PSCI 3109 Politics of Law and Morality Lecture 11 PDF

Preview

Summary

PSCI 3109 Politics of Law and Morality Lecture...

Description

PSCI 3109 Politics of Law and Morality Lecture 11 Biotechnology Interdisciplinary: economics, ecology, politics, sociology Biochemists who discovered DNA that started a scientific revolution with long lasting effect – potential to change the world more than mechanics because it is the ability to tinker with life If you make alterations to life, it has other effects on reproduction Their discoveries allowed gene splicing – take genes from on organism and put them in another than can never be found in nature Crop modification – began with cross-breeding and selective breeding Moved on to transgenesis and genome editing of crops Green biotechnology Global area of biotech crops have had enormous uptake since the 1990s – main focus of the industry is Asia, South America and North America Most packaged food in the supermarket has GMOs     

Corn Soy Canola Cotton Papaya

Most fresh foods as also GMOs Ethics are complex – very big industry and a lot of money is involved – the biotech companies have made a lot of claims – minefield of who to trust on GMOs Industry presentation for GMOs   

Benefits of biotech Saved Hawaii’s papaya crops from disease by creating virus resistant crops Council for biotechnology information o Insect resistance o Drought tolerance o Herbicide tolerance o Disease resistance o Enhanced national content o Reduced food waste o Etc.

  

Soy council – 93% decrease of soil erosion First genetically engineered crop was the flavour saver tomato – but it failed because people didn’t like it, and it didn’t task good The next was a pureheart seedless watermelon – done so farmers couldn’t save them and plant them the next year – its free, and GMOs changed that

Promises of the biotech industry   

Feed the world Insert slide Heal the world – use own genetic makeup to heal, reduce rates of infectious diseases, etc.

Cliams of the Biotechnology Industry    

 







GF is not new, it is just speeded-up selective breeding Biotech = continuation of genetic engineerying we’ve been doing for thousands of years It prodiuces crops, plants Ancient food biotechnology – fermentation by microbes o Cheese o Beer o Wine o Bread Modern food biotechnology But: selective breeding doesn’t manipulate genes because it is crossing the same parents of a related species, which in nature can genetically cross breed – species is defined as reproductively isolated – specieis barriers in nature, only genetically mix with like species GE involves extracting selected gens from one organism – animals, plants, insects, bacteria – an or viruses or synthesizing copies, and articfically inserting them into a completely different organism GE uses virus genes to smuggle in and promote the inserted genes, and anti-biotic resistane genes to act as markers, and all inserted genes are present in every cells if the plant – do not just have the one affect you’re looking for because genes interact with each other GMOs not the same as they altered to have an advantage over wild or previously tended strains – the species will dominate over the wild strain

GE is precise  

Can cut a out a specific gene and paste it into an organism But: you can cut it out precisely, you cannot put it in precisely, it will have random effect





We only know the functions of a very small proportion of genome of any higher organism – junk DNA – only 10% of DNA are coding genes and the rest are just junk – but if it is junk, then why does it survive Before the Human genone project o The junk DNA actually has many functions that regulate the coding genese o If you try to code a gene to get one affect, because they don’t know what the other genes are doing, you don’t know what the affect on the other genes are

GE Food is more nutritious 

 



GMO crops are deisnged to resist specific herbicide, to produce their own pesticides/insecticides – when the insect eats the GM plant, it will die – or to have a longer shelf. The plants themselves are registered as pesticides However, studies show no difference in nutrition and taste between biotech and conventional crops Genetic traits expressed in GMOs o Apples, non-browning – longer shelf-life, better looking – when an apple is browning, you can tell its dying and decomposing o Potato – reduced bruising – blight resistance – kills certain insects o Field corn – insect resistance, drought tolerance, etc. None of them are about nutrition

One can choose not to eat GE foods  



Unlikely as there is no labeling Ge products are likely to be found in foods containing soya flour and oil – in breads, sausages, etc. lecithin (in chocolate, ice cream, canola oil, corn maize extracts, corn syrup, corn starch, sugar The companies oppose labeling GMOs – because if they are labeled people won’t eat them

Farmers will benefit from growing GE foods     

GE seeds are more expensive, farmers report no greater yields, crops less reliable, as more countries reject GE foods, non-GE crops, and especially organic is a premium Insurance companies in the UK and the US are refusing to insure GM crops because of the risks associated with them Farmers must sign binding contracts with biotech companies, committing them only Farmer suicides in India due to debt in trying to purchase GMO seeds Movement in India against GMOs o Political issue – scientific warnings in effects of GM crops on Indian environment o Food creation is undemocratic because of the companies that own the seeds have all the power

GE Crops will reduce use of herbicides and pesticides 

      

Crops engineered to produce their own insecticide can kill beneficial insects/soil microbes o Trillions of micro-organisms – that’s what makes it alive because they all interact with each other and passing on nutrients – they pass on the nutrients into plants, and the nutrients are passed on to humans If you kill in a blanket, you destroy those microbes, and those soils Soil dies in a faster rate Crops engineers to be resistant to specific herbicides encourage more liberal use of them Some insecticide use has decreases, but BT plants are not registered as pesticides Ground water contamination – water goes underground and into rivers and lakes Cross-pollinates weeds Monsanto

GE crops will save the poor/developing countries from hunger    

    

Major source of famine is unequal distribution of food Poor people can’t afford the seeds of GE food No evidence that GE crops provide higher yield at lower cost than conventional costs Other costs of famines and poverty: lack of land reform, monoculture, cash crop production, wars, soil erosion due to numerous causes, aridity, politics, imperialism, foreign corporations, etc. Stopping eating beef would make more difference in terms of poverty rates We waste 1.3 billion tonnes of food Food mountains in western world, especially EU with butter mountains, wine lakes, etc. Regular dumping of food, we pay farmers not to grow certain crops, produce milk, etc. or produces and excess even if products not sold to keep the prices regulated Which regions waste the most food? Us and Europe

No evidence that GE crops are harmful to the environment    



Insects, birds, or ingesting animals and wind carry genetically altered pollen and seeds into neighbouring fields and beyond – they will get dispersed Cross-poliination will occur between GE and non GE crops and their wild relatives – so e.g. resistance to weed-killer transmitted to weeds Crops engineered to produce their own insecticide kill beneficial insects Risks of spontaneous mutation, cant recall a lvign organisim, effects can’t be contained locally like a sprayed shemicl, capacity to reproduce itself so multiplication and dispersal might produce long problems Spring 2004, Supreme Court of Canada: Monsanto successfully sued a Saskatchewan farmer, Percy Schneider, for unauthorized use of their seeds, which he claims blew into his land and contaminated his land

              

    



o Went through many iterations and he eventually beat Monsanto o Patent violation Spread of GM seeds/crops – spores on average float 800m, contaminate non-GM crops Biotech encourages monoculture, which leads to mutations in pests, genetic and soil erosion, killing of soil organics, ground water contamination, etc. Monsanto factored in a terminator gene – but they took it off the market after threatened lawsuits However, insects have become adaptable – they have become immune to pesticides, and the effects of the ingestion of these superbugs? Monarch butterfly decline linked to spread of GM crops – decline in milkweed, which is what they eat Insect resistance to GM crops has increased BT crops registered under EPA as pesticides But even if you are successful in killing insects, what are they supposed to eat? What are the implications of this up the food chain? Insect apocalypse? Killing bees, butterflies, etc. – pesticides are killing them If the insects are dying off at such rates, we should be concerned Non-GM crops are doused in neonictoids Plants are becoming virus resistant like rag weeds Glysophate resistant weeds now Big concern is the effect on biomes because of interference with the food chain E.g. changes in a plant, affects the herbivores that eat the plant, predators that consume those herbivors, and the microorganisms that decompose organism from the other trophic level So a genetic modification in a plant has a cascading effect across the food chain Changing many plants and crops – you might have all kinds of effects up the food change Noticing desertification because the biomes are being killed off The potential for transgenic crops to cause environmental impacts has been studies Major effects on honeybees and if pollen is genetically modified it affects the health for bees – as we lose bees, there go our food crops – affect the niches of various species in the food chain Insert slide

Externality 

Economics – a side effect or consequence of an industrial or other activity that affects other parties without this being reflected in the cost of the goods or services involved, such as the pollination of surrounding crops by bees kept for honey o Effects for which you don’t have to pay o Companies treat these as side-effects or externalities

Monsanto

  

Arose out of the war They were creating chemical weapons After the war ended, they shifted from chemical for war use, to creating pesticides insecticides and herbicide business

Progress is inevitable     

Utilitarian argument – future benefits argument Bio tech will feed the world But they don’t weigh the future benefits against the risks – they treat the risks as externalities What is there are disproportional or inequitable benefits? Golden rice o Let’s engineer rice with vitamin A so children in developing country won’t die o However, farmers in those countries opposed golden rice because they said the technologies have been looking unsafe, and we’re afraid of the effects they’ll have on the environment, etc. o Vitamin A is not the only thing that’s missing – rather we have no vitamin A because we are poor and don’t have access to food with vitamin A

GE Foods are extensively tested   

CBI claims that the federal government has been regulating biotechnology Yes they are extensively tested, but to make sure they work, but not tested for longterm health effect Where are the studies on human health?

Royal Science report       

Looked at role of agencies on regulating GMOs No independent testing on the safety of the GMOs Decision-making process in general lacks transparency, and thus credibility Health Canada: consult using data supplied by applicant to decide whether a product is toxic to the environment or human health No independent testing of the safety of a GM food by the government or an independent laboratory Substantial equivalence approach – barley is barley No actual studies or independent studies

64 countries around the world label GE food – but the Canadian government has resisted this Other companies have started labeling their food as non-genetically modified in the absence of official regulations Glyphosate and Autism

   

    

Looked at the incidence of health issues with glyphosate Correlation between autism, celiac disease, dementia, kidney disease death rate liver and bile duct cancer, thyroid cancer Large spike in food digestive problems since the mid 90s One of the scientists who did the first study on GMOs – Arpad Pusztai – fed GMO potatoes to rats, and the rats developed organ damage, reproductive failure, etc. o He was fired by the university 1998 study – put in a modified food into your gut, you gut does not know how to deal with it – gut bacteria mount inflammatory attack on GMO Number of studies confirming glyphosate links to celiac GM food might affect organ failure However, there are many studies that have no found effects o These are 90 day studies funded by the companies – not long term studies Call for independent studies that are not funded by movements or companies in order to seek the truth about GMOS

We are the world’s largest science experiment    

No control group No consent No compensation No end

Long-term effects are not knowable – almost all the health budget will go towards diabetes in the future Political implications   



Monsanto Protection Act signed by Obama Administration Monsanto lost many courts cases about cancer claims linked to their pesticide 5 pesticide and GMO corporations dominate world’s seeds, pesticide and biotechonolgy industries o BASF o BAYER – MONSANTO o DUPONT o DOW CHEMICAL o SYNGERTA Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN o GM are not the answer to beat hunger and malnutrition o Rather organic food is the answer

Organic systems are competitive – insert data of 30 year study of GMO and organic crops Substantial Equivalence and the Precautionary Principle

 



Just how different does the crop have to be for it to not be considered substantially equivalent Precautionary principle: the science is uncertain, so we should err on the side of caution – better to predict there is an adverse effect when there isn’t one, than to predict there isn’t one and it turns out there is We don’t have to prove its not safe, but companies have to prove that it is...