Engineered DNA Found in Crop Seeds

The Washington Post ^ | February 24, 2004 | Rick Weiss

[neverdem]

Tests Show U.S. Failure to Block Contamination From Gene-Altered Varieties

Much of the U.S. supply of ordinary crop seeds has become contaminated with strands of engineered DNA, suggesting that current methods for segregating gene-altered seed plants from traditional varieties are failing, according to a pilot study released yesterday.

More than two-thirds of 36 conventional corn, soy and canola seed batches contained traces of DNA from genetically engineered crop varieties in lab tests commissioned by the Union of Concerned Scientists, a Washington-based advocacy group.

The actual amount of foreign DNA present in U.S. seeds appears to be small, and most engineered genes getting into the seed supply are among those that regulators have deemed safe for consumption, the report acknowledges.

[farmfriend]

Rights, farms, environment ping.
Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from this list.
I don't get offended if you want to be removed.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Do you use Atrazine (Roundup) or other products like it ?

[mrsmith]

I can't imaginer why you put this in "Constitution/Conservatism".

Still I'm intrigued: if the engineered genes run off to other plants are the patents on them still enforceable?

[Gunslingr3]

deserve a ping?

[the Real fifi]

Lying nonscientists.. See ActivistCash.com--It must be fundraising time--they are having a presser a day on one eviro hoax after another.

[neverdem]

I was just about to repost the article after getting an error message saying "no data" or some such nonsense. When I then saw the article I thought you posted it at first. LOL

[Carry_Okie]

The one thing we don't need is roundup resistent weeds.

[neverdem]

I can't imaginer why you put this in "Constitution/Conservatism".

I consider it a conservative idea that business should make progress and profits.

[farmfriend]

Do you use Atrazine (Roundup) or other products like it ?

I don't farm. I was an agricultural lobbyist.

[neverdem]

Still I'm intrigued: if the engineered genes run off to other plants are the patents on them still enforceable?

IIRC, Beelzebubba is a patent attorney. Perhaps he'll address your other question.

[farmfriend]

I also post these types of articles under that catagory.

[blam]

"I don't farm. I was an agricultural lobbyist."

What are your thoughts on the GM products? Good - Bad?

[gaijin]

When use of the telephone started growing, people said it would spread TB. Why? Well, the other party is talking directly into your face right? I mean, just look at that receiver...!

After the Wright Brothers made their historic flight, the NYT came out with long editorials by scientists reputable in that day giving detailed explanations regarding why flight by mankind would violate the laws of physics; it was deemed impossibleand fanciful.

You can look it up to this day.

[gaijin]

GM'ing crops make them hardier, more resistant to pests --PERFECT for African conditions; GM crops would save millions of African kids.

To activists, though, that would bring a screeching halt to ever-reliable famines that plague that continent. In time, their nagging and harping would be like the sound of windchimes in midwinter, and then they'd have to go out, cut their hair and PRODUCE SOMETHING --YUCK!

[gaijin]

Oh, here's something else; ever wonder what % of US food is somehow GM...?

70%. Yep.

Do you feel sick?

[Eala]

in lab tests commissioned by the Union of Concerned Scientists, a Washington-based advocacy group.

Hmmm... let's just take a little gander into how those tests were commissioned...? Just to be sure it's all done cleanly and independently, without any idea by the testers of the "expected" outcome...? No "lynx-hair plantings"...?

[Beelzebubba]

Still I'm intrigued: if the engineered genes run off to other plants are the patents on them still enforceable?

---

Bio is not my subspeciality, but it is fair to assume that if the patent sequence is generally claimed in the patent, then it may apply for other organisms in which it appears. But if the sequence for hybrid sweet corn appears in a pig, the patent probably wasn't written to cover it.

Then again, I may be wrong, and a Freeper biotech specialist may enlighten us.

[AFreeBird]

Bio is not my subspeciality, but it is fair to assume that if the patent sequence is generally claimed in the patent, then it may apply for other organisms in which it appears.

So DNA from an altered plant makes its way into DNA of a "normal" seed through no fault or manipulation of the farmer or anyone, and that farmer sells his "normal" seed to someone else and the GM company who own the patent on the DNA in question could sue the farmer for violating their patent?

Se, this is why I don't like the idea of companies owning patents on DNA (especially if it's mine).

DNA has this funny way of getting around.

[farmfriend]

The Grange supports GM crops with caution.

Biotechnology Policy, Research and Application to Agriculture

1. The National Grange supports a federal policy to allow the use of biotechnology in agriculture. We recognize that genetic engineering of plants and animals has already had a positive impact on increasing the availability of food, decreasing the environmental impact of agriculture and creating foods that are safer, longer-lasting, more nutritious and better tasting. We further support continued research on biotechnology and genetic engineering, including further scientific research into non-human cloning. We support an approval process for genetically modified plants and animals which utilizes science based decision making to assure the safety of agricultural products. To that end, the National Grange philosophically supports the efforts of National Science Foundation (NSF) concerning their Plant Genome Initiative.

2. The National Grange supports legislation that provides that patented plants and livestock that have been developed through biotechnology (gene-splitting, cloning, genetic engineering, etc.) will be made available to farmers by provisions that will not result in a concentration of the patented livestock in the hands of a few large firms and will not interfere with their availability to all farmers.

3. The Grange urges the FDA, EPA, USDA, and other national farm organizations to publicize the safety of GMO's to help reduce the resistance to the use of this technology.

I personally support the efforts of people like Dr. Wambugu.

[anguish]

Not just DNA-jumping. When more resistant crop by accident (wind, seed stuck on a sole, etc) gets into a non-GM field, it's probably impossible to remove it. What then? Charge the farmer for something he didn't want?

Complicated issue

[longtermmemmory]

Proof that corporations can't stop seed holdback for future planting. Genetic copyright needs be treated differently when it comes to crop seed.

[steelie]

Atrazine is not Roundup. Roundup is a synthetic of a natural salt I think called glyphosenate.(sp?) Atrazine is a highly regulated herbacide.

[PatrickHenry]

deserve a ping?

It's not really a creavionism/evolution thread at this point. Let me know if it, uh ... evolves into one. Then I'll deploy the list.

[E.G.C.]

BTTT!!!!!

[Prodigal Son]

I can't imaginer why you put this in "Constitution/Conservatism".

I'm with you there. I see articles make it into all kinds of crazy categories and can never figure out why.

[Beelzebubba]

So DNA from an altered plant makes its way into DNA of a "normal" seed through no fault or manipulation of the farmer or anyone, and that farmer sells his "normal" seed to someone else and the GM company who own the patent on the DNA in question could sue the farmer for violating their patent?

---

I imagine that buyers of GM seeds are entitled to grop and sell produce from those seeds, which is the whole point. If he were propogating them for further seed sale, then he would probably be liable.

[mrsmith]

I thought engineered plants were sterile, preventing their propagation and thereby ensuring the property right of the inventor.
If a company pays to engineer some trait into DNA and the gene that has that trait moves into another fertile plant and survives then the company would have lost control of part of their invention through an immutable law of nature.
I assume there would be recourse if this happened through someone's deliberate efforts. But if it "just happens" I don't see how the patent could be of any further value- except for protecting the selling of the original pure strain.

(Yes, I have a vast ignorance on the subject!)

[mrsmith]

I'm sure many of these articles could be "constitution/conservatism" stories. This one seems a pretty straight "business" story to me.

Just wanted to state MHO as long as I was going to reply to the thread anyway.

[cyborg]

good point

[dirtboy]

But if it "just happens" I don't see how the patent could be of any further value- except for protecting the selling of the original pure strain.

There is a case in Canada dealing with just that issue. I'll drag the details into this thread in a minute.

[dirtboy]

Monsanto vs Schmeiser

Percy Schmeiser is a farmer from Bruno, Saskatchewan Canada whose Canola fields were contaminated with Monsanto's Round-Up Ready Canola. Monsanto's position is that it doesn't matter whether Schmeiser knew or not that his canola field was contaminated with the Roundup Ready gene and that he must pay their Technology Fee...

[LTCJ]

More than two-thirds of 36 conventional corn, soy and canola seed batches contained traces of DNA from genetically engineered crop varieties

Uhh... isn't canola seed, by definition, a genetically engineered crop? Otherwise it would be rapeseed. Kinda like complaining about finding paint in a paint can isn't it?

I suppose they'd rather eat machine oil?

[neverdem]

I'm not a farmer and wasn't aware. It's the first time I heard of eruric acid too. Thank you.

Main Entry: ca·no·la
Pronunciation: k&-'nO-l&
Function: noun
Etymology: Canada oil--low acid
1 : a rape plant of an improved variety having seeds that are low in erucic acid and are the source of canola oil
2 : CANOLA OIL

[mrsmith]

Thanks, that's exactly what I was wondering about.

[Beelzebubba]

But if it "just happens" I don't see how the patent could be of any further value- except for protecting the selling of the original pure strain.

---

At this point, I will bow out with the high-end version of "it depends", which is:

"This issue is a highly fact-specific one that can not be resolved as a hypothetical case without more information."

[dirtboy]

Your Friendly Freeper Patent Attorney

Patent attorney, eh? Here's one for you - what would you think of using copyright protections for genetic changes to organisms, rather than patents? After all, in most cases genetic alterations follow existing processes to create a new organism, and the genetic changes can be accurately mapped. I think the case of the patent granted to Harvard for the onco-mouse shows how difficult it can be to apply patent law to genetic changes.

[AFreeBird]

I imagine that buyers of GM seeds are entitled to grop and sell produce from those seeds, which is the whole point. If he were propogating them for further seed sale, then he would probably be liable.

But what if say, natural forces (insect, wind etc.) moved some of that patented GM material to a neighboring farm, and that former ended up with crop seed with the GM DNA and then resold it?

Like I said; DNA has a funny habit of spreading itself around; sometimes purposely, sometimes accidently.

Would the farmer accross the road or down wind, who's not using GM seed, be liable for violation of someone's patent?

Maybe he could send the lawyers off to sue the bee's?

[mrsmith]

Take a look at dirtboy's link above.
Pollen from a neighbor turned the guy's crop into the patented kind and the manufacturer with the patent sued him.

It's before their Supreme Court now. So far two courts have told him he owes the manufacturer.

[Beelzebubba]

what would you think of using copyright protections for genetic changes to organisms...

---

Are you sure you want this? Patents expire in <20 years, and require a public disclosure of all the data. Copyrights last for generations (75 years for a corporate author, life of the author plus 50 years for individuals) and require no publication, just recording in a tangible medium.

Granted, copyright prohibits only copying, and not independent creation that has the same claimed characteristics.