of
                      U.S. dairy cows are injected with recombinant
                      bovine growth hormone (rBGH) to increase
                      their milk production and the genetically
                      engineered enzyme chymogen is used in 60% of
                      U.S. cheese production. {Source}

                              Virus-resistant crops. Some crops
                              are genetically engineered to resist
                              viruses (for example, genetically
                      engineered squash and papaya).

                      Applications of genetic engineering currently
                      under development include:

                      Use-restriction
                      crops. Under
                      development are
                      crops that limit their own use. For example,
                      so-called "Terminator" seeds grow "normally,"
                      but produce sterile seeds, forcing farmers to buy
                      new seed every year, instead of being able to
                      save, share and breed them.

                             Genetically engineered animals.
                             Some production animals are
                             genetically engineered for some
                             "advantageous" trait. For example,
                      under development are Atlantic Salmon that are
                      engineered to use more of their own growth
                      hormone so that they grow faster.

                      "Pharming." Biotech companies are also
                      engineering animals to produce pharmaceutical
                      drugs in their milk, urine, blood, sperm or eggs,
                      or to grow organs for transplantation. For
                      example, sheep, pigs, goats, cows and chickens
                      have been engineered as industrial drug
                      factories (or "bioreactors.") {Source} 

                      Added nutrients. Also under development are
                      foods that have additional nutritional value. For
                      example, so-called "golden rice" contains extra
                      beta-carotene, the precursor to vitamin A,
                      which can be beneficial to those with vitamin A
                      deficiency. 

Genetically engineered crops and foods
                      now on the market

                      Although the first genetically engineered crops
                      hit the market only in 1994, genetically
                      engineered foods are now widespread. Chances
                      are you are already buying genetically
                      engineered foods. Without mandatory labeling,
                      however, you can't really tell.

                      About 16% of U.S. cropland is
                      planted with genetically
                      engineered crops, {Source}
                      making the U.S. by far the world's
                      largest producer. {Note} In 2000,
                      about 75% of U.S. soybeans, 25%
                      of corn and 72% of cotton were
                      genetically engineered varieties.
                      {Source} There are also
                      genetically engineered canola,
                      potatoes, squash, tomatoes, and
                      other crops.

                                 Many food
                                 products contain
                                 soy, corn,
                                 cottonseed or
                                 canola -- or
                                 common soy and
                                 corn derivatives such as lecithin,
                                 soy oil, soy proteins, corn syrup
                                 and cornstarch. The food industry
                                 estimates that more than 60% of
                                 all non-organic processed foods
                                 sold in U.S. supermarkets contain
                                 genetically engineered
                                 ingredients. {Source}

                                 Some of the foods that have tested
                                 positive include infant formula,
                                 tortilla chips, soy burgers, bacon
                                 flavor bits, taco shells and corn
                      muffin mix. {Source}{Note} 

                      Many more genetically engineered foods are on
                      the way! Approvals have been granted for
                      thousands of new field trials of genetically
                      modified plants. {Source} Foods being readied
                      for market include: genetically engineered fish
                      and seafood, lettuce, peppers, melons, peas,
                      rice, wheat, strawberries, raspberries,
                      pineapples, bananas, apples and pigs.

Industry's claims

                      Facing growing consumer
                      resistance, the
                      biotechnology industry now
                      touts genetically engineered foods as a panacea
                      for all kinds of problems. It has at times even
                      claimed that they will solve world hunger, make
                      agriculture sustainable, turn things around for
                      struggling farmers, eliminate pesticide use and
                      wipeout disease through enhanced nutrition.

                                   One after another, however,
                                   these claims ring hollow.
                                   Consider hunger. There is
                                   little evidence to support the
                                   claim that genetically
                                   engineered crops have higher
                                   yields. Even if they did,
                                   however, hunger has little to
                                   do with the overall volume of
                      food produced. The United Nations Food
                      Programme reports that there is enough food
                      produced worldwide to feed everyone one and
                      a half times over. {Source} Amid plenty, about
                      36 million people in the U.S. in 1998, nearly
                      40% of them children, did not have access to
                      enough food. {Source} Clearly, hunger is
                      therefore a matter of poverty and access to
                      resources, not simple abundance. 

The public relations onslaught

                      To advance its claims about genetically
                      engineered crops, Monsanto, DuPont, Novartis
                      (now part of Syngenta), Dow, Aventis and other
                      major biotechnology companies are spending
                      heavily on public relations. For example, they
                      launched one U.S. public relations (PR)
                      campaign for $52 million. 

                      The campaign is directed by
                      BSMG Worldwide (recently
                      purchased by Weber
                      Shandwick), a major PR
                      player with clients such as
                      Philip Morris, Microsoft and
                      the Chemical Manufacturers
                      Association. BSMG
                      advertised its special skills in
                      "crisis management," "technology PR" and
                      "express[ing] an industry viewpoint" with
                      "powerful, emotionally resonant messages."
 

                      Modern public relations entails manipulative
                      advertising and big money lobbying--it has little
                      to do with truth or democracy. 

Profit frenzy

                      The biotechnology industry is making
                      unsubstantiated claims and spending millions on
                      public relations because genetic engineering is
                      highly profitable for them. It offers nothing less
                      than a new frontier for investment and
                      commercialization.

                      Since 1980, when
                      the U.S. Supreme
                      Court ruled that a
                      corporation could
                      patent a genetically
                      engineered organism, the industry has invested
                      more than $20 billion in genetic engineering
                      ventures. {Source} Now these investments are
                      starting to show significant returns. Revenues
                      for genetically engineered crop products have
                      grown like weeds: Sales grew from an
                      estimated US$75 million in 1995 to an
                      estimated whopping $2.1 to 2.3 billion in 1999.
                      {Source}

                                        The drive for profit has
                                        resulted in countless
                                        cases of extraordinary
                                        harm. In one remarkable
                                        case, negligent corporate
                                        practices by Union
                                        Carbide's chemical plant
                                        in Bhopal, India, resulted
                                        in a 1984 chemical leak
                                        causing at least 16,000
                      deaths and hundreds of thousands of injuries and
                      illnesses. {Source} In 1999, Union Carbide
                      merged with biotechnology giant Dow
                      Chemical. Corporate profiteering has played a
                      decisive role in the crises of ozone depletion,
                      air pollution, acid rain, pollution of rivers,
                      lakes and ground water, depletion of fisheries,
                      loss of soil productivity, forest destruction and
                      the irreversible loss of species, as well as an
                      astounding range of human injury and disease.
 

                      Impacts!

                      Genetically engineered crops and foods pose
                      profound risks to human health and the
                      environment. They also have serious impacts on
                      agriculture, farmers, rural communities and the
                      organic foods movement.

                      While assessing these potential
                      (and in some cases already
                      demonstrated) impacts, it is
                      important to keep in mind that
                      industrial practices are not
                      "innocent until proven guilty."
                      Whereas the biotechnology industry demands
                      that its opponents must provide conclusive
                      proof of serious harm, food safety advocates
                      around the world say the burden of proof should
                      be on the industry to demonstrate conclusively
                      that genetically engineered foods are safe.
                      According to this principle, when facing
                      uncertainty about serious harm, precaution, not
                      profit, should rule. 

Health impacts

                      Many health professionals around the world
                      have sounded the alarm on genetically
                      engineered foods. The British Medical
                      Association, for example, has called for an
                      indefinite moratorium on genetically engineered
                      foods. {Source} The health hazards of
                      genetically engineered foods include:

                      Allergens. The novel proteins in
                      genetically engineered foods can
                      cause unexpected allergic reactions.
                      For example, in 1996 researchers
                      found that soybeans engineered by Pioneer
                      Hi-Bred with a gene from a Brazil nut could
                      cause potentially fatal allergic reactions in
                      those with Brazil nut allergies. In this case,
                      researchers knew to look for the common Brazil
                      nut allergy reaction, but testing for unexpected
                      allergens is exceedingly difficult and would be
                      tremendously expensive. {More}

                              Toxins. Genetically engineered foods
                              may have toxic effects. For example,
                              Monsanto's genetically engineered (or
                              recombinant) bovine growth hormone
                              (rBGH) is used in milk production,
                              where it raises the level of
                              Insulin-like Growth Factor-1 (IGF-1).
                      Studies suggest that people with elevated levels
                      of IGF-1 are more likely to get prostate cancer
                      {Source}, breast cancer {Source} and lung
                      cancer {Source} than those with normal levels.
                      {Note} Genetically engineered potatoes were
                      found to weaken rats' immune systems and
                      adversely affect their kidneys, thymuses,
                      spleens, guts and brains. {Source} Another
                     study found a genetically engineered yeast
                      significantly more toxic than the non-genetically
                      engineered strain. {More}

                      Antibiotic resistance. For
                      technical reasons having to do with
                      the imprecise nature of gene
                      insertion, most genetically
                      engineered organisms are also
                      given a gene conferring resistance
                      to antibiotics. {More} Although these antibiotic
                      resistance genes are only used early in the
                      process, they generally remain fully functional
                      in the host organism. According to the Union of
                      Concerned Scientists, when eaten, these foods
                      could reduce the effectiveness of antibiotics to
                      fight disease when taken with meals. Another
                      danger is that, although unlikely, it is possible
                      that antibiotic resistance could be passed to
                      dangerous microbes, exacerbating the current
                      crisis of antibiotic resistant infection. {Source}

                      Nutrition. There is evidence that some
                      genetically engineered foods have reduced
                      nutritional quality. For example, a 1999 study
                      found that beneficial phytoestrogen compounds
                      (believed to protect against heart disease and
                      cancer) were lower in some genetically
                      engineered soybeans. 

Environmental impacts

                      Many scientists are becoming increasingly
                      worried about the environmental impacts of
                      genetically engineered crops. These impacts
                      include:

                      Pesticide use. Despite
                      biotechnology industry PR
                      about eliminating pesticides,
                      virtually all genetically
                      engineered crops are either
                      designed to work in concert
                      with conventional pesticides
                      or to themselves contain pesticides. The overall
                      impact of these systems on pesticide use is still
                      unclear, but for some crops the result is clearly
                      an increase in the amount or potency of
                      pesticide use. In general, industrial pesticide
                      use causes the development of resistance in
                      pests, which requires the use of more or more
                      potent pesticides. Whether the pesticides are
                      outside or inside of the plant, genetically
                      engineered crops involve this same spiral of
                      environmental toxins. In fact, because plants
                      engineered to contain pesticides constantly
                      expose pests to toxins, the development of
                      resistance is accelerated, squandering the
                      valuable susceptibility characteristics of pests.

                                      Harm to wildlife and soil
                                      organisms. The toxins in
                                      genetically engineered
                                      crops can harm beneficial
                                      and other non-target insects
                                      and soil organisms. Bt
                      crops, for example, may harm bees {Source},
                      lacewings {Source} and monarch butterflies
                      {Source}. These harms have not been fully
                      investigated.

                      Invasive species. The natural
                      passing of genetically
                      engineered traits from
                      cultivated to wild organisms
                      can make species become
                      invasive. For example, the
                      pollen of genetically engineered crops can
                      travel long distances, where it can transfer its
                      modified DNA to wild relatives. {Note} In fact,
                      two kinds of herbicide-tolerant genetically
                      engineered canola passed their weed-killer
                      resistance to nearby volunteer canola plants,
                      considered by many to be a weed. Super
                      fast-growing genetically engineered Atlantic
                      Salmon now under development could cause
                      extinction of wild salmon if they were to escape
                      into the wild {Note}--an event which many
                      consider inevitable. Such "genetic pollution" is
                      impossible to reverse.

                            Development of new or worse viruses.
                            Scientist are concerned that crops
                            engineered to resist viruses can cause
                      the target viruses to mutate into more virulent
                      forms or enable them to infect a wider range of
                      plants and animals. {Source}

                      Loss of biodiversity.
                      Biodiversity, the variety of living
                      things, is vitally important for
                      healthy ecosystems. For example,
                      the more diverse an agricultural
                      region, the more that region is able to
                      accommodate challenges from pests, disease or
                      climate change. Yet the UN Food and
                      Agricultural Organization estimates that 75% of
                      the genetic diversity in agriculture present at the
                      beginning of this century has been lost.
                      {Source}

                      Genetically engineered crops erode
                      biodiversity. This happens because the
                      biotechnology industry fosters the widespread
                      adoption of only a relatively small number of
                      commercially successful varieties. {Note}
                      Genetic engineering also has the potential to
                      undermine biodiversity by creating invasive
                      species that out-compete native ones. In the
                      U.S., 42% of the species which are threatened
                      or endangered are at risk primarily due to
                      non-indigenous species. 

Impacts on agriculture and farmers

                      Genetically engineered crops and foods pose
                      serious risks to health and the environment, but
                      they also mean trouble for all kinds of farmers.
                      These problems include:

                      Loss of
                      markets. As
                      consumers
                      around the
                      world
                      increasingly
                      say no to
                      genetically
                      engineered
                      foods, farmers are losing markets, and are
                      forced to bear the financial and logistical
                      burdens of testing and segregating crops. In
                      1996, U.S. farmers sold $3 billion worth of
                      corn and soybeans to Europe. In 1999, those
                      exports had shrunk to $1 billion. {Source} In
                      fact, the European Union has enacted a
                      moratorium on importing new biotech food
                      products. {Source} And Japan's new labeling
                     law will no doubt have enormous ramifications
                      for its $3 billion in imports of corn and
                      soybeans from the U.S. Midwest. {Source}

                                   Crop contamination. Even
                                   growers who do not plant
                                   genetically engineered crops
                                   may face market problems from
                                   possible contamination by
                                   nearby genetically engineered
                      crops (via pollen) and from accidental
                      co-mingling of seeds. For example, organic
                      cornchip maker Terra Prima lost $87,000 when
                      its European exports were returned after they
                      tested positive for genetically engineered
                      ingredients. The organic corn of one of the
                      company's suppliers had been contaminated by
                      a neighboring farmer's genetically engineered
                      corn. {Source}

                      Loss of natural pesticides. In their
                      natural forms, Bt-based products
                      are natural, organic-approved
                      biopesticides. Genetically
                      engineered Bt-crops, however, are
                      very different. Their ever-present
                      toxicity is rapidly accelerating the
                      onset of pest resistance to this valuable pest
                      management tool. It is estimated that within five
                      to ten years, current Bt biopesticides will no
                      longer work. Both conventional and organic
                      growers use these low-impact products. In fact,
                      about 67% of U.S. organic farmers use them, at
                      least as a last recourse {Source} and would
                      thus face a serious pest management crisis if
                      they were no longer effective.

                      Loss of independence. Genetically engineered
                      crops extend agribusiness's control over seeds,
                      and therefore its control over farmers.
                      Worldwide, about 1.4 billion farmers save
                      seeds, {Source} freely replanting, trading and
                      sharing them, as well as breeding them to create
                      strains that are well suited to local conditions.
                      Building on the commercialization of modern
                      hybrids, which produce unsuitable seeds and
                      thus require farmers to purchase new seed every
                      year, genetically engineered crops entail
                      far-reaching restrictions on farmers' use of
                      seeds.

                                               Genetically
                                               engineered
                                               seeds are
                                               licensed, not
                                               owned,
                      generally for one season. The farmer can eat or
                      sell the harvest, but cannot use the seeds
                      produced by the crop. In fact, Monsanto has
                      brought legal action against hundreds of farmers
                      to assert its control over how seeds are used.
                      Technology under development will soon allow
                      these restrictions to be enforced biologically.
                      For example, "Terminator" seeds are
                      intentionally engineered to give rise to plants
                      that produce sterile seeds. So-called "Traitor"
                      seeds require that external chemicals be
                      purchased and applied to "turn on" or "turn off"
                      certain traits. These restriction technologies are
                      sparking outrage from farmers around the
                      world. Whereas the genetics of crops has been
                      stewarded by farmers for 10,000 to 12,000
                      years, selection of traits is now increasingly in
                      the hands of biotechnology companies alone.

                      Higher costs. Growing genetically engineered
                      crops is expensive. For example, agricultural
                      analyst and consultant Charles Benbrook points
                      out that the full Roundup Ready system
                      (Monsanto's Roundup herbicide along with
                      seeds genetically engineered to tolerate it) is
                      costing U.S. farmers "an amazing $68.77 per
                      acre in 1999, about 50% more than the cost of
                      (other) seed plus weed management systems in
                      the Midwest in recent years." {Source} Such
                      costs are part of the on-going "high-costs but
                      low-prices" squeeze that has put 74,440
                      mid-sized U.S. farms out of business between
                      just 1993 and 1997. {Source} Such
                      bankruptcies have lead to widespread rural
                      decay.

                      Liability. Farmers growing genetically
                      engineered or genetically
                      engineered-contaminated crops are exposed to
                      potential liability for possible harm to people
                      and the environment. A sign of their lack of faith
                      in the technology, insurance companies are not
                      insuring against crop loss, loss of farmland or
                      other problems associated with genetically
                      engineered crops.

                      Poor performance. There is mounting evidence
                      that genetically engineered crops are not
                      performing as promised. While biotechnology
                      companies sometimes claim that genetically
                      engineered crops have higher yields and lower
                      pesticide requirements than conventional crops,
                      research showed that herbicide-tolerant
                      soybeans, the most widely grown genetically
                      engineered crop, yielded on average 6.7% less
                      and required two to five times more herbicides
                      than non-genetically engineered varieties.
                      {Source} Another study showed that
                      Monsanto's herbicide-tolerant soybeans were
                      splitting open in high temperature at a much
                      higher rate than conventional soybeans.
                      {Source} There have also been genetically
                      engineered cotton crop failures.

                                 Loss of investment in
                                 appropriate research. The
                                 genetic engineering frenzy is also
                                 diverting private and public
                                 research dollars from important
                                 research in conventional and
                                 organic agriculture. Whereas
                      research is desperately needed to help farmers,
                      to support sustainable agriculture {Note} and to
                      investigate the hazards of genetic engineering, it
                      is increasingly being diverted by the hype
                      surrounding and the profit potential of
                      genetically engineered products. 

Regulation and labeling

                      The regulation of
                      biotechnology is crucial: it
                      is supposed to provide a
                      buffer between the drive for
                      profit and human, animal
                      and environmental welfare.

                      In fact, Monsanto's former Director of
                      Corporate Communications, Phil Angell said
                      "Monsanto should not have to vouchsafe the
                      safety of biotech foods. Our interest is in selling
                      as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is
                      the FDA's job." {Source}

                      Does the U.S. regulatory system protect people
                      and the environment from the hazards of genetic
                      engineering? 

The U.S. regulatory framework

                      According to the New York Times,
                      the regulatory environment that
                      "Monsanto wished for from
                      Washington, Monsanto-and, by
                      extension, the biotechnology
                      industry-got." {Source} The
                      Reagan and first Bush
                      administrations made sure that no
                      new statute was created to regulate genetically
                      engineered crops and foods, leaving regulatory
                      agencies to rely on existing laws developed for
                      traditional crops and foods. {Source} 

                      The principal agencies regulating genetically
                      engineered crops and foods are the Department
                      of Agriculture (USDA), the Environmental
                      Protection Agency (EPA) and the Food and
                      Drug Administration (FDA). Their rules,
                      designed for conventional plants, pesticides and
                      foods, have been modified only slightly to
                      address the risks of agricultural biotech. Not
                      surprisingly, regulation of genetically
                      engineered crops and foods has numerous
                      inadequacies. For example:

                          There is no mandatory, independent
                          pre-market safety testing for genetically
                          engineered foods 
                          There is no mandatory food labeling 
                          Liability for harm is not clearly delineated 
                          There are few limits on what and how
                          genetically engineered organisms are
                          released into the environment 
                          No agency regulates the environmental
                          impacts of genetically engineered animals,
                          such as fish, that may pose risks to wild
                          populations 
                          There is little attention paid to the problem
                          of genetic pollution 
                          There are no restrictions on insidious uses
                          of genetic engineering, such as use
                          restriction (e.g. "Terminator" seeds which
                          intentionally give rise to sterile plants) 

                                    Unfortunately, this inadequate
                                    oversight is not just a matter
                                    of bureaucratic misjudgment.
                                    The regulatory agencies often
                                    act to promote industry
                                    interests. For example, the
                      USDA actually helped develop and is a joint
                      patent holder for the Terminator seed
                      technology. One of FDA's consumer
                      publications trumpeted the arrival of genetically
                      engineered foods: "You're apt to find new
                      versions of familiar foods--ones that are custom
                      'built' to improve quality or remove unwanted
                      traits....These commodities will arrive courtesy
                      of genetic engineering." {Source} In fact, court
                      documents reveal that some of FDA's own
                      scientists objected to its basic policy on
                      genetically engineered foods, one calling it
                      "very pro industry" and another saying that the
                      agency was "trying to fit a square peg into a
                      round hole."

Public opinion

                      Whereas the FDA believes that the U.S. public
                      should not know what foods are genetically
                      engineered, polls have consistently shown that
                      Americans overwhelmingly want genetically
                      engineered foods to be labeled. For example, a
                      2001 ABC News poll found that 93% of
                      respondents want labeling. {Source} Even a
                      poll by Swiss biotechnology company Novartis
                      (now part of Syngenta) found that more than
                      90% of the U.S. public believes genetically
                      engineered foods should be labeled. {Source}

                      Interestingly, these polls
                      also indicate that most
                      consumers would not eat
                      foods they know to contain
                      genetically engineered
                      ingredients. {Source}

                      One might think that such an overwhelming
                      concurrence of public sentiment would shape
                      policy-making. Most decisions about what and
                      how things are produced, however, are made by
                      the private sector and regulatory agencies that
                      often promote corporate interests above those of
                      the public. 

International regulation

                      Outside the U.S., many
                      countries have (or are
                      developing) significant
                      restrictions on genetic
                      engineering, such as
                      labeling requirements and
                      moratoria. The list
                      includes the European
                      Union, China, Brazil, India, Japan, South Korea,
                      Thailand, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, the Phillipines,
                      Algeria, Egypt, Australia, New Zealand and
                      Croatia.

                                   There are also global
                                   institutions and treaties that
                                   impact genetically engineered
                                   crops and foods. For example,
                                   the World Trade Organization
                      (WTO), which negotiates, interprets and
                      enforces global agreements dealing with trade
                      and investment, makes it more difficult for
                      governments to regulate genetic engineering for
                      reasons of social or environmental welfare. In
                      fact, the U.S. recently complained to the WTO
                      that member nations are increasingly moving
                      toward regulation of genetically engineered
                      products. {Source} At the same time, the
                      Biosafety Protocol of the international
                      Convention on Biodiversity reaffirms the right
                      to regulate genetically engineered crops and
                      foods without conclusive proof
                      of harm. Unfortunately, the
                      WTO and the Biosafety
                      protocol clash on key issues,
                      and the WTO has significantly
                      more thrust in international
                      affairs than the Biosafety Protocol. 

Growing opposition

                      Opposition to genetically
                      engineered crops and foods
                      has been strong outside the
                      United States. In a short
                      two-year span, Europe went
                      from almost no public
                      awareness of genetically engineered foods to a
                      de facto ban brought about by consumer
                      rejection. Now opposition is growing in the
                      U.S., the heart of the biotechnology industry.

                                  There have been thousands of
                                  local grassroots actions,
                                  including: educational events,
                                  letter writing campaigns,
                                  demonstrations, genetic
                                  engineering "food dumps,"
                                  shareholder resolutions,
                                  boycotts, regulatory and
                                  political lobbying, conferences
                                  and meetings, city resolutions
                                  and even putting labels on
                                  products containing genetically
                                  engineered ingredients.

                      There are also a number of state and national
                      legal actions and campaigns. For example,
                      about 50 organizations filed a legal petition
                      with FDA demanding safety testing and labeling
                      of genetically engineered ingredients. There are
                      federal labeling and safety testing bills. The
                      Genetically Engineered Food Alert campaign is
                      calling on food companies and regulatory
                      agencies to keep genetically engineered foods
                      off of store shelves unless they are proven safe
                      for people and the environment and are labeled.

Genetically Engineered Food Alert

                      Genetically Engineered
                      Food Alert is a U.S.
                      coalition of thousands of
                      consumer, environmental,
                      and public health
                      organizations, and chefs,
                      religious leaders, doctors
                      and scientists. The coalition
                      has launched a nation-wide campaign to keep
                      genetically engineered foods and crops off the
                      market unless: 

                          Independent safety testing demonstrates
                          that they have no harmful effects on human
                          health or the environment; 
                          They are labeled to ensure the consumer's
                          right-to-know; and 
                          The biotechnology corporations that
                          manufacture them are held responsible for
                          any harm their products cause. 

                      For more information, visit the Genetically
                      Engineered Food Alert Web site
                      (http://www.gefoodalert.org). 

Beginning to win

                      While U.S. regulatory agencies and legislatures
                      have so far been largely unresponsive, food
                      companies, growers and financiers are
                      beginning to respond to consumer resistance to
                      genetically engineered foods.

                      Gerber and Heinz declared they
                      would not use genetically
                      engineered ingredients in their
                      baby foods in the United States.
                      {Source} Frito-Lay told its corn
                      and potato farmers to stop growing genetically
                      engineered varieties for use in its snack
                      products. Fast-food chains like McDonald's are
                      quietly telling their french-fry suppliers to stop
                      using genetically engineered potatoes. And
                      national natural foods chains Whole Foods and
                      Wild Oats said they are removing genetically
                      engineered ingredients from their hundreds of
                      store-label products.

                      Likewise, U.S. growers are planting less of
                      certain genetically engineered crops. For
                      example, they planted 6% less genetically
                      engineered corn in 2001 than in 2000, largely
                      due to concerns about markets for genetically
                      engineered products. {Source} And some
                      investors are urging caution. The head of one
                      biotechnology investment firm said public
                      opposition"is having a horrendous impact....It's
                      a serious, serious showstopper." {Source}

                      At the same time, thousands of new genetically
                      engineered crops are under development. What
                      will happen when mounting resistance meets the
                      industry's tidal wave of new products? The
                      answer depends, of course, on how we respond!

What you can do

                      Join the millions of people around the world
                      opposing genetically engineered crops and
                      foods.

                          Demand a halt to their sale, unless they are
                          proven safe, they are labeled to safeguard
                          the consumer's right to know and liability
                          for any harm rests squarely with the
                          biotechnology industry 
                          Insist on regulation that is precautionary,
                          so that the burden of proof is on industry,
                          not citizens! 
                          Say "no" to patents on life! 
                          Demand a sustainable food system! 

                      Things you can do:

                      Join a group to help build the
                      grassroots movement. If there
                      is no group in your area, start
                      one! {More}

                                     Get involved in the
                                     Genetically Engineered
                                     Food Alert campaign.
                                     {More}

                                     Send a comment to the FDA
                                     about the legal petition
                                     spearheaded by the Center
                      for Food Safety. {More}

                      Support the national labeling and safety testing
                      bills. {More}

                      Buy local, organic foods and
                      fibers. If you can't completely
                      avoid non-organic foods,
                      avoid those likely to contain
                      genetically engineered
                      ingredients. {More}

                      Learn more about genetic engineering and the
                      biotech industry. 

For more information

                      For more information about these topics, see the
                      following pages of the Pesticide Action
                      Network North America (PANNA) Web site
                      (http://www.panna.org):

                      To learn about PANNA's
                      genetic engineering program,
                      see the "Genetic engineering
                      campaign" page.

                      For more information about
                      genetic engineering, see the
                      "Genetic engineering
                      resources" page.

                      For information related to genetic engineering,
                      such as pesticides and sustainable agriculture,
                      see the "Reports, articles, links and other
                      resources" page.

                      For news, resources and information about
                      PANNA, its work and how you can help, see
                      the PANNA homepage.