NP: Biotech and the Fate of the Natural Order
By James W. Astrada
Global warming has since been an issue debated by both sides as either a hoax or an ever growing problem. According to Jorgen Randers of the BI Norwegian Business School in Oslo, argues that enough data sufficiently displays that the second half of the 21st century will bring humans near “apocalyptic” conditions. Many scientists like those at M.I.T have agreed that some scenarios concerning the “Limits to Growth” model (where humans manage to control production and population to live within planetary limits) is no longer sustainable or accurate due to humans failing to act accordingly. Many key examples displayed after global tracking data show all of these variables reaching peak and then suddenly dropping until collapse. Randers himself has stated in his new book that food per capita has gone down, energy has become scarcer, and GHG gasses are being emitted twice as much as the oceans and forests can handle/absorb. He compared this to the 1972 statistical data where humans only used 85% of “regenerative capacity” of the biosphere to support economic activities (i.e. growing food, producing goods, and assimilating pollutants) to now where humans use 150%— and continues to rise. Although Randers has suggested that renewable energy and efficiency would be needed to starve off the worst effects of climate change until 2050, he doesn’t believe humanity’s efforts to ameliorate climate change have been sufficient. Concurring with Randers, some have made it difficult to help humanity change course for the better in terms of tampering with nature’s system.
Others concur with the collapse of civilization; however blame the peak of oil instead of climate change. Some experts are concerned with this nonrenewable source becoming more expensive to extract. In order to keep up with the demand of the oil supply, many suggest that society has to divert investment from agriculture causing a drop in food production. Either way the model plays out, humanity (if it survives until 2050…) will have many obstacles in the latter half of the 21st century if it plans to live to see 2100.
Environmental impacts are the cause of climate change and if humanity plans to make a positive difference for a “better tomorrow,” we have to be vigilant in regards to our actions. It seems that biotech industries are trying to push a law to grant them immunity from repercussions of their actions. The “Monsanto-rider” law was interjected into the multi-billion dollar FY 2013 Agricultural Appropriations bill allowing them to plant (by temporary permit authorized by the Secretary of Agriculture) and cultivate GMO crops even if the federal courts have not authorized them to until further notice. If the farmers (under the payroll of Monsanto or DuPont) ask for the permit, their crops could be released into the environment contaminating conventional and organic crops without penalty.
Unless someone takes action (the Senate or an “army of farmers”) the House of Representatives will likely pass the law soon. According to the Center for Food Safety, Monsanto has been circumventing and trying to corner the food industry which places the nation’s food supply at risk. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) has created an amendment to halt the acceptance of the rider law; however even if it survives the House vote, it still has to be accepted by the Senate. Along with DeFazio, the Organic Consumers Association, Center for Food Safety, FoodDemocracyNow!, the Alliance for Natural Health USA and others are gathering signatures to support and protest this blatant misuse of power. If Congress allows biotech industries their wish for complete autonomy and immunity, the environment will be subjected to numerous alterations commencing major negative changes for the biosphere. Despite many lawsuits to slow the approval for GE crops, biotech industries have still challenged the USDA at the NEPA act. What is the point to establish guidelines and laws if corporations just find ways to get around them? Monsanto’s Roundup Ready alfalfa has already contaminated organic alfalfa crops without analyzing risks. Unless the Center for Food Safety brought up law suits concerning this issue in 2007, the USDA would have never done a four year study of GMO alfalfa impacts on other crops. Why do other organizations have to force the government agencies responsible in policing the activities of these industries to act in the benefit of the people rather than the benefit of the industries by issuing lawsuits? What ever happened to law and order? The USDA was ready to approve the chemical legally until there was a lawsuit to challenge the legality issue.
Even if biotech industries boast about the perfection of their GM crops resisting pests, it seems Mother Nature is fighting back. Cotton bollworms were dealt with by inserting Bt bacterium (a toxin harmless to humans and most other creatures) within the GM crop to kill the pest. Scientists now are worried due to the bollworm developing a resistance. It seems a “rare genetic mutation” is making the bollworms immune to Bt and it is now becoming common in their offspring. One scientist from the University of Arizona College of Agriculture and Life Sciences Bruce Tabashnik, compared bollworms from China and found that the same mutation was evident as the laboratory studies. There was added data that he considered “disturbing” where the Chinese bollworms also displayed other unexpected adaptations. Tabashnik had more trouble on a genetic level dealing with real world mutations rather than his laboratory studies. According to studies, scientists fear a “genetics arms race” with insects. As scientists develop more GM crops with better resistance capabilities, this will also mean more problems on the horizon. Even though Tabashnik’s studies only account for 2% of bollworms with resistance capabilities, numbers will quickly rise. This result as displays that nature designs more resistant and difficult “pest” species that scientists will have to try to eliminate. With nature’s experience of over 4 billion years of evolution compared to humanity’s 200 years of industrial and scientific progress, the winner is obvious. The only concern now is how far biotech industries are willing to go in the name of genetic progress that will have negative effects of human health, food production, animal and plant species health, and the biosphere.
In the name of science, many accomplishments have been documented which has allowed the human race to move forward. As a man of science myself, there are always boundaries that have been marked by Mother Nature on where our place in the natural order stands. Humans always seem to push those boundaries in the name of “human progress” without taking responsibility for our actions. There are many of us who do care and try to do the best we can in life without affecting some other organism along the way. The majority however, is not properly informed on what transpires under their noses that eventually reaches their livelihoods and those around them. It seems greedy corporations buy their way to advancements while the rest of the public and the biosphere take the brunt of the consequences. Those government agencies created to regulate these companies and set rules are bending to the will of those in power by being paid off while they have a field day with our food supply, crops, health, and taxpayer money. Instead of trusting a product or food item, one now has to investigate, familiarize themselves with certain chemical names (that always change as people become educated) and recalls so we do not poison ourselves or our loved ones (animals included). How much more evidence do we need to finally see the bigger picture? Do we have to suffer major losses to our population to finally step forward and say “enough?” If scientists are indeed accurate about our current position and the inadequacy of our efforts, then I see a grim future for our species on the horizon that may push us past the point of no return.
References
George Dvorsky. “Mutated pests are quickly adapting to biotech crops in unpredicted and disturbing ways.” I09.com. June 27th, 2012.
“Monsanto rider: new bill could make biotech companies immune to courts.” Rt.com. July 11th, 2012. http://rt.com/usa/news/monsanto-bill-immunity-court-862/
Jorgen Randers. 2052: A Global Forecast for the Next Forty Years. Chelsea Green Publishing. June 13th, 2012.
Gus Lubin and Rob Wile. “Peak Oil Guru Robert Hirsch Gives A Dire Outlook For The Future.” Business Insider.
July 10th, 2012.
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-02/uoa-fdc020508.php
©James Astrada 2012.
Discover more from Robert JR Graham
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.