Editorial

Genetic Engineering: Fields of Dreams — Or Nightmares?

To the extent genetic engineering is discussed at all in Hawai`i, it is celebrated as the next economic savior in a state where visitor counts are in the cellar and the old warhorses of sugar and pineapple have been hauled to the glue factory.

But elsewhere, genetic engineering, especially of food crops, has generated controversy — and not genteel parlor-room chats of potential drawbacks and benefits, but actions bordering on riots. Contrary to the views of Hawai`i’s ever-hopefuls, those protesting genetically engineered seeds regard white-coated lab technicians as the first wave of a malevolent invading force that, if triumphant, would draw the agricultural sector into an ever-tighter orbit around multinational corporations.

Not that the multinationals don’t already exert what many would say is an unhealthy influence over agricultural practices worldwide. Consider, for example, the development of pesticide-resisistant crops, such as Monsanto’s Roundup-Ready varieties. These were formulated with an eye to increasing a farmer’s dependence on the glyphosate herbicide Monsanto produces — to the point that the farmer must agree to use only Roundup on his crop, and not an equivalent herbicide that is produced by, say, Zeneca.

Aside from the economic and social significance of the increasing dominance of multinationals in agricultural life, there’s the all-but unstudied potential for genetically engineered crops to undermine organic agriculture. Polluting pollen from transgenic crops can drift onto fields of organic farmers. Of course, this wreaks economic havoc on the organic farms, but it also makes organic produce even scarcer and more costly to consumers.

Then, too, there is the usurpation by corporate America of one of the few tools in the organic farmer’s toolbox, Bacillus thuringiensis, or Bt. Applied sparingly on organic crops, this strain of bacteria is perhaps the most important pesticide available to organic farmers. But the use of Bt in genetically engineered crops, as a built-in pesticide, threatens to diminish its effectiveness in the long run. As everyone who has battled the lowly cockroach knows, organisms that are routinely exposed to chemicals can develop a resistance, which, when transferred to later generations, makes them impervious to the chemicals’ effects. Should the same thing happen as a result of the ubiquitous use of Bt, organic farmers — and their customers — would disproportionately suffer.

Not to be overlooked is the potential threat to health and the environment posed by transgenic crops. With corporate giants such as Monsanto sponsoring much of the research on genetic engineering, it is hardly surprising that these effects are not well studied as yet. Still, as reported in the May 6, 1999, edition of Rachel’s Environment & Health Weekly, a researcher in Aberdeen, Scotland, has observed stunted development and immune-system damage in rats that have been fed genetically modified potatoes. Shortly after reporting his research results on British television, the researcher, Dr. Arpad Pusztai, was forced to sign a gag order by the director of the Rowett Research Institute where he worked, and then pushed into retirement. (Earlier this year, Pusztai’s supporters learned the Rowett Institute receives funds from Monsanto.)

In The Dark

In Hawai`i, public oversight of genetic engineering projects is all but non-existent. For months, Environment Hawai`i has sought, without much success, to break through a wall of defenses erected to keep the state’s involvement in such projects beyond the public’s view.

Much of the information, it is claimed, is proprietary. Yet such fundamental questions as the when and where and what of many experiments was deemed to be off-limits when we made inquiries. Even when it was learned a researcher had been fined, the amount of the fine was held back as a closely guarded secret.

Information such as this is not proprietary. Indeed, for the state’s organic farmers, it is imperative that they know whether researchers for the state or private corporations are conducting nearby experiments with genetically engineered seeds. Taxpayers, too, have a right to know what private parties are deriving special benefits from state-owned resources — whether it be use of the university’s experimental stations and labs, or acquisition of licenses developed by state employees.

Until the state comes clean, enforces its own laws, and allows for unfettered disclosure of the circumstances surrounding genetic experimentation in Hawai`i, the public has every right and reason to remain skeptical about its promise and suspicious about its potential for wreaking environmental harm.

Environment Hawai`i is pleased to announce the selection of Christopher Joyce as our 1999 resident journalist. Joyce is managing correspondent for environment and technology at National Public Radio’s science desk in Washington, D.C. He will be in Hawai`i for a month, preparing articles for publication in the newsletter and for eventual broadcast on his return to Washington.

Joyce is also author Earthly Goods: Medicine-Hunting in the Rainforest (1994), and co-author Witnesses from the Grave: The Stories Bones Tell (1991), a book on forensic science.

The resident journalist program is underwritten by a grant from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation.

Volume 9, Number 12 June 1999