Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 10:05:48 -0400 Reply-To: Sustainable Agriculture Network Discussion Group Sender: Sustainable Agriculture Network Discussion Group From: Alex McGregor Organization: Walden Farm Subject: Averting Disaster Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Some info on how GMOs are under-tested and EPA's cover-ups: The AGRIBUSINESS EXAMINER Monitoring Corporate Agribusiness From a Public Interest Perspective A.V. Krebs Editor\Publisher Issue #116 May 16, 2001 ECOLOGICAL DISASTER AVERTED???? U.S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY; TREATING THE WORLD'S SOIL LIKE DIRT In 1992 the Environmental Protection Agency was only a few weeks away from ending life on the planet as we know it, so writes George Lawton in the April, 2001 issue of Acres USA (A Voice For Eco-Agriculture). Lawton reports that the EPA, although only having done limited tests at that time on a variety of genetically engineered microbes, all of which had been approved for release into the atmosphere, were prepared to approve the release of a GE variant of Klepbsiella planticola (KP), one of the most common bacteria on the planet This particular variety of KP, he writes, had the unique ability to convert dead plant matter into alcohol. It was hoped that this would provide a way for farmers to transform their unused stalks, leaves and other types of compost material into alcohol, which could be used for washing, running vehicles, etc. The EPA had done a variety of tests on this organism, all of which indicated that it would not be toxic to humans or animals. They were only a few weeks away from releasing these bacteria into the wild, when Michael Holmes, a graduate student at the University of Oregon, came looking for an interesting thing to study for his doctoral thesis. Under the direction of his academic advisor, Elaine Ingham, Holmes elected to do his thesis on the effects of this genetically engineered KP on plants, something which had not occurred to the EPA, as it was not required for the release of new genetically modified organisms, Lawton notes in his Acres USA expose. Holmes study revealed, after testing samples of plants growing in sterile soil, soil with regular KP and soil with genetically engineered KP, that no plants in the latter soil were growing as the alcohol produced by the bacteria had killed them all. At the time, Lawton notes, the EPA was envisioning that farmers would use these bacteria in a kind of fermenting process to convert plant material into a mixture of 17% alcohol and 83% mineral sludge, which could be poured off into the soil and reused. If that had occurred, the genetically engineered KP could have colonized the entire planet over the course of several years, turning all of the soil where it grew into barren dirt. Ingham said that problem was and still is that the EPA only looks at the immediate impact of new genetically modified organisms on animals, and does not take into account the larger impact on the ecosystem as a whole. That approach can work to a limited extent when working with chemicals, which can break down and dissipate over time. But living organisms have the ability to procreate and overwhelm the natural ecosystem. After the Holmes research, Ingham claims, the EPA didn't accept their findings. Further, she said that she received considerable flack from the EPA, which also objected to Holmes' graduation because they thought his research was flawed. The EPA repeated the experiment but never released the results to the general public. Ingham believes that the EPA was trying to hide the results because they were under pressure from chemical, seed, and biotech companies. She feared, Holmes says, "If we had not done that testing, the EPA would have allowed its field use in two weeks. We just happened to be working on that for academic interest. What would have happened if we had not done that work? What kind of unexpected effects are already out there? Hopefully nothing as devastating as this organism, but we don't know because they have not been tested." The EPA applied the rules mandated by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, Rodenticide Act and the Toxic Substances Control Act, and found no problems with the microbe, so it was approved for field testing. Ingham explained, "Clearly the current regulatory methods are totally inappropriate. The work we were doing was not normal work for engineered organisms. The regulatory testing is appropriate for chemicals, but not appropriate for biological things that reproduce. If we were going to do appropriate testing, we should use the system developed by the Edmonds Institute in Edmonds, Washington. They publish a biosafety handbook which goes through all of the testing that should be required to assess the potential effects of genetically engineered organisms. "This was the first organism capable of surviving in the soil. KP is found in the root systems of all the plants we have looked at, and it exists in decomposing plant material everywhere in the world. It is one of the few organisms that is everywhere," she adds. As Lawton points out, the problem with any organism and particularly with bacteria is that there is no surefire way to recall them once they have been released. Even plants pose a problem, despite the possibility of mechanical control. Imagine how hard it would be to selectively kill something that cannot even be seen with the naked eye and Ingham observes, "We have never been good at recapturing any organisms we have released into the world."