Staff Contributors
Guest Contributors

Seeds of wisdom

Seed-savers and greens unite to challenge Monsanto's latest cash cow

Posted by Tom Philpott at 12:09 PM on 23 Jan 2008

Read more about: food | agriculture | business | industrial ag | GMOs

For years, candy makers and other industrial food manufacturers refused to use genetically modified sugar, fearing a consumer backlash.

Hard candy
Photo: iStockphoto

As a result, Monsanto's Roundup Ready sugar beet -- designed to withstand heavy application of Roundup, Monsanto's herbicide -- has been dead in the water. (Sugar beets, grown in the Midwest and Northwest, account for half of U.S. sugar production; cane, grown mainly in Florida, provides the rest.)

But as of last fall, all of that changed. Big Food -- which has already given a bear hug to another genetically modified sweetener, high-fructose corn syrup -- changed its tune. A Kellogg spokesperson told the NYT that the company "would not have any issues" with GM sugar in the U.S., because "most consumers are not concerned about biotech."

And now, the powerful sugar industry is urging beet growers to plant the Monsanto product. Does that mean Monsanto -- which already essentially controls production of our two biggest crops, corn and soy -- will add sugar beets to its trophy case of monopolies?

Maybe not. A scrappy coalition of seed-diversity activists, organic seed providers, and green groups are suing the USDA, urging it to revoke the "unregulated" status it awarded Monsanto's latest strain of GM beets.

The coalition's logic is compelling. According to their press release, the sugar beet industry grows its seed stock mainly in Oregon's Willamette Valley, "also an important seed growing area for crops closely related to sugar beets, such as organic chard and table beets."

And beets are wind-pollinated, thus prone to cross-pollinate. This raises the thorny issue of genetic contamination -- Monsanto's patent-protected genes weaseling into conventional plants, including ones producing seeds for organic beets and chard.

Genetic contamination not only ruins efforts to preserve old seed lines and threatens the organic status of producers; it also opens non-GM growers to claims of patent infringement from Monsanto's notorious team of seedy rent-a-cops and lawyers (PDF). In 2004, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that farmers caught using seeds containing patented genes owe the patent-holder a technology fee -- even if the genes ended up in their seed through cross-pollination.

Moreover, the coalition argues that the industry line about how GM crops reduce chemical use is nonsense. They cite figures (PDF) showing that "GE crops increased herbicide use in the U.S. by 122 million pounds -- a 15-fold increase -- between 1994 (when GE herbicide-tolerant crops were introduced) to 2004."

As I wrote last week, Monsanto rose to dominance on a wave of lawsuits against farmers. It would be lovely if this litigious giant saw the prospect for yet another crop monopoly crumble because of a successful lawsuit.

Kellogg and Hershey had interesting responses

I recently emailed both Hershey and Kellogg urging them to not use GMO sugar. The responses I got were both ignorant and patronizing. Kellogg's said something to the point "Don't worry, Sweet Nell, Kellogg would NEVER do anything to harm its customer's. Our 100 year reputation is staked on it." (say this using Dudley Doright's voice) and Hershey was simply oblivious to the risks GMOs pose and supported them. How ridiculous. I think if more people emailed them, they may change their minds. Couldn't hurt.

"For as long as space endures, and for as long as living beings remain, until then may I too abide, to dispel the misery of the world." - Shantideva
I emailed Kellogg's

That comment made by the Kellogg's spokesperson made it look like they think they can do whatever they want with the food because their consumers are stupid.

Now I need to go email Hershey's.

The time to act is now

These are great ideas, guys. I, too, intend to write to these giants of industry - the very ones that do not care what we're being made to eat, as long as they make money. Monsanto is the biggest offender, and what they are doing to our food is nothing short of criminal. I wish I could join in the lawsuit against the USDA, who is in bed with Monsanto, Cargill, and other companies.

In the meantime, we can boycott these companies as a way of saying "I'm a consumer who happens to care about what I eat, especially if it's gm food." It is possible to avoid gm crops (by eating more organic), to buy foods that don't contain high fructose corn syrup, to avoid meat and dairy, and to stick to "real" foods - unprocessed, whole and raw foods. I know, because I'm doing it. I feel better than ever, and my grocery bill has gone down, as well.

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.
sign in
Search Gristmill
Subscribe
  • subscribe via RSSStay updated with the Gristmill RSS feed.
  • Add to My Yahoo!
  • Subscribe with Bloglines
  • Subscribe in NewsGator Online
  • Subscribe in Netvibes
  • Subscribe in Google
Using Gristmill
  • What is Gristmill?
  • Posting rules
The comments of Gristmill users reflect the opinions of those individuals only, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoints of Grist, its staff, its board members, their psychotherapists, or their aestheticians. Got it?

Gristmill is powered by Scoop.

ADVERTISING POLICY


About Grist | Support Grist | Job Board | Archives | Grist by Email | RSS | Podcast
Gristmill Blog | In the News | Ask Umbra | Muckraker | Victual Reality | 'Tis the Season | The Grist List | The Bottom Line



Grist: Environmental News and Commentary
a beacon in the smog (tm) ©2008. Grist Magazine, Inc. All rights reserved. Gloom and doom with a sense of humor®.
Webmaster | Sitemap | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Trademarks