Center for Food Safety

Last updated
Center for Food Safety
AbbreviationCFS
Founded at Washington, D.C.
Type 501(c)(3) non-profit
Purposeprotecting the environment and communities from harmful effects of industrial agriculture
Locations
Website www.centerforfoodsafety.org

The Center for Food Safety (CFS) is a 501(c)(3), U.S. non-profit advocacy organization, based in Washington, D.C. It maintains an office in San Francisco, California, and Portland, Oregon. CFS's mission is to empower people, support farmers, and protect the earth from the harmful impacts of industrial agriculture through groundbreaking legal, scientific, and grassroots action. It was founded in 1997.

Contents

The Center for Food Safety has been an associated party in challenges against the planting of genetically modified crops in the US.

Alfalfa

In April, 2004, Monsanto petitioned the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) for deregulation of their product Roundup Ready Alfalfa (RRA). After performing an Environmental Assessment, APHIS deregulated the product in 2005. In 2006, this decision was challenged by Geertson Seed Farms and other parties including the Center for Food Safety. [1] This led to a decision by the US District Court of San Francisco to suspend the deregulated status of RRA and place an injunction on the sale and planting of RRA until the completion of an Environmental Impact Statement. [1] [2]

The US Supreme Court reversed the District Court decision in 2010, in the case of Monsanto Co. v. Geertson Seed Farms . This 7–1 decision in favor of Monsanto Company declared the injunction against RRA invalid, allowing the sale and planting of the product; it did not, however, restore the deregulated status of the crop. [2] Upon completion of the Environmental Impact Statement, RRA was officially deregulated in January 2011. [3]

The Center for Food Safety also launched a separate lawsuit against RRA in the case Center for Food Safety v. Vilsack, in October, 2012. The CFS alleged that RRA had been improperly reviewed by APHIS, arguing that it should be considered a "Plant Pest" under the Plant Protection Act. In 2013 the United States District Court of San Francisco issued a ruling for the case in favor of the defendant, Thomas Vilsack, Secretary of APHIS. [4]

Sugar beets

In 2009–2010, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California has been considering the case involving the planting of genetically modified sugar beets. This case involves Monsanto's breed of pesticide-resistant sugar beets. This lawsuit was also organised by Center for Food Safety.

Earlier in 2010, Judge Jeffrey S. White allowed the planting of GM sugar beets to continue, but he also warned that this may be blocked in the future while an environmental review was taking place. Finally, on 13 August 2010, Judge White ordered the halt to the planting of the genetically modified sugar beets in the US. He indicated that "the Agriculture Department had not adequately assessed the environmental consequences before approving them for commercial cultivation". [5] This decision was reversed in 2011, with the appellate court citing studies that indicated that there was no molecular difference between sugar produced by the GMO and non-GMO variants of sugar beets. [6]

The herbicide and pesticide chemical arms race

In a 2012 article on the Huffington Post blog, Kimbrell noted that Monsanto developed soy, corn and cotton resistant to 2,4-D which would cause a switch in herbicide usage towards more 2,4-D. [7]

These developments have been made to combat newly resistant weeds and insects, immune to developed pesticides and herbicides, which became "a problem needing national attention" according to a National Academy of Sciences committee. [7]

Kimbrell's most alarming claim is that according to some, the reliance on this non-diverse type of grain, may be "a threat to global food production". [7] [8]

One month later, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) decided to reaffirm its denial of the petition, and to allow continued usage of these chemicals, [9] and in 2014 the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) gave a green light to allow the seeds to be used. [10]

Criticism

The Center for Global Food Issues (CGFI), a pro genetically-engineered food organisation, claims that in one case, Kimbrell was said to have released a baseless food poisoning scare in the Wall Street Journal, following a request to exempt Monsanto from recalling of CANOLA oil from seed with a not yet US approved gene, (although approved in Canada) found in small quantities in their oil, after deciding to concentrate on a different gene that had similar results. [11]

GE crop development scientists, molecular biologists, pro GE organisations, and the broader scientific community disagree with anti GE organisations such as the CFS, and argue that the FDA and the courts are careful, scientific and truthful, and that most of the anti GE claims from organisations like CFS are based on emotion, on misrepresented facts and not on science and the scientific method nor do they reflect the consensus held among scientists regarding GE crops. [12]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetically modified maize</span> Genetically modified crop

Genetically modified maize (corn) is a genetically modified crop. Specific maize strains have been genetically engineered to express agriculturally-desirable traits, including resistance to pests and to herbicides. Maize strains with both traits are now in use in multiple countries. GM maize has also caused controversy with respect to possible health effects, impact on other insects and impact on other plants via gene flow. One strain, called Starlink, was approved only for animal feed in the US but was found in food, leading to a series of recalls starting in 2000.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sugar beet</span> Plant grown commercially for sugar production

A sugar beet is a plant whose root contains a high concentration of sucrose and that is grown commercially for sugar production. In plant breeding, it is known as the Altissima cultivar group of the common beet. Together with other beet cultivars, such as beetroot and chard, it belongs to the subspecies Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris but classified as var. saccharifera . Its closest wild relative is the sea beet.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Alfalfa</span> Plant species in pea family

Alfalfa, also called lucerne, is a perennial flowering plant in the legume family Fabaceae. It is cultivated as an important forage crop in many countries around the world. It is used for grazing, hay, and silage, as well as a green manure and cover crop. The name alfalfa is used in North America. The name lucerne is more commonly used in the United Kingdom, South Africa, Australia, and New Zealand. The plant superficially resembles clover, especially while young, when trifoliate leaves comprising round leaflets predominate. Later in maturity, leaflets are elongated. It has clusters of small purple flowers followed by fruits spiralled in two to three turns containing 10–20 seeds. Alfalfa is native to warmer temperate climates. It has been cultivated as livestock fodder since at least the era of the ancient Greeks and Romans.

Agricultural biotechnology, also known as agritech, is an area of agricultural science involving the use of scientific tools and techniques, including genetic engineering, molecular markers, molecular diagnostics, vaccines, and tissue culture, to modify living organisms: plants, animals, and microorganisms. Crop biotechnology is one aspect of agricultural biotechnology which has been greatly developed upon in recent times. Desired trait are exported from a particular species of Crop to an entirely different species. These transgene crops possess desirable characteristics in terms of flavor, color of flowers, growth rate, size of harvested products and resistance to diseases and pests.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetically modified food</span> Foods produced from organisms that have had changes introduced into their DNA

Genetically modified foods, also known as genetically engineered foods, or bioengineered foods are foods produced from organisms that have had changes introduced into their DNA using various methods of genetic engineering. Genetic engineering techniques allow for the introduction of new traits as well as greater control over traits when compared to previous methods, such as selective breeding and mutation breeding.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetically modified crops</span> Plants used in agriculture

Genetically modified crops are plants used in agriculture, the DNA of which has been modified using genetic engineering methods. Plant genomes can be engineered by physical methods or by use of Agrobacterium for the delivery of sequences hosted in T-DNA binary vectors. In most cases, the aim is to introduce a new trait to the plant which does not occur naturally in the species. Examples in food crops include resistance to certain pests, diseases, environmental conditions, reduction of spoilage, resistance to chemical treatments, or improving the nutrient profile of the crop. Examples in non-food crops include production of pharmaceutical agents, biofuels, and other industrially useful goods, as well as for bioremediation.

Since the advent of genetic engineering in the 1970s, concerns have been raised about the dangers of the technology. Laws, regulations, and treaties were created in the years following to contain genetically modified organisms and prevent their escape. Nevertheless, there are several examples of failure to keep GM crops separate from conventional ones.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetically modified food controversies</span>

Genetically modified food controversies are disputes over the use of foods and other goods derived from genetically modified crops instead of conventional crops, and other uses of genetic engineering in food production. The disputes involve consumers, farmers, biotechnology companies, governmental regulators, non-governmental organizations, and scientists. The key areas of controversy related to genetically modified food are whether such food should be labeled, the role of government regulators, the objectivity of scientific research and publication, the effect of genetically modified crops on health and the environment, the effect on pesticide resistance, the impact of such crops for farmers, and the role of the crops in feeding the world population. In addition, products derived from GMO organisms play a role in the production of ethanol fuels and pharmaceuticals.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Roundup Ready</span> Trademark for genetically modified crop seeds

Roundup Ready is the Bayer trademark for its patented line of genetically modified crop seeds that are resistant to its glyphosate-based herbicide, Roundup.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jeffrey White</span> American judge (born 1945)

Jeffrey Steven White is a senior United States district judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

The United States is the largest grower of commercial crops that have been genetically engineered in the world, but not without domestic and international opposition.

Genetically modified wheat is wheat that has been genetically engineered by the direct manipulation of its genome using biotechnology. As of 2020, no genetically-modified wheat is grown commercially, although many field tests have been conducted. One wheat variety, Bioceres HB4 Wheat, is obtaining regulatory approval from the government of Argentina.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetically modified soybean</span> Soybean that has had DNA introduced into it using genetic engineering techniques

A genetically modified soybean is a soybean that has had DNA introduced into it using genetic engineering techniques. In 1996, the first genetically modified soybean was introduced to the U.S. by Monsanto. In 2014, 90.7 million hectares of GM soybeans were planted worldwide, making up 82% of the total soybeans cultivation area.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mendocino County GMO Ban</span>

Mendocino County, California, was the first jurisdiction in the United States to ban the cultivation, production or distribution of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). The ordinance, entitled Measure H, was passed by referendum on March 2, 2004. Initiated by the group "GMO Free Mendocino", the campaign was a highly publicized grassroots effort by local farmers and environmental groups who contend that the potential risks of GMOs to human health and the ecosystem have not yet been fully understood. The measure was met with opposition by several interest groups representing the biotechnology industry, The California Plant Health Association and CropLife America, a Washington-based consortium whose clients represent some of the largest food distributors in the nation, including Monsanto, DuPont and Dow Chemical. Since the enactment of the ordinance, Mendocino County has been added to an international list of "GMO free zones." Pre-emptive statutes banning local municipalities from such ordinances have now become widespread with adoption in sixteen states.

Monsanto Co. v. Geertson Seed Farms, 561 U.S. 139 (2010), is a United States Supreme Court case decided 7-1 in favor of Monsanto. The decision allowed Monsanto to sell genetically modified alfalfa seeds to farmers, and allowed farmers to plant them, grow crops, harvest them, and sell the crop into the food supply. The case came about because the use of the seeds was approved by regulatory authorities; the approval was challenged in district court by Geertson Seed Farms and other groups who were concerned that the genetically modified alfalfa would spread too easily, and the challengers won. Monsanto appealed the district court decision and lost, and appealed again to the Supreme Court, where Monsanto won, thus upholding the original approval and allowing the seeds to be sold.

The Farmer Assurance Provision refers to Section 735 of US H.R. 933, a bill that was passed by the Senate on March 20, 2013, and then signed into law as part of the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013 by President Barack Obama on March 26, 2013. The provisions of this law remained in effect for six months, until the end of the fiscal year on September 30, 2013. The Farmer Assurance Provision was discontinued in Sec. 101 of the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2014. The bill is commonly referred to as the "Monsanto Protection Act" by its critics.

The Enlist Weed Control System is an agricultural system that includes seeds for genetically modified crops that are resistant to Enlist and the Enlist herbicide; spraying the herbicide will kill weeds but not the resulting crop. The system was developed by Dow AgroSciences, part of Dow Chemical Company. In October 2014 the system was registered for restricted use in Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Ohio, South Dakota and Wisconsin by the US Environmental Protection Agency. In 2013, the system was approved by Canada for the same uses.

Monsanto was involved in several high-profile lawsuits, as both plaintiff and defendant. It had been defendant in a number of lawsuits over health and environmental issues related to its products. Monsanto also made frequent use of the courts to defend its patents, particularly in the area of agricultural biotechnology. Bayer acquired Monsanto in 2018, and the company has since been involved in litigation related to ex-Monsanto products such as glyphosate, PCBs and dicamba. In 2020 it paid over $10 billion to settle lawsuits involving the glyphosate based herbicide Roundup.

A genetically modified sugar beet is a sugar beet that has been genetically engineered by the direct modification of its genome using biotechnology. Commercialized GM sugar beets make use of a glyphosate-resistance modification developed by Monsanto and KWS Saat. These glyphosate-resistant beets, also called 'Roundup Ready' sugar beets, were developed by 2000, but not commercialized until 2007. For international trade, sugar beets have a Maximum Residue Limit of glyphosate of 15 mg/Kg at harvest. As of 2016, GMO sugar beets are grown in the United States and Canada. In the United States, they play an important role in domestic sugar production. Studies have concluded the sugar from glyphosate-resistant sugar beets is molecularly identical to and so has the same nutritional value as sugar from conventional (non-GMO) sugar beets.

References

  1. 1 2 "GEERTSON SEED FARMS DC DC v. JOHANNS". Findlaw. Retrieved 16 September 2015.
  2. 1 2 Supreme Court Lifts Ban on Planting GM Alfalfa New York Times, Energy & Environment, Retrieved 28 August 2012.
  3. ↑ "USDA Announces Decision to Fully Deregulate Roundup Ready Alfalfa - USDA Newsroom". usda.gov. Archived from the original on 10 September 2015. Retrieved 16 September 2015.
  4. ↑ Center for Food Safety v. Vilsack (17 May 2013).
  5. ↑ Judge Revokes Approval of Modified Sugar Beets, by ANDREW POLLACK, New York Times, August 13, 2010
  6. ↑ https://web.archive.org/web/20131016004552/https://articles.law360.s3.amazonaws.com/0228000/228390/monsanto.pdf. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2013-10-16. Retrieved 2022-01-02.{{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  7. 1 2 3 Less than One Month to Comment on Corn Resistant to Agent Orange Herbicide 2,4-D, On the chemical arms race with weeds (May 2012, Huffington Post website)
  8. ↑ According to Gene amplification delivers glyphosate-resistant weed evolution, by Professor Stephen B. Powels Archived 2019-01-31 at the Wayback Machine of the University of Western Australia
  9. ↑ EPA first denial of petition Archived May 14, 2014, at the Wayback Machine April 2012
  10. ↑ Agent Orange GMO? After USDA backs 2,4-D seeds, Michael Pollan and Marion Nestle lead activist hype of discredited link (Forbes website)
  11. ↑ Anti biotech group scares Wall Street Journal Archived May 21, 2014, at the Wayback Machine (CGFI Website) The FDA according to this article replied that there was no need for concern, for several detailed reasons given in the article.
  12. ↑ Food Safety: Focus on Real Risks, Not Fake Ones (Academics Review)
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.