[APWG] [PCA] Invading Transgenes

Fri Feb 27 22:24:31 CST 2009

I understand the general idea behind gene banks is that they might offer
some sort of limited remedy in the event of climate change or nuclear
holocaust, in terms of reseeding the planet in a worse-case scenario.

With respect to this thread, however, I am not sure how to process the
suggestion that gene banks are valuable when you can't control the change.
The article of dicussion points to confirming evidence that genetically
modified corn has contaminated Mexico's wild maize..  This is confirmation
in addition to the original evidence published in Nature, in a study
authored by Ignacio Chapela and David Quist.  The ensuing controversy almost
cost them their careers. (http://ngin.tripod.com/deceit2.html)

So what we are talking about here is contamination that has occurred though
development of proprietary genetically modified crops by multinational
corporations (such as Monsanto) and with the deregulatory support, sometimes
as well as shared intellectual property rights, of the United States
government.  These same players have an influential role in gene banks.

And the issue is that once these proprietary crops are grown in the wild,
their genetic drift can not be controlled and therefore  they contaminate
wild species with their transgenes.

Since we can't control the way multinational corporations and the United
States government are genetically contaminating our natural
resources, violating species boundaries and introducing genetic constructs
designed (in some instances) to deliberately shut down natural reproduction,
is it a good thing they have access to the gene banks so they can also
control what little may be let of life when the collective effects of
their genetic tampering reach such proportions that a global catastrophe
ensues?  As Steve points out, reintroduction would be compromised by the
prevailing genetic environment.  Genetic contamination can not be called
back.

Of course, gene banks are a useful resource.  It is especially
disheartening that wars have destroyed regional banks, such as in Iraq and
Afghanistan.

But it is essential to consider the ways we might take back control of
events, by taking responsibility for safeguarding the environment and our
food security, and placing the world on a less threatening course.

1)  The pursuit of genetic modification is fueled by intellectual property
rights incentives.  The patenting of life has never been voted on by the
American people.  Is it constiutional?  We need to get this issue in front
of Congress.

2)  Review  repercussions of the Bayh-Dole act and the corporate-university
relationship.  We need research for the public good, not just research for
corporate profit and market control.

3)  Reorganize economic and technologic development to address ecologic
imperatives, instead of maximum efficiency and economic profit for the
controlling few.

The best way to preserve genetic plant resources is to grow them.  We need
ecologic resilience, not novelty introduced for the sake of a patent and a
market monopoly.  What if we took  the funding for patent-oriented research
and instead supported farmers and conservationists in the growing of
heirloom crops, medicinal and native plants, and in ecologic restoration
projects?

The current trend is to interfere with natural safeguards in order to
re-arrange nature to accommodate existing corporate priorities and
industrial processes (as well as introduce new market monopolies).  One
isolated example is forest trees that are being engineered for decreased
lignin (making them weaker and susceptible to disease) in order to
accommodate the paper industry because this makes trees more easily
processed into paper.

In other words, the way the paper industry is currently set up, it would
create an expense for them to change their equipment and way of doing things
to make paper out of alternative sources, such as hemp or kudzu.

So, instead of investing in alternative technologies for paper manufacture,
we are decimating the genetic integrity of forest trees and continuing to
obliterate our forests.  Meanwhile, kudzu (which can also be used as a
medicine) grows unabated while we rant about how evil it is instead of
harvesting it for paper manufacture and medicine while leaving our forests
intact.

I say "we" because whoever, whatever, wherever we are, we have to assume
collective responsibility for the direction our society is going.  I know I
do not have easy answers or expect anyone else to either.  But communication
is essential to the healthy functioning of all organisms and biologic
systems.  It is in this spirit that I speak, in the hope that we can
collectively see our way through and effect change where an individual can
not.

In summary:  Essential oganizational structures (DNA code) within Nature are
being rearranged (forcefully bombarded with foreign genes from other genera
and kingdoms) to benefit the status quo. But current economic and
bureaucratic structures are not even reliable in their own realms, much less
as an adequate replacement for the intricate web of relationships that
define living organisms and systems.

Let's keep keep Nature the way she is and rearrange the status quo.

best regards,

Gena Fleming

2009/2/27 Steve Erickson <wean at whidbey.net>

>
> But the what are you going to do with the material other than
> slice and plice? Reintroductions into the wild are going to be
> recontaminated.
> -Steve Erickson
> Forsty Hollow
> ==================================
>  > This is one reason that gene banks are important. I'm not
> saying it's a
> > replacement for the wild species, but when you can't control
> the change,
> > better to get a sample of what's out there before the
> change happens,
> > right?
> >
> > Patricia S. De Angelis, Ph.D.
> > Botanist - Division of Scientific Authority
> > Chair - Plant Conservation Alliance - Medicinal Plant Working
> Group
> > US Fish & Wildlife Service
> > 4401 N. Fairfax Dr., Suite 110
> > Arlington, VA  22203
> > 703-358-1708 x1753
> > FAX: 703-358-2276
> > Working for the conservation and sustainable use of our
> green natural
> > resources.
> > <www.nps.gov/plants/medicinal>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Gena Fleming <genafleming at gmail.com>
> > Sent by: native-plants-bounces at lists.plantconservation.org
> > 02/23/2009 04:12 PM
> >
> > To
> > apwg at lists.plantconservation.org
> > cc
> > native-plants at lists.plantconservation.org
> > Subject
> > [PCA] Invading Transgenes
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I think it's imperative that we recognize transgenes from
> transgenic
> > "forest" (planation) trees and other modified plants will also
> > inevitably
> > escape and contaminate the wild.
> >
> > Why are we reorganizing nature?  How is this passing for
> "science"? -
> > Gena
> > Fleming
> >
> >
> > Excerpt and link:
> >
> > "NOW it's official: genes from genetically modified corn
> have escaped
> > into
> > wild varieties in rural Mexico. A new study resolves a
> long-running
> > controversy over the spread of GM genes and suggests that
> detecting such
> > escapes may be tougher than previously thought.
> > In 2001, when biologists David Quist and Ignacio Chapela
> reported
> > finding
> > transgenes from GM corn in traditional varieties in Oaxaca,
> Mexico, they
> > faced a barrage of criticism over their techniques. Nature,
> which had
> > published the research, eventually disowned their paper,
> while a second
> > study by different researchers failed to back up their
> findings.
> > But now, Elena Alvarez-Buylla of the National Autonomous
> University in
> > Mexico City and her team have backed Quist and Chapela's
> claim. They
> > found
> > transgenes in about 1 per cent of nearly 2000 samples they
> took from the
> > region (Molecular Ecology, vol 18, p 750)."
> > Full article:
> >
> >
> http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126964.200-
> transgenes-found-in-
> > wild-corn.html
> >
> >
> ______________________________________________
> _
> > native-plants mailing list
> > native-plants at lists.plantconservation.org
> >
> http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/native-
> plants_lists.
> > plantconservation.org
> >
> >
> > Disclaimer
> > Posts on this list reflect only the opinion of the individual
> who is
> > posting the message; they are not official opinions or
> positions of the
> > Plant Conservation Alliance.
> >
> > To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to
> > native-plants-request at lists.plantconservation.org with the
> word
> > "unsubscribe" in the subject line.
> >
> > -----
> >
> >
> ______________________________________________
> _
> > native-plants mailing list
> > native-plants at lists.plantconservation.org
> >
> http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/native-
> plants_lists.
> > plantconservation.org
> >
> > Disclaimer
> > Posts on this list reflect only the opinion of the individual
> who is
> > posting the message; they are not official opinions or
> positions of the
> > Plant Conservation Alliance.
> >
> > To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to
> > native-plants-request at lists.plantconservation.org with the
> word
> > "unsubscribe" in the subject line.
> ---------------------------------------------
> Frosty Hollow Ecological Restoration
> Helping Nature Heal
> Box 53
> Langley, WA  98260
> (360) 579-2332   wean at whidbey.net
> =======================================
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.plantconservation.org/pipermail/apwg_lists.plantconservation.org/attachments/20090227/5d5e8a28/attachment.html>