GE Fails where Conventional Breeding Succeeds
Call for Change in Research Funding as GE Fails where Conventional Breeding Succeeds.
Industry claims, that GE is a more accurate and successful way to alter crops than traditional breeding, have typically ignored the fundamental scientific problems with the GE process, and ensuing contamination of the food supply.
Now even the biotech industry's basic claims for GE are being proven wrong, casting increasing doubt on the value of public funding of biotech crops by the New Zealand government.
Recent experiments show conventional breeding of an indigenous sweet potato in Africa has created a virus free high-yielding plant, whereas trials to develop a virus-resistant sweet potato, by genetically engineering the plant, have been a dismal failure.
"The proof that conventional breeding research can more easily develop resistant varieties comes as no surprise." says Claire Bleakley from GE Free New Zealand in food and environment. “Global seed companies need to be told that both consumers and farmers are averse to any control of seed stocks by GE patented seeds.”
GE tubers weren’t resistant to the virus and were much smaller in comparison to conventional controls.
A recent study in the US also reveals overall yields in commercialized GE crops are lower than conventionally bred crops and need more chemicals after the first few years.
“Evidence is mounting that public funding of GE research is not the best way for government to spend our taxes,” says Claire Bleakley. “The benefits or organics and IPM are proven – not speculative: so why is money being gambled on GE instead of being spent on these sure-bets for New Zealand? The government should listen to their citizens and put precious research money into conventional breeding, organics and research into sustainable farming.”
New Zealand Apple growers have already benefited from a drastic reduction in sprays, new programs now produce high quality fruit with less chemical inputs and residues. This has been achieved by quality research resulting in a mixture of conventionally produced virus resistant trees, Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and organic programs.
New Zealand onion producers have signaled that over the past two years, they too have trialled IPM programs, aiming to reduce chemical applications and thus the cost to the farmer and environment. These methods are already solving the problems which are the supposed objectives of Crop and Food's 10-year publicly funded GE onion research.
There are concerns that the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) listens selectively to the large body of scientific information presented by submitters, many of whom have worked in GE science yet remain critical of environmental release.
ERMA's reading of scientific details shows a bias towards permissiveness, rather than a genuine acceptance of the precautionary principle, and the protection of the long term safety of humans, animals and the environment. ERMA’s staff understanding of the US Benbrook report on increased pesticide use in GE crops does not even reflect the reports findings.
New Zealand's agricultural Crown Research Institutes (CRI's) should be leading the way, as they used to, in conventional and organic, animal and plant breeding. Many NZ scientists have spent their lives selecting and breeding the best traits in animals and plants and have built New Zealand’s reputation in the agricultural world market. The push for GE is undermining this. New Zealand cannot afford to lose any more scientists trained in those conventional techniques that are now being found to be superior to GE experimentation. It is time to reinvigorate the expertise in natural breeding area.