Any product
made with potato will be subject to added scrutiny before it can receive
The Non-GMO Project’s verification stamp due to widespread prevalence
of genetically engineered (GE) potato in the U.S. food supply
The
first-generation GE Innate® potato, developed by J.R. Simplot and
branded simply as White Russet™, was approved by the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA) in 2014 and entered the U.S. marketplace the
following year
The Innate®
potato has been modified using RNA interference (RNAi) technology to
inhibit blackspot bruising and browning by reducing levels of asparagine
and certain enzymes in the potato
Genetic
engineer Caius Rommens, former director of R&D at J.R. Simplot Co.
and a former team leader at Monsanto, has written a tell-all book about
the GE potatoes
In his book,
“Pandora’s Potatoes: The Worst GMOs,” Rommens reveals the GE potatoes
contain unstable traits and unintended mutations that compromise
nutrition, noting they are likely to contain new toxins
Any product made with potato will
henceforth be subject to added scrutiny before it can receive The
Non-GMO Project’s verification stamp.1 The reason? The now widespread prevalence of genetically engineered (GE) potato in the U.S. food supply.
The first-generation GE Innate® potato, developed by J.R. Simplot Co.
and branded simply as White Russet™, was approved by the U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA) in 2014 and entered the U.S.
marketplace the following year.2 Canada approved it in 2016.3
The Innate® potato has been modified using RNA interference (RNAi)
technology to inhibit blackspot bruising and browning by reducing levels
of asparagine and certain enzymes in the potato. In addition to white
russet potatoes, ranger russet, russet Burbank and Atlantic potatoes
have also been modified in this way.
The Non-GMO Project has also announced4
the marketing of a new high-oleic acid GE soy variety, engineered with
TALEN gene editing technology. It too has been added to the Project’s
high-risk list and is ineligible for The Non-GMO Project Verification
label. According to Megan Westgate, executive director of The Non-GMO
Project:5
“The supply chain risks we’re now seeing from new GMOs are
unprecedented in the decade we’ve been verifying products. Not only are
new GE techniques being used, but in some cases biotechnology companies
are using unscientific arguments to deceive the public into thinking
their products are non-GMO.”
GMO Potatoes Hide Spoilage
J.R. Simplot claims the nonbrowning potatoes benefit consumers, farmers and the environment by cutting down on food spoilage waste and reducing water use and greenhouse gas emissions.6 Trials have shown the Innate® potatoes result in farmers discarding 15 percent fewer potatoes due to bruising and spotting.7
“Another great advantage of Innate® potatoes is that they can be
cut, peeled or diced in advance. With Innate’s reduced browning
benefits, potatoes can be prepared ahead of time, and stay
fresher-looking longer.
In addition to reducing waste, nonbrowning potatoes give
foodservice operators and restaurants options for labor savings and
off-site peeling or dicing,” Simplot’s website states.
However, as noted by Westgate,” browning is nature’s most visible way
of letting you know a product is rotting. GMOs that use RNAi to mask
the signs of bruising could lead consumers to unknowingly ingest an
unhealthy, toxic product.”
According to Simplot, however, by reducing asparagine, which creates acrylamide,
a probable carcinogen, at high temperatures, the Innate® potatoes lower
the potential health hazards associated with baked, fried and roasted
potatoes.8
Second generation Innate® potatoes are currently under regulatory
review. In addition to being nonbrowning, these second generation crops
are also engineered to be blight resistant. According to a February 28,
2017, press release:9
“[T]he United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have completed their independent
reviews and granted registrations and clearances for three varieties of
Simplot’s second generation of INNATE® potatoes.
The three varieties have already been deregulated by the USDA so
these new agency registrations and clearances permit these proprietary
bioengineered potatoes to be grown and sold in the United States.
The INNATE® Gen. 2 Russet Burbank, Ranger Russet and Atlantic
varieties contain significant benefits to growers, processors and
consumers with reduced bruising and black spots; reduction of the
natural chemical compound asparagine; protection from late blight
pathogens; and enhanced cold storage capability.”
Creator of GMO Potatoes Reveals Danger
How can we know Innate® potatoes are a health risk? Because their
creator, a genetic engineer named Caius Rommens, former director of
researcher and development for the potato program at J.R. Simplot Co.
and a former team leader at Monsanto, wrote an entire book about it.
In “Pandora’s Potatoes: The Worst GMOs,”10
released October 7, 2018, Rommens reveals these and similar GE potatoes
contain “unstable traits, two of which appear to have been lost already
(or are in the process of being lost).”
He also claims the GE potatoes “suffer a significant yield drag and
reduction in size profile, conceal bruises and potentially spread
diseases, may be grown and stored in ways that maximize disease and pest
pressures … [and] are also likely to contain new toxins. If it were up
to me, the creator of these potatoes, I would call them Pandora’s
Potatoes. They are the worst GMOs ever commercialized.” Rommens also
discusses his concerns in an interview with Sustainable Pulse, in which
he says:11
“I had my potatoes tested in greenhouses or the field, but I
rarely left the laboratory to visit the farms or experimental stations.
Indeed, I believed that my theoretical knowledge about potatoes was
sufficient to improve potatoes. This was one of my biggest mistakes …
It is amazing that the USDA and FDA approved the GM potatoes by
only evaluating our own data. How can the regulatory agencies assume
there is no bias? When I was at J.R. Simplot, I truly believed that my
GM potatoes were perfect … I was biased and all genetic engineers are
biased …
We test our GM crops to confirm their safety, not to question
their safety. The regulatory petitions for deregulation are full with
meaningless data but hardly include any attempts to reveal the
unintended effects.
For instance, the petitions describe the insertion site of the
transgene, but they don’t mention the numerous random mutations that
occurred during the tissue culture manipulations.
And the petitions provide data on compounds that are safe and
don’t matter, such as the regular amino acids and sugars, but hardly
give any measurements on the levels of potential toxins or allergens.”
Genetic Engineers Know ‘Just Enough to Be Dangerous’
Rommens says he left J.R. Simplot, where he was in charge of up to 50
scientists, once he realized there were significant problems with his
creation. “Looking back at myself and my colleagues, I believe now that
we were all brainwashed; that we all brainwashed ourselves,” he says.
“We believed that the essence of life was a dead molecule, DNA,
and that we could improve life by changing this molecule in the lab …
and that a single genetic change would always have one intentional
effect only.”
Indeed, science reveals it simply doesn’t work that way, and that even minor modifications can trigger a cascade of unintended effects.
Here’s just one case in point: Researchers decided to search for
unintended mutations using research data from a study that used CRISPR-Cas9 to restore sight in blind mice by correcting a genetic mutation.12
They sequenced the entire genome of the CRISPR-edited mice, and in
addition to the intended genetic edit they found more than 100
additional deletions and insertions, along with more than 1,500
single-nucleotide mutations.
“We were supposed to understand DNA and to make valuable
modifications, but the fact of the matter was that we knew as little
about DNA as the average American knows about the Sanskrit version of
the Bhagavad Gita,” Rommens tells Sustainable Pulse.13
“We just knew enough to be dangerous, especially when combined
with our bias and narrowmindedness. We focused on short-term benefits
(in the laboratory) without considering the long-term deficits (in the
field).
It was the same kind of thinking that produced DDT, PCBs, Agent
Orange, recombinant bovine growth hormone, and so on. I believe that it
is important for people to understand how little genetic engineers know,
how biased they are and how wrong they can be.”
How GMO Potatoes Stack Up Against Conventional Potatoes
According to Rommens, his GMO potatoes
had a number of problems. Their growth was stunted and the plants
frequently died. The tubers were also frequently misshapen, and the
leaves pale yellow rather than bright green, a condition known as
chlorosis, caused by insufficient production of chlorophyll.
Sterility and necrosis, where the plant’s tissues turn brown or black
as a result of cell degeneration and death, were other problems noted
by Rommens. Necrosis is typically the result of nutrient deficiencies.
According to Rommens, one of the reasons his GE potatoes are so inferior
has to do with the fact that they’re derived from somatic cells, and
somatic cells are only meant to survive for a single season.
“These cells don’t have the genetic integrity to create new plants (like pollen cells and egg cells),” he explains. “So,
by transforming somatic cells, we created GM potatoes that contained
hundreds of genetic mutations, and these mutations compromised yield.
Additionally, the genetic modifications often have ‘unintended’ effects
that negatively affect both the agronomic performance and nutritional
quality of a crop.”
Rommins claims he was even wrong about the potatoes’ bruise
resistance. The potatoes bruise just as easily as normal potatoes, he
claims; you just cannot see the bruises because the discoloration has
been deactivated.
And this, Rommons says, is actually a significant problem, because the melanin — the compound that causes the dark coloration14
— is actually a protective compound that helps prevent entry by
pathogens when the potato is damaged. What’s worse, these now-invisible
bruises may actually accumulate toxins.
How Does RNAi Gene Silencing Work?
RNAi is also known as post transcriptional gene silencing. The two
scientists who discovered RNAi — Andrew Fire and Craig Mello — received
the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 2006.15 In a 2015 MIT Technology Review article, Antonio Regalado describes the RNAi gene silencing process thus:16
“The cells of plants and animals carry their instructions in the
form of DNA. To make a protein, the sequence of genetic letters in each
gene gets copied into matching strands of RNA, which then float out of
the nucleus to guide the protein-making machinery of the cell. RNA
interference, or gene silencing, is a way to destroy specific RNA
messages so that a particular protein is not made.”
Aside from potato, another food that employs RNAi gene editing
technology to achieve nonbrowning is the Arctic® apple. The Organic
Consumers Association wrote about this in 2013, saying:17
“While most existing genetically engineered plants are designed
to make new proteins, the Arctic Apple is engineered to produce a form
of genetic information called double-stranded RNA (dsRNA). The new dsRNA
alters the way genes are expressed.
The result, in the Arctic Apple’s case, is a new double strand of
RNA that genetically ‘silences’ the apple’s ability to produce
polyphenol oxidase, an enzyme that causes the apple to turn brown when
it’s exposed to oxygen.
Harmless? The biotech industry, OSF and some scientists say yes.
But others, including professor Jack Heinemann (University of
Canterbury, New Zealand), Sarah Agapito-Tenfen (from Santa Catarina
University in Brazil) and Judy Carman (Flinders University in South
Australia), say that dsRNA manipulation is untested, and therefore
inherently risky.
Recent research has shown that dsRNAs can transfer from plants to
humans and other animals through food. The biotech industry has always
claimed that genetically engineered DNA or RNA is destroyed by human
digestion, eliminating the danger of these mutant organisms damaging
human genes or human health.
But many biotech scientists say otherwise. They point to evidence
that the manipulated RNA finds its way into our digestive systems and
bloodstreams, potentially damaging or silencing vital human genes.”
There are also indirect consequences. The chemical compound used in
the RNA manipulation process is one that also combats plant pests, and
if the fruit’s ability to fend off pests is impaired, growers will end
up having to use more pesticides.
How to Avoid GMO Potatoes
Based on Rommens testimony it would seem wise to steer clear of the GE Innate® potato. To avoid them:
Avoid any potato sold under the Simplot Innate® brand
Avoid White Russet™ potatoes, as well as any other white russet
potato, as contamination between GE and non-GE varieties could be a
problem
Check the potatoes for spots. GE varieties will not have spots
Check the potato for browning once peeled or cut in half. Non-GE
varieties typically start browning within two minutes (see video above)
Avoid processed foods made with potato ingredients, such as frozen
dinners, powdered potatoes, soup with potatoes and potato chips, as
processed foods typically use GE ingredients. Also avoid ordering russet
potatoes when eating out, unless they’re guaranteed non-GMO or organic
One of the easiest ways to avoid GE potatoes is to buy organic
varieties. This way, you’ll also avoid synthetic pesticides. If you live
in the U.S., the following organizations can help you locate
organically grown produce such as potatoes:
Demeter-USA.org provides a directory of certified Biodynamic farms and brands. This directory can also be found on BiodynamicFood.org.
Weston A. Price Foundation
has local chapters in most states, and many of them are connected with
buying clubs in which you can easily purchase organic foods.
The Cornucopia Institute
maintains web-based tools rating all certified organic brands of eggs,
dairy products and other commodities, based on their ethical sourcing
and authentic farming practices separating CAFO "organic" production from authentic organic practices.
No comments:
Post a Comment