New Term "Bioengineered" Replaces the Widely Recognized Acronym "GMO"

 By Theodora Filis

Consumers will see food labels that now say "bioengineered" or "derived from bioengineering," replacing the acronym "GMO" (genetically modified organism). 

The federal standard replaces the former requirements as of January 2022.

The new standard applies to genetically modified foods as well as foods with genetically modified ingredients that are "detectable" by certain standards.

Critics say the rules devised by the U.S. Department of Agriculture will actually confuse consumers further and make it harder to know what's in any given product.

The new rules give food producers a few options. Commonly bioengineered foods include corn, canola, soybeans, and sugar beets. Most GMO crops are used for animal feed, according to the Food and Drug Administration. But they are also used to make ingredients that routinely find their way into human diets, such as cornstarch, corn syrup, canola oil, and granulated sugar.

The Center for Food Safety, one advocacy group opposed to the new standard, says it makes it easier for companies to conceal what's in their products and leaves consumers in the dark. Logos are confusing and the rules don't go far enough. 

"These regulations are not about informing the public but rather designed to allow corporations to hide their use of genetically engineered ingredients from their customers," Andrew Kimbrell, executive director of the Center for Food Safety, said in a statement.

Additionally, the new standard discriminates against the poor, the elderly, people who live in rural areas, and minorities who may lack a smartphone or access to the internet, the group said. It also puts an "undue burden" on shoppers to scan food items in stores during a deadly pandemic, advocates have argued.

Who makes sure GMOs are safe? Federal agencies play a role in ensuring the safety of GMOs - as described in the Coordinated Framework for the Regulation of Biotechnology.

FDA’s voluntary Plant Biotechnology Consultation Program evaluates the safety of food from new GMOs before they enter the market. This program allows developers to work with FDA on a product-by-product basis.

How can I tell if I’m eating GMOs? Certain types of GMOs have a disclosure that lets you know if the food, or ingredients you are eating, is a bioengineered food. The National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard defines bioengineered foods as those that contain detectable genetic material that has been modified through certain lab techniques and cannot be created through conventional breeding or found in nature.

The Standard establishes requirements for labeling foods that humans eat that are or may be bioengineered and defines bioengineered foods as those that contain detectable genetic material that has been modified through certain lab techniques and cannot be created through conventional breeding or found in nature.

By 2022, food makers, importers, and certain retailers label foods that are bioengineered or have bioengineered ingredients. Foods sold in the United States that meet the definition of bioengineered food must have information on their packaging using one of the approved methods, including text on the package that says “bioengineered food,” the bioengineered food symbol, or directions for using your phone to find the disclosure.

Searching for bioengineered ingredients is like finding Wally in Where's Wally?.

 

Much of the World Requires Labeling & Banning of GMOs, Why Not The United States?

By Theodora Filis

*Enforcement today is done through complaints. Consumers can file complaints with the USDA if they suspect a grocery store, manufacturer or importer is knowingly not disclosing bioengineered food. The USDA will determine whether or not to investigate further - that is worrisome.

Recently, a committee made up of members of the US House of Representatives passed a bill allowing genetically modified crops (GMOs) to continue to be used on American farmland. These patented seeds are owned by biotech giants like Dupont, who claim their seeds help provide US consumers with an “abundant and reliable food supply” while remaining competitive in the world market.

According to Bloomberg Business, the one-paragraph provision to the 90-page bill, which is headed to the full House for consideration, will "circumvent legal obstacles that have slowed commercialization of engineered crops, sometimes for years, benefiting Monsanto, the world’s largest seed company. Planting would be permitted until USDA completes any analysis required by a judge."

Most of the World Already Requires Labeling of GMOs. What Do They Know That US Consumers Don't?

Monsanto is well known for the company's heated stance against small-scale farmers, threatening them with hundreds of lawsuits for using GMO seeds patented by Monsanto that have been carried onto their farms by wind and other elements of nature.

Earlier this year, Monsanto threatened to sue the entire state of Vermont because lawmakers there were considering a bill that would force manufacturers to label products that are created either partially or in full from a GMO.

Fortunately, Vermont is not alone in its fight to have GMO products labeled. Many other states, including California, are fighting to have GMOs labeled like they are in Europe and other nations.

Over 75% of Californians said they would vote for Mandatory Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods.

The California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act is simple: The initiative would simply require food sold in retail outlets to be labeled if it contains genetically engineered ingredients. Contrary to what Monsanto and the Biotech industry would like you to believe, the California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act will have no cost impact on consumers or food producers.

If this initiative passes, it will be a huge step towards the transparency US consumers have been demanding for years. Once people know what is in their food, they can then make the informed choice to avoid the potential health risks of GMOs until more research on their long-term effects can be done.

50 countries with over 40% of the world’s population already label genetically engineered foods, including the entire EU. Even China labels genetically engineered foods.

Despite consumer's demands to label and halt the use of GMOs, the Seed Library of Los Angeles (SLOLA), brought news recently that Monsanto is beginning a program to start selling seeds to consumers. The first crop of seeds to be sold for home use will be corn. The problem with this, says SLOLA's chairman David King, is that corn's pollen can spread up to 20 miles, meaning that if one person plants Monsanto's modified seeds, other organic farmers' produce can and will be impacted.

Most European governments have adopted the “precautionary principle” in dealing with GMOs, arguing that GM crops should be proven safe to both human health and the environment before farmers plant their fields with them.

93% of US consumers favor labeling GMO foods. Only 35% of US Senators voted in favor of allowing States to require GMO labeling.

Genetically Engineered Salmon & Corn & Rice And The List Just Keeps Growing!

By Theodora Filis

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is preparing to approve genetically engineered (GE) salmon for human consumption. If approved, the salmon would be the first GE animal on the market. Because the agency is unlikely to require the salmon to be labeled as GE, consumers will have no way of knowing whether the salmon they buy is engineered. The salmon contains genetic material from an eel-like fish, called an ocean pout, and another species of salmon and grows to market size more rapidly than a normal Atlantic salmon. 

Consumer groups are concerned that scientists and the public have been given very little time to weigh in on the approval process and that the environmental and human health risks of the GE salmon, including harm to wild fish stocks and effects on human health, have not been properly assessed.

To complicate matters, the agency is evaluating the GE salmon under its industry-friendly drug approval law, which is not suited to oversee GE animals, especially those raised as food.

"We need to regulate this product in a way that will protect consumer choice and wild fish populations. That means labeling the fish and enforcing strict environmental conditions for rearing them." ~ Margaret Mellon, Food & Environment Program Director

Genetically Engineered Corn

Farmers are finding it more difficult to buy corn and soybean seed that is not genetically engineered. According to a recent poll, nearly 1/3 of farmers would like more opportunities to buy non-GE seeds, but consolidation in the industry has narrowed seed company offerings. 

Using biotechnology and genetic transfers, Monsanto, the world's largest seed company, hoped to create a corn variety that could grow well in dry conditions, even in drought-prone Africa, helping to alleviate hunger and poverty -- and fatten its bottom line.

However, early 2010 harvest data show that Monsanto's new elaborately engineered SmartStax corn seeds—advertised as the highest yielding varieties available—are producing less than the company had predicted. SmartStax corn is engineered with an unprecedented eight genes for insect resistance and herbicide tolerance, but its yields so far are lower than those of Monsanto's older, cheaper three-gene varieties.

This and other recent GE flops are fueling resentment among farmers, who are asked to pay ever higher prices for each new engineered variety.

The backlash comes on the heels of a 2009 UCS report, Failure to Yield, which found that genetic engineering has not contributed substantially to increases in U.S. corn and soybean yields over the past 13 years.

"Feeding the world's population without degrading our environment is a critical problem facing humanity. To solve it, we need to bring together farmers, ecologists, economists, social scientists, and policy makers to address not just how much food we grow, but where and how we grow it." ~ Noel Gurwick, Senior Scientist, Food & Environment Program

The South African supermarket-chain Woolworths already banned GM-foods from its shelves in 2000. However South African farmers have been producing GM-corn for years: they were among the first countries other than the United States to start using the Monsanto products.

The South African government does not require any labeling of GM foods (corn is the main staple food for South Africa's 48-million people). The three maize varieties which failed to produce seeds were designed with a built-in resistance to weed-killers, and manipulated to increase yields per hectare.

Monsanto blames the failure of the three varieties of corn planted on these farms, in three South African provinces, on alleged 'under-fertilization processes in the laboratory". Some 280 of the 1,000 farmers who planted the three varieties of Monsanto corn this year, have reported extensive seedless corn problems.

"We have been warning against GM-technology for years, we have been warning Monsanto that there will be problems,' said Marian Mayet director of the Africa-Centre for Biosecurity in Johannesburg. She calls for an urgent government investigation and an immediate ban on all GM-foods in South Africa, blaming the crop failure on Monsanto's genetically-manipulated technology.

"Monsanto is merely trying to hide its profit motive behind a mask of altruism," said Andrew Kimbrell, executive director of the Center for Food Safety, a private advocacy group. "Monsanto has a long history of putting profit before the welfare of people and communities."

Monsanto, ever on the lookout for a new financial opportunity found one in biofuels. The growing of corn, in Monsanto's case, genetically engineered corn, for the production of ethanol so they can do their part to reduce the use of fossil fuels.

Am I the only one who feels like Monsanto is selling us swampland in Florida? What's next, genetically engineered people? Shhhh, don't give them any more ideas...

Parasitic Sea Lice Threaten Salmon Farming

 By Theodora Filis

Salmon farmers around the world consider sea lice to be the most dangerous threat to their industry.

Salmon farms and their farmers are being disrupted around the world because of sea lice attaching themselves to, and feeding on, the #Salmon. This is causing many salmon to die or making them unsuitable for people to consume.

Price of salmon going up
Salmon prices are going up as much as fifty-percent - wholesale - from last year. That means as consumers we will see higher prices for salmon stakes, fillets, and the lox on our bagels.

Vice President of Cooke Aquaculture, Jake Elliott, from Blacks Harbour, New Brunswick, Canada, said that the salmon #Farmers need to be quicker and work faster than the lice.

New and established ways are being used
Both new and established technology will be needed in order to defeat the lice, experts say.

Older tools like pesticides and more recent practices like breeding for genetic resistance need to be tried. Some of the more recent solutions that are either in use now, or in the developmental stages include such things as zapping the lice with underwater lasers and trying to remove the lice by bathing the salmon in warm water.

Salmon farmers say sea lice is considered one of the biggest and most dangerous threat the industry faces - worldwide. In 2015 the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations reported farmed salmon to be worth close to twelve billion U.S. dollars.

A scientist from the Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Shawn Robinson, said the only hope of controlling the infestation of these parasitic sea lice is to find new ways to control the spread. Lice are present in the wild, too, Robinson said, but they apparently live longer and stronger in tightly packed ocean pens like fish farms.

He went on to say that right now, there are just not enough tools for fish farmers to effectively deal with the sea lice.

Sea lice lay thousands of eggs
Sea lice grow to roughly the size of a pea and lay upwards of a thousand eggs in their very brief lifetime. Wild salmon growing in the Atlantic ocean have had to deal with sea lice for centuries, and fish farmers have been able to control these parasites in aquaculture environments for many years.

However, in 1994 farmers in Canada noticed they had a lice problem, said the executive director of research and environment with the Atlantic Salmon Federation, Jonathan Carr.

Carr said that by feeding salmon with a pesticide that contains the active ingredient - emamectin benzoate - they were able to control the lice infestation. But in 2009 the lice began to reappear and were no longer killed by the pesticide. Without the help of pesticides, the parasitic sea lice have been laying thousands of eggs each, around the world, for past 16 years.