Nina Fedoroff

Nina Fedoroff, a geneticist and molecular biologist who developed several modern techniques used to study and modify plants, is science and technology adviser to the US Secretary of State and to the administrator of USAID. She is also a professor at Pennsylvania State University and author of Mendel in the Kitchen: A Scientist’s View of Genetically Modified Food.

The disconnect between what people worry about and what’s true about GM crops is deep and wide—a chasm, really. Is it about the technology itself or is it about all kinds of other things?

With a computer and bit of effort, almost anyone can extract the facts from the gloom and catastrophism. Fact: Modern genetic modification of crops is responsible for most of the crop yield increases of recent years. This means, of course, that the farmers who’ve adopted GM crops have benefited the most. These already number more than 13 million, 90 percent of whom are resource-poor, small-holder farmers in relatively poor countries. READ MORE »

Pamela Ronald

Pamela Ronald is a professor of plant pathology at the University of California, Davis, where she studies the role that genes play in a plant’s response to its environment. She is co-author of Tomorrow’s Table: Organic Farming, Genetics, and the Future of Food.

The community of Davis, California, where I teach, is renowned for its devotion to the idea of local, organic, sustainable foods. As a plant geneticist, I spend my weekdays doing research, surrounded mostly by scientists (some who admit being baffled by continued fears about GM food). As the wife of an organic farmer, I spend my weekends gardening and cooking the produce that my husband, Raoul, brings in from the farm. My lab focuses on genetically engineering rice to give it resistance to diseases and flooding, both of which are serious problems of rice crops in Africa and Asia. My family focuses, at least in the summertime, on eating lots of pesto, which we make by grinding up organic basil from Raoul’s farm with the organic walnuts our neighbor gives us. In short, my world is a case study in contrasts, and it’s given me an insider’s view of perspectives from both communities. READ MORE »

According to a new USDA report released July 1, American farmers have adopted genetically engineered crops widely since their introduction in 1996, especially corn, cotton and soybean varieties. The Economic Research Service report includes key findings:

• Adoption of GE soybeans is 91 percent in 2009.

• Adoption of all GE cotton reached 88 percent in 2009.

• Adoption of all biotech corn climbed to 85 percent in 2009.

Sharon Bomer Lauritsen, Executive Vice President, Food and Agriculture for the Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO), issued the following statement in response to the report’s findings:

“Because of the compelling benefits that biotech crops provide, herbicide-tolerant and insect-resistant varieties of corn, cotton and soybeans continue to be the choice of American farmers. Since 1996, these crops have proved to yield more per acre and reduce farmers’ production costs with more environmentally friendly farming practices.”

The report summarizes the extent of adoption of herbicide-tolerant and insect–resistant crops since their introduction in 1996. Three tables within the report devoted to corn, cotton, and soybeans cover the 2000-09 period by U.S. state.

A copy of the USDA ERS report, Adoption of Genetically Engineered Crops in the U.S. (July 1, 2009) including data tables, can be read here.

On organic fruits and vegatables Los Angeles Times “California Cook” columnist Russ Parson in today’s Los Angeles Times writes that organic “is not a surefire solution to all of life’s (or even agriculture’s) ills.” He states that organic advocates oversimplify the benefits of organics:

“[T]he ones who need to do the apologizing are the often-well-meaning organic advocates who paint such a black-and-white picture of the way farming works that it seems there should be no choice at all.”

Parson takes exception with those who put forward organics as the “only” option in sustainable farming. He writes that “there is a huge gray area, and this is where most farming is done.”

“You can be a bad farmer growing organically, and you can be a good farmer and still use chemical pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers.”

Parson’s thoughts echo Dr. Clive James remarks in a video we posted last week:

“Can biotech crops contribute to more affordable food? Can biotech crops help mitigate climate change and contribute to sustainability? Can biotech crops contribute to global food security and the alleviation of poverty? We believe the answers to each of these questions are unequivocally yes. Biotech crops can make an important contribution, but are not a panacea. They can provide a contribution but are not the whole solution for these three questions.”