GMO. History of a global scam

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

The author, without touching on the issue of the impact of GMOs on health, examines in detail the economic underpinnings of this technology. From this point of view, the introduction of GMOs is a strategy of total monopolization of the food world on the entire planet and the concentration of all power in several corporations.

To begin with, it is important to understand the main thing: what is my coordinate system, in which I, in fact, evaluate GMOs as a practical phenomenon. The context of my conclusions is roughly the following: first, I believe that food is a powerful tool for changing the world for the better or for the worse. Second, immediate financial efficiency is just one of the yardsticks for agriculture. One of, not the only one. Thirdly, I am sure that if the world is not arranged correctly, this does not mean that it cannot be rebuilt. That is, the very fact that GMOs are already part of agriculture in many countries of the world does not mean at all that this will always be the case now.

The next important point for me is that the current debate about GMOs is on the wrong plane. This is a conversation between a blind man and a deaf person. There are two main positions. The first is that all of this is terribly dangerous. And if you eat GMO corn, then the mutation will immediately begin. The second position is to call the supporters of the first position obscurantists and opponents of progress. This is where the dispute usually ends. More precisely, it continues for a very long time, but stupid and incoherent. For people far from medicine and science, it is difficult to productively argue about GMOs in such a plane. But it is also difficult for those who are related to the world of science. After all, these diametrically opposed positions exist, and they cannot come together.

(The latest up-to-date data on this important topic can be found here, ed.)

Therefore, I decided to generally leave the topic of health outside the brackets of my message to humanity. All my arguments against GMOs have nothing to do with the harm that can be caused to the eater of one particular GMO corn.

Introduction. Few facts about GMOs

There is a lot of talk about GMOs. And there are much fewer GMO plants that end up in stores. The nearest access now has soybeans, corn, potatoes, sugar beets, rice. And there is also the fact that most often everything is present in food in the form of ingredients. And this is the main source of GMOs. Sugar from GMO-beets, chocolate from GMO-soybeans, etc. Another very important channel for the ingestion of GMOs to us is through the feed of farm animals. GM corn and GM soybeans are the foundations of the modern world agro-industrial complex. In some countries, up to 96 percent of meat comes from animals fed GMO foods.

The area occupied by GM crops - 175 million hectares in 2013 (more than 11% of all world sown areas). Such plants are grown in 27 countries, especially in the USA, Brazil, Argentina, Canada, India, China.

At the same time, since 2012, the production of GM-varieties of plants by developing countries has exceeded the production in industrialized countries. Of the 18 million GM farms, over 90% are smallholders in developing countries.

[

[Crops of GM wheat in the USA. [

[Protesters against GMOs in France.

In Russia, there is a ban on the cultivation of GM crops in the country. But according to the Russian Grain Union, uncontrolled sowing of GMOs in Russia is about 400,000 hectares, almost 200,000 of which are maize. According to Dmitry Rylko, Director General of the Institute for Agrarian Market Studies, about 5% of maize and soybeans grown in the Russian Federation are transgenic.

This is a typical situation for Russia - the severity of the law is compensated by the non-binding nature of its implementation. Another great illustration is the "Veterinary and Sanitary Requirements for the Import of Meat and Meat Products into the Russian Federation" of the Ministry of Agriculture. According to these requirements, the country must import exclusively "meat obtained from the slaughter of animals that did not receive feed, containing raw materials produced using genetic engineering methods." But there are no real mechanisms for checking imported meat. They bring in what they want. And with the labeling of products "non-GMO" - the same thing. Anyone can write this.

The situation in Russia is another illustration of the fact that GMOs penetrate even where they should not be.

Now let's move on to the most important thing. So why am I against? I think the whole GMO story is a huge scam. Great marketing campaign. And not at all harmless. As a result, life on the planet will become noticeably worse.

Why? Let's go further, we'll see.

The whole world is in your hands

GMOs are a great tool for redistributing the global food market to be controlled by corporations. And mainly one - Monsanto.

There are three main factors helping GMOs conquer the world:

- GM seeds lose their characteristics already in the second generation. It makes no sense to sow them.

- Companies that produce GM seeds patent their inventions and prohibit the use of seeds in other conditions than what is written in the agreement between the farmer and the company. You can't even postpone seeds for next year. This is a breach of contract and is being prosecuted.

- Pollination of traditional "neighbors" with GM plants leads to the mutation of the latter and the loss of their traditional characteristics.

[

[Biotechnology Monsanto. Innovation, collaboration, speed. Collage by joe-ks.tom drawing.

All this leads to market monopolization. Farmers start buying seeds from only one producer. The world of seeds and agriculture is now arranged in such a way that most often the Monsanto corporation acts as such a single producer. Once the largest chemical company in the world. And now it is far from the last. It became famous, for example, for being the leading producer of Agent Orange in the 1960s, which was used to destroy agricultural crops and vegetation in the jungle during the Vietnam War. For this, the company in 1984 had to pay compensation to veterans of the Vietnam War. According to the Vietnamese Society of Dioxin Victims, about a million people have become hereditary disabilities.

In the 1990s, the company started working with GMOs. More than 50 percent of all GM crops in the world are now sourced from Monsanto seeds. At the same time Roundup is the best-selling herbicide in the last 30 years. Owned by Monsanto.

In March 2005, Monsanto acquired the largest seed company Seminis, specializing in the production of seeds for vegetables and fruits, in 2007-2008, absorbed 50 seed companies around the world, after which it was heavily criticized. The main charge is market monopolization.

“The production of genetically modified seeds, resistant to pests and herbicides, brought the capitalization to $ 44 billion. In 2009, Monsanto sold seeds and genes for $ 7.3 billion. $ 2.1 billion. Sales in the last 5 years have grown by 18% per year, and the return on equity was 12%. Sales growth has been going on all these years, including in 2013.

Products from farms that partner with Monsanto are the backbone of the world's largest food companies. This diagram shows that the influence of the company, let's put it mildly, is significant.

[

The structure of the world seed production industry. Schematic author: Philip H. Howard, Associate Professor, Michigan State University

Every farmer who purchases seed from Monsanto signs a "copyright" agreement for the seed. The agreement imposes a lot of restrictions on the farmer. For example, a farmer cannot leave seeds for the next season and use them at his own discretion.

In 2011, the film "The World According to Monsanto" was released. It also tells the story of American farmers who were on the brink of ruin as a result of an agreement with a company.

Film "The World According to Monsanto"

The most revealing and instructive story in this sense happened in India, where hundreds of thousands of farmers switched to GM cotton seeds through a government campaign and credit policy.

GM cotton began to be planted in early 2000. In 2006, an adaptation of parasites to Bt toxin-producing GM cotton was discovered. Diseases and crop failures began. By 2012, there was a situation in which there were simply no offers on the market for non-GM seeds. At the same time, the price of GM-cotton seeds has grown several times over 10 years and exceeds the cost of ordinary seeds (which are not yet available) from 3 to 7 times.

India, after switching to GM seeds, was swept by a wave of farm suicides. They could neither set aside seeds for sowing next year, nor pay off their debts. According to a report prepared by the Indian National Crime Bureau, the number of suicides committed by local farmers in 2009 reached 17,000. From the late 90s to 2008, more than 150,000 Indian farmers committed suicide.

This desire to commit suicide was due to the fact that, according to Indian laws, the debts were not transferred to the members of the farmer's family. But now this has changed too. The family is now responsible for the debts of a farmer who committed suicide.

There is one more thing that is important to mention here. I absolutely do not want to say that the only reason for these suicides is the emergence of GM seeds. There are undoubtedly other reasons as well. But the fact that GM seeds are one of the main ones is also quite obvious. It is the agrarian "drug addiction" - on loans or GM-technologies - that radically changes the life of the peasants and deprives them of the opportunity to choose, save crops for the next planting season, and makes them completely dependent.

As a result, we see that GMO - as a practical phenomenon of our social, economic and cultural reality - leads to the complete loss of the sovereignty of each individual farmer. Each specific region, each specific state.

Destruction of biodiversity

Here are some totally crazy numbers. Over the past century, about 93% of varieties of vegetables and fruits have been lost in the United States. In 1903, there were 408 varieties of tomatoes in the United States, and in the 1980s there were already less than 80. There were 544 varieties of cabbage, after 80 years - only 28; lettuce - 497 and 37, respectively, and so on. This happened due to the globalization of the seed market and the emergence of hybrids instead of varieties. With the advent of GMOs, all these processes are accelerating. Hundreds are being replaced, at best, by dozens of exactly the same vegetables and grains around the world.

[

Infographics: National Geographic

As an anxious gourmet who thinks with his stomach and not with his head, I am most outraged by the disappearance of the possibility of poisoning myself in the Vladimir region for Vyaznikovsky cucumber or in Yaroslavskaya for Danilovsky onion. I really want every region, and even better every village, to give me a chance to taste myself. I want a lot of different vegetables. Many different grains. Many different herbs. I do not want the whole world to give me StarLink Bt corn, I want to get old varieties of corn in Mexico. I want regional varieties to delight eaters with diversity, to preserve local agricultural and gastronomic traditions. And so on. In general, I want a lot.

Suppose all these "Wishlist" of mine can be attributed to the "uniqueness" of my internal structure. In the end - eat what they give! But here, too, the problem arises. Even if we forget about the stomach, which dictates its conditions to the head, with GMOs in the sense of biodiversity, everything is very alarming.

Here, listen to biologist and biodiversity activist Carey Fowler: “Crop diversity is the biological basis of agriculture. And all the attempts of the modern food industry to standardize and universalize varieties lead to the degeneration of crops and future hunger. " With the disappearance of the variety of varieties and species, the risks of epidemiological diseases among plants increase. The epidemic is much easier to sweep across the planet if it is opposed by only one variety (two, three, five) of corn, and not 120 - as it was quite recently. That is, GMOs are the path to an increased risk of hunger. Not the other way around - as the GMO advocates try to say ("we'll feed Africa").

In general, it is better to see once. Watch Fowler's excellent and short talk at Ted.com.

After reading and seeing, there will be those who will ask me: “What does GMO have to do with it? After all, we are losing biodiversity throughout the entire XX century. " I answer. GMOs in this case are the most powerful catalyst for these processes. A) Economic - what it was about in the first part. B) Biological. Pollination or transgenic pollution leads to the death of varieties. "Accidental crossing" is what Monsanto calls it.

Here's an example for you. In Mexico, the homeland of corn, corn has been found with GMOs in its DNA. Although no one planted her there. Moreover, the sowing of GM corn in Mexico is prohibited by law. But after the creation of a free trade zone with the United States and Canada, corn from the United States began to enter the market. It was 2 times cheaper, and although the ban on sowing GM corn in Mexico was in effect, there was a mixture. The Mexican State Environmental Institute conducted research and confirmed the contamination.

There is a version that such an infection does not happen by chance - it is part of a planned action. One way or another - the result is the same. The traditional maize varieties of Mexico are now in danger.

One more example. In Paraguay, the legalization of GMO seeds took place after their penetration into the country. There were bans on sowing GM seeds. But in fact, it turned out that the whole country was already "infected" or "accidentally crossed". Whatever you call it, the result is the same. That is, they simply allowed what had already happened. It turned out that there was nothing to save. Local varieties have degenerated.

Destruction of the traditional way of life

Biodiversity isn't just food. Each variety has its own history, its own way of material and spiritual life of this or that place on the planet. The regional variety is a symbol of local life. When the consumer gives preference to a regional variety and understands its gastronomic benefits, they end up financing this very special way of life, which is the primary reason for the preservation of the variety.

Big business destroys local traditional communities, way of life, material and spiritual culture inherent in the region.

Unfortunately, in Russia, the situation with regional agricultural crops and local rural communities around it suffered greatly in the 20th century as a result of well-known events. At the same time, fortunately, GMOs did not penetrate to us as strongly as in other countries. Therefore, as an example of how GMOs are destroying the traditional way of life, I will cite the same Paraguay.

[

Paraguayan farmers against GMOs. Still from the documentary film Raising Resistance, 2011

After the world prices for soybeans increased several times, the land here began to be massively bought up. More than 70 percent of arable land is now owned by 2 percent of the population and foreigners. This was the first blow to local communities. But the main and most effective was the transition to GM soybeans. The massive use of Roundup and GM soybeans by those outside the land has resulted in this being done without regard for the interests of the local population. Thousands of cases of pesticide poisoning of water sources, farm animals, etc. have been recorded. A mass exodus of peasants to the cities began.

[Here [there is an extensive report on this topic.

GMOs are not sustainable at all

The GMO plant cultivation program involves the use of herbicides and pesticides. And this means poisoning of the soil and groundwater. If a farmer suddenly decides to use GM seeds without these very herbicides and pesticides, he will look crazy. It doesn't make any economic sense.

Here, again, they can object to me that GM crops theoretically require less pesticides than hybrids and varieties that have been used recently. But I am proceeding from the principles of organic farming, which completely rejects the use of pesticides. Therefore, for me, the section goes right here. Do not use at all. Or use less (which is actually not true - as discussed below), but always.

GM plants are herbicide resistant. They are specially created just like that. For example, Roundup herbicide. It is designed to kill all weeds. A resistant GM plant survives. Roundup is the top-selling herbicide in the last 30 years. More recently, the advertisements for the herbicide read: "Decomposes quickly in soil and does not harm the environment." There was a trial on the occasion of this slogan in France. And the French court found this slogan "deceit". A specially conducted study showed that only 2 percent of the herbicide decomposed in the soil.

What is the result? Roundup still reigns throughout the world - including Russia. But the inscription "readily decomposes in soil" was simply removed from the label and from the advertisement.

Roundup advertisement

In addition, GM plants contain Cry-toxins or Bt-toxins (species-specific protein toxins) - this is done specifically so that the plant itself plays the role of an insecticide. Insecticides are chemicals used to kill harmful insects. Thus, such plants should by themselves kill parasites and protect themselves. Some creature attacked the corn - and immediately fumbled.

The position of GM seed producers in this regard is as follows: it is very effective, as it reduces the risks of crop loss. This means it makes your product cheaper and more competitive. And of course, these toxins are completely harmless to humans and soil.

Regarding the effectiveness a little lower, regarding the health of people, I promised not to talk at all, so here is a little about the soil and insects.

Bt toxins enter the environment in three ways:

- As a result of the selection of root processes;

- When the wind spreads pollen;

- When harvesting. Through the remnants of the crop in the field. About 10 percent of toxins enter the soil in this way.

A few observations from the world of science:

- A negative impact has been recorded on earthworms that process contaminated soil.

- The negative effect of pollen on butterfly larvae. Including monarch butterflies. Much has been written about this not only in scientific publications. For example, here. And here.

- Negative effect on ladybirds. In 2009, in Germany, because of this, a ban was introduced on the sowing of MON810 maize, which is especially resistant to the European corn moth.

As they say, draw your own conclusions.

Cost-effectiveness?

Economy, efficiency, productivity - this is the trump card of GMOs, which until the recent past fought all opponents. “Are you against GMOs? You are against progress! You are against the idea that civilization should strive for efficiency!"

In 2013, the American magazine Modern Farmer published research on GM corn and soybeans. The essence of which is that over several years of use, GM corn and soybeans lose their advantages in yield. Parasites adapt to toxins, weeds adapt to pesticides and the cultivation of such corn becomes an expensive and meaningless pleasure: “After five years of use, GMO corn seeds are more expensive for the farmer than traditional seeds. The cost of the product rises at the rate of almost $ 160 per hectare."

The magazine tells, among other things, the story of farmer Chris Hujrich from Iowa. Chris himself says that GM plants worked for a while. One gene made soybeans resistant to the herbicide glyphosate. Another protected corn from root worms and corn moths. What happened? “It worked for five years. And now the worm has adapted, and the weeds are resistant! Mother nature adapts. And it's not just that seeds are expensive (a bag of GM corn seeds costs $ 150 more than regular corn), but GMOs are forcing farmers to use more chemicals. Despite the theoretical resistance of genetically modified seeds to root worms, during the sowing period, I spray twice both regular corn and corn containing GMOs, herbicides and pesticides."

[

[Infographics: Modern Farmer

Herbicide and pesticide use rose 26 percent as weed resistance increased, according to US consumer rights company Food and Water Watch. Today, 61.2 million acres of arable land in the US is overgrown with glyphosate-tolerant weeds.

Well, towards the end [a little of my beloved Paraguay today [. "An attempt to grow genetically modified soybeans in Paraguay has failed," says the Paraguayan Farmers' Association communiqué. The statement of the farmers was also confirmed by the representative of the Ministry of Environment of Paraguay, Alfredo Molinas, who visited the provinces of Alto Parana and Canindea, where transgenic soybeans are grown. "Lost 70 percent of the crop," Molinas told Paraguay's La Nacion. According to representatives of the farmers' association, transgenic soybeans cannot withstand even the brief periods of drought that occur in this region of Paraguay. In some cases, this leads to the death of the entire crop."

Conclusion

Once again, I want to emphasize that the most popular topic among the opponents of GMOs - the topic of human health - has remained outside the brackets. And not at all because I consider it unreasonable. But only because I wanted to show that it is not the determining factor in my personal struggle against GMOs. Health is not the most important thing here - after all, GMO technologies were not invented in order to harm or help health - this is perhaps only one of the consequences of this invention. Moreover, the consequence, which was overgrown with the greatest number of myths and legends - and therefore, too, I diligently avoided this topic. But nevertheless, it should be noted that on this issue in the world of science, to put it mildly, different opinions are expressed.

The main thing for me is that GMOs are not a way to save or poison someone. This is a marketing strategy for the total monopolization of the world of food on the entire planet. And the concentration of all power (at least in the food sector) in several corporations (mostly in one). And such a strategy carries all the risks that I wrote about. Risks that are completely unacceptable for me personally. For me, GMOs as a phenomenon are unacceptable from the point of view of my civil position. For me, the world can and should be better, more varied, fairer and, damn it, tastier.

This is why I call GMOs one of the biggest scams in the world. And this scam, with scientific fanfare and discussions about the need to be more cost-effective, is unfolding before our eyes and in our stomachs.

P. S. Russian perspective

If Russia manages to become a country completely free of GMOs - and there is still such a chance - then we will have an excellent opportunity to become the world leaders in the production of organic products (there is a lot more to do for this - but without a tough stance on GMOs, everything else is meaningless). And such a map of the world will become not only a reflection of the agrarian reality, but also a symbol of the transformation of our country into the world leaders of the environmental movement. And this, believe me, is stronger than any national revolution.

[

[The prevalence of GMO crops in the world. Russia is one of the few green places.

Boris Akimov