“The First Decade of Genetically Engineered Crops in the United States,” a recently released report from USDA’s Economic Research Service (ERS), notes that some 200 million acres of GE crops were cultivated in 17 countries worldwide in 2004. More than half of that acreage was in the United States. Since 1987, seed producers have submitted 11,600 applications for field testing of GE varieties to USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. Of those submissions, more than 92% have been approved. Still, the report acknowledges, “questions remain regarding the impact of agricultural biotechnology,” ranging from economic and environmental impacts to consumer acceptance of products derived from such crops.
Overall, farmers seem to have embraced GE varieties, particularly herbicide-tolerant varieties that allow crops to survive exposure to herbicides used to destroy weeds. Increased income, reduced pesticide use and higher yields are among the other benefits farmers anticipate with GE crops.
Consumer perceptions of GE food products range from unwitting to accepting to vehemently opposed. In the United States, where an estimated 70% of all processed foods in grocery stores may contain ingredients derived from GE plants, labels indicating that fact are not required by FDA since nothing tangibly different exists about the food. Therefore, U.S. consumers are largely unaware when they are eating a GE food product. According to a 2001 Gallup survey cited in the report, 52% of consumers surveyed support the application of biotechnology. Another study (IFIC, 2005) showed that 50% of consumers said they were “likely to buy” GE produce modified to taste better or fresher. In the same survey, 64% indicated they were likely to buy GE produce modified to require fewer pesticide applications. Conversely, groups such as Greenpeace believe that manipulating genes is unnatural, and GE plants should not be released into the environment because “there is not adequeate scientific understanding of their impact on the environment and human health.”
In the European Union (EU) member states, consumer outcry led to strict label rules: Labels must indicate whether a food contains or consists of GMOs, or contains ingredients produced from GMOs, and no GMO is allowed on the EU market unless it has been proven safe. Recently, however, the GMO Panel of the European Food Safety Authority determined that five GM food products banned in some EU member states present no health risk.
In an FDA-published article— “Genetic Engineering: The Future of Foods?”—author Linda Bren notes that while the first generation of GE crops was developed primarily to benefit growers, “scientists see the next generation of genetically engineered products benefiting consumers directly.” Some developments in the works include reduced bitterness in citrus fruit, reduced saturated fats in cooking oils, more-flavorful tomatoes, and even beans that cause less gas. As development of GE crops continues, the challenge for scientists will be assessing whether a new protein in a food will be an allergen for some people.
Biotechnology is at a crossroads, the USDA report concludes, and its future role and ultimate contribution to agriculture in the United States “will depend on our ability to identify and measure its potential benefits and risks.”
To view the full report, log on to http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/eib11/eib11.pdf.
