Posted: January 5, 2015 in Uncategorized

Featured image

By Donna Balancia | Jan 03, 2015

Scotts is among the myriad companies using “get-around” scientific techniques to avoid regulation on its genetically modified products, according to a report in The New York Times.

Because most of the laws regulating genetically modified crops, plants and foods were created in 1986, crop-producers like Scotts have found ways to get around them, according to a report in the Jan. 1 edition of The New York Times.

Scotts is creating a new grass that would need less mowing, would have deeper color and be resistant to damage from Roundup, the weed killer.

Scotts is not alone in successfully circumventing the U.S. Department of Agriculture and other governmental regulations in bringing its GMO products to market.

Companies like DuPont, Cibus, Ceres and Syngenta are among the companies using or researching the use of genetic “editing” to get around regulations, the Times report indicated.

The new editing process involves the use of naturally occurring genetic material and uses a gene gun, rather than bacteria, to deliver the desirable DNA material into the plant.

Critics say the editing process merely takes advantage of loopholes in the laws and amounts to the same thing as traditional genetic modification.

They say altered crops can have significant and irreversible negative impact on the environment.

Co-director of the Genetic Engineering and Society Center at North Carolina State University, Jennifer Kuzma, said that there would soon be many manufacturers of modified crops that would seek exemptions and a public discourse is needed, the Times reported.

“It’s not that I think these are risky,” Kuzma said. “But the very fact that this is the route we are taking without any discussion is troubling.”

Nature Biotechnology reported that the gene editing process enables companies to “fly under the US regulatory radar.”

The November report, written by University of California scientists Alex Camacho, Allen Van Deynze, Cecilia Chi-Ham and Alan B. Bennett, gives detailed information on progress made in the genetic editing process.

The report also includes inquiry letters written to governmental bodies like the USDA, by Del Monte, Ceres, Dow, BioGlow and University of Florida.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s