The Lack of Science Behind Hawaii Island GMO Bill 113
We all want healthy, safe, nutritious, and affordable food to feed our families. Working together, we can make headway toward this common goal of obtaining food security for our Islands.
Hawaii County Bill 113 divides us rather than unites us, because it proposes to ban all new genetically engineered (GE) crops on the Big Island. It is not based on scientific evidence, despite Dr. Hector Valenzuela鈥檚 claims that were published recently in 天美视频.
Bill 113 would lump all genetically engineered crops together, whether they were experimental crops or ones approved and deregulated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Drug Administration, and the Environmental Protection Agency, three federal agencies that regulate GE crops. There is scientific consensus by the National Research Council of the U.S. National Academies of Sciences (2004) that GE crops must be assessed on a case-by-case basis, depending on the crop species and the trait involved. In a published in the Star Advertiser, Dr. Maria Gallo, Dean of the College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources, repeated this point 鈥 that not all genetically modified foods are the same and a blanket ban on them would be misguided.
Plants are basically chemical factories. They don鈥檛 have legs to run away from grazing animals or other pests. As a result, they use their chemical factories to protect themselves. Many insecticides are derived from plant compounds. Cyanide is produced by many plant species to .
One example of a food crop that produces such defenses is cassava, which is processed to remove the cyanide compounds before human consumption. In addition to cyanide, there are multiple examples of plant-based chemicals that are . Does the government require multi-generational animal or human testing of these food plant species? No.
Those opposed to GE crops demand such multi-generational studies to prove that GE crops are perfectly safe. But, regular food crops are also not perfectly safe. They produce allergens and toxins routinely, as a result of their natural biochemical activity.
Scientific studies can demonstrate that GE crop varieties are 鈥渟ubstantially equivalent鈥 to non-GE crops. Scientists analyze GE crop varieties for all the various chemical constituents normally found in non-GE crops and ensure that there are no increased amounts of naturally occurring plant toxins or new chemicals that may be allergenic.
Recently, Dr. Alessandro Nicolia published a review of 1,783 articles or 10 years of studies from 2002 to 2012 on the safety of GE crops. They published in Critical Reviews in Biotechnology, a well-respected, scientific journal. Dr. Nicolia and others concluded that 鈥淭he scientific research conducted so far has not detected any significant hazards directly connected with the use of GE crops …鈥
Irrational fears about GE crops have led to acts of vandalism against them, such as recently occurred on 8 August 2013, when vandals destroyed trials of 鈥淕olden Rice鈥 in the Philippines. White rice lacks vitamin A, and half a million children a year in the world are blinded by vitamin A deficiency. Golden Rice had a gene transferred from corn, in order to produce beta-carotene, a precursor of vitamin A, and it has the potential to prevent vitamin A deficiency. Thousands of scientists have signed a petition condemning the destruction of trials on 鈥淕olden Rice鈥 and they stand in opposition to 鈥渢he anti-GMO fever鈥 fanned by social media gossip and 鈥“.
Who can we trust? How can you distinguish rumors from high quality science? How can you determine what is an established scientific fact? In 鈥“, geneticist Dr. Pamela Ronald and organic farming instructor Mr. Raoul Adamchak provide the following criteria:
1) Examine the primary source of information. Is the source reputable? 2) Was the work published in a peer-reviewed journal? 3) Check if the journal has a good reputation for scientific research. 4) Determine if there is an independent confirmation by another published study. 5) Assess whether a potential conflict of interest exists. Does the person work for or have funds provided by a for-profit biotechnology firm or for anti-biotechnology groups? Remember that conflict of interest can occur on both sides of the issue. 6) Assess the quality of the institution or panel issuing a report. 7) Examine the reputation of the author.
Hawaii County Council Bill 113 is not based on science, contrary to the claims by Dr. Valenzuela. If passed, it will prevent ranchers and farmers on the Big Island from growing legal, healthy, and safe food crops. If passed, then we are on a slippery slope where laws are based not on facts, but on opinions.
Instead of passing Bill 113, Hawaii County Council members should table the bill and first form a Task Force or Ad-Hoc committee to advise them on this scientifically complex, controversial issue. This Task Force or Ad-Hoc Committee should be composed of scientists, health professionals, representatives of federal government regulatory agencies, and commercial growers of organic and conventional and GE crops or animals.
The . We can demonstrate how co-existence of diverse farming systems on the Big Island is possible, just as we have shown how diverse ethnic and cultural groups can co-exist together, by respecting each other and focusing on what we have in common.
About the author: Dr. Susan C. Miyasaka is an Agronomist with the University of Hawaii鈥檚 College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources (CTAHR). She was born and raised in Hawaii, and she eats Rainbow papayas and other genetically engineered foods. Dr. Miyasaka is an independent scientist who has not received research funding from the seed companies nor from organic food companies. The views expressed here are hers and not those of CTAHR.
Community Voices aims to encourage broad discussion on many topics of community interest. It’s kind of a cross between Letters to the Editor and op-eds. This is your space to talk about important issues or interesting people who are making a difference in our world. Columns generally run about 800 words (yes, they can be shorter or longer) and we need a photo of the author and a bio. We welcome video commentary and other multimedia formats. Send to news@civilbeat.com.
