In a message dated 3/26/2011 6:11:03 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [log in to unmask] writes: We know that turning corn into ethanol makes no sense from a global warming perspective – it’s using a third of America’s corn crop, hurting the land and waterways, and saving almost no gasoline. It has had the effect of driving up food prices – but farmers may lose from the introduction of a new genetically engineered corn, designed especially to be turned into fuel, as it may harm marketability of the two-thirds of the crop destined for food or feed. The following press release from our ally Center for Food Safety sums up the situation well. Jim Diamond / Sierra Club Genetic Engineering Activist Team -=-=-=-=-=-=- World’s First Genetically Engineered Biofuels Corn Threatens Contamination Of Food-Grade Corn Washington, D.C. – February 11, 2011 – Impacts on Human Health, Environment, and Farmers Not Fully Assessed DESPITE RISING GLOBAL FOOD PRICES, OBAMA ADMINISTRATIONCONTINUES MISGUIDED BIOFUELS AGENDA The Center for Food Safety criticized an announcement today by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) that it will approve the world’s first genetically engineered (GE) crop designed specifically for biofuel production. The Center maintains that this GE “biofuels corn” will contaminate food-grade corn, and has not been properly assessed for potential adverse effects on human health, the environment, or farmers’ livelihoods. “The USDA has once again put the special interests of the biotechnology and biofuels industries above the clear risks to our nation’s food system,” said Andrew Kimbrell, Executive Director for the Center for Food Safety. “ The Obama Administration is well aware of the costly effects that Starlink corn contamination had on farmers and the food industry, and now it is poised to repeat the same mistake.” The GE corn – known as Event 3272 – is genetically engineered to contain high levels of a heat-resistant and acid-tolerant enzyme derived from exotic, marine microorganisms. The enzyme breaks down starches into sugars, the first step in conversion of corn to ethanol, and has not been adequately assessed for its potential to cause allergies, a key concern with new biotech crops. In fact, leading food allergists consulted by CFS indicated that Syngenta’s assessment of the potential allergenicity of this enzyme was inadequate, and called for more careful evaluation. Agronomists suggest that unharvested corn will deposit large quantities of this enzyme in the soil, which could adversely affect soil carbon cycling. At present, ethanol plants add a different and familiar version of this enzyme to accomplish the same purpose. The corn was developed by Syngenta, the Swiss agrichemical and biotechnology firm. “Syngenta’s biofuels corn will inevitably contaminate food-grade corn, and could well trigger substantial rejection in our corn export markets, hurting farmers” said Bill Freese, science policy analyst at the Center for Food Safety Though this industrial corn is supposed to be used only for domestic ethanol plants, Syngenta has sought import approvals in nations to which the U.S. exports corn. These approvals are being sought because Syngenta knows that food-grade corn shipments will inevitably be contaminated with Event 3272, and hopes to thereby avoid liability for such episodes. While some markets have granted import approvals, South Africa denied import clearance on health grounds in 2006. Whatever the import policies of governments, corn traders might well test and reject U.S. corn supplies contaminated with industrial corn that contains a potentially allergenic enzyme. USDA acknowledges that serious concerns about food system contamination remain, yet deregulated the GE corn anyway, citing a Syngenta-led “advisory council” and so-called “closed-loop” system for amylase corn. That Syngenta “invited USDA to participate” in this Council is not consoling to farmers, consumers or food companies who remember the Starlink corn debacle. In addition, Syngenta’s capacity for and commitment to stewardship are called into question by past mishaps. From 2001 to 2004, the company accidentally sold seed of an unapproved GE corn variety (Bt10) to American farmers, a variety which contained an antibiotic-resistance marker gene for resistance to ampicillin, an important human antibiotic, presenting the risk of exacerbating the serious medical problem of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. “The resemblance to StarLink is uncanny,” continued Freese. “Much like StarLink, Syngenta’s biofuels corn poses allergy concerns and is not meant for human food use. It’s hard to believe that USDA has forgotten the substantial harm StarLink caused to farmers and the US food industry, but apparently it has.” StarLink was a GE corn variety approved only for animal feed and industrial use because leading food allergists thought it might cause food allergies if used in human foods. Despite measures to keep StarLink separate from food-grade corn, it contaminated the human food supply in 2000-2001. Hundreds reported allergic reactions they believe were linked to StarLink. Food companies recalled over 300 corn-based products, export markets sent back StarLink-contaminated corn shipments, and farmers suffered substantial economic losses as a result. Seventeen state Attorneys General sued StarLink’s developer, Aventis CropScience, to partially recover damages. The Center also believes it is irresponsible to engineer corn for fuel use at a time when massive diversion of corn to ethanol has played a significant role in raising food prices and thus exacerbating world hunger. Leading food experts have blamed excessive conversion of corn to ethanol for exacerbating the world food crisis by driving up prices of corn and other staples. The World Bank reported an 83% rise in food prices from 2005 to 2008, and estimates that 100 million additional people have been pushed into hunger and poverty as a result. USDA data show that 23% of US corn (3 billion bushels) was converted to ethanol in 2007, jumping to over 30% (3.7 billion bushels) in 2008, with further increases expected as more ethanol refineries are constructed. The Center is currently reviewing all materials related to today’s decision and is planning litigation. # # # - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the CONS-SPST-BIOTECH-FORUM list, send any message to: [log in to unmask] Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp To view the Sierra Club List Terms & Conditions, see: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/terms.asp - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to: [log in to unmask] Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp