JUST Eat Organic

I'll let the video do all the talking on this one. Enjoy!



Share it, stumble it, digg it.. you know the deal - THIS video needs exposure right now! We al need to JUST EAT REAL FOOD!

GM Chickens to fight Flu, Why Not GM Humans?

I don't mean to be facetious (or maybe I do), but based on yesterday's breaking news out of the UK I was left asking myself, "Why don't we do this to humans if it is such a good idea?!" It is a question of curiosity and accusation, I suppose. In case you haven't heard the news and you are wondering what I am talking about here, let me recap the story before I go on.

Genetic Modification for the Greater Good 
 A team of scientists in the UK have bred the first Genetically Modified chickens specifically engineered to prevent the spread of the avian flu (H5N1). Here is the video from BBC World News that I saw yesterday:


I was immediately intrigued by the idea. I do love science. I am not sure that comes across on this blog enough, but it is true. However, the debate is on: Is this the way to go? Questions begin to swirl and, I imagine, in the weeks and months to come, many will have their own opinions.

Why Not Just Vaccinate?
This was the first question I thought of, I mean, it is what we humans do, so don't we provide ourselves with the best protection available? The answer was staring me in the face, viruses mutate all the time, which is why we are always hoping we have the "right" flu shot for the year ahead. The genetic modification is engineered in such a fashion that the birds will adapt to the mutations and not spread the virus.

How Modified Are These Chickens?
According to those involved in the study, the only difference is in the flu protection.

"Apart from their flu protection, the GM birds are indistinguishable from non- GM chickens of the same breed. Laurence Tilney of Cambridge university said they would be safe to eat.
'The nature of the genetic modification and the decoy molecule makes it extremely unlikely that it could have any negative effects on people consuming the chickens or their eggs,' said Dr Tilney." (Financial Times "GM chickens boost hopes on Avian flu")

When Will These Chickens Be In The Public Market?
This study was released yesterday, January 13, 2011, in The Journal of Science. While it is breaking news, it is fairly early in the implementation phase. Many people have to be given time to absorb the results of the study, raise their own questions and decide which way to move from here.

"Peter Bradnock from the British Poultry Council said the development should spark a new debate on the use of biotechnology. 'The most important thing is that society will have to decide if it wants this kind of technology taken to all farmed animals. We'd need to have this before farmers could think about taking it up,' he said.
'I'm not talking about consumers in Britain. I'm talking about a broader debate, because this technology could have very important implications for global food resources and reducing the environmental footprint of animals. If you're keeping animals then you know they are going to survive and not be afflicted by really debilitating diseases which are endemic in some parts of the world.'"(Farmers Weekly Interactive "Scientists breed first GM chicken")

 In other words, the implications of a successful run in this study could be GM pigs, to save us from swine flu and then on to other animals in an effort to protect us from all disease.

Who Funded The Study?
 According to most sources, the study was funded by an organization known as BBSRC, or "Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council …the UK's leading funding agency for academic research and training in the non-clinical life sciences." They, of course, have their own article about the big news they helped create, on their website. However, Nature.com also sites that Cobb-Vantress, a major international chicken-breeding company played a part in funding the study and has already stated that they will not fund any future studies after this one. It is suspected that this is due to a fear of public perception.

Will Are Some of the Obstacles to this Becoming A Global Success?

• Public aversion to GM food
• This may not be feasible to poorer countries, according to Marc Van Ranst, a virologist at the Dutch-speaking Catholic University of Leuven in Belgium (Nature.com "Transgenic chickens curb bird flu transmission")
•  Funding for further study
• Farmer resitance - here is one quote of many I have found arguing simply for better farming practices: 

"Tim Elsdale, who is an organic farmer in East Sussex, said it was better to adopt good farming practices to avoid animals getting diseases in the first place than to create GM farm animals. 'We don't suffer much from animal diseases on this farm,' he said.
'Organic methods of husbandry doesn't encourage disease if the animals are well spaced enough. They live in a natural environment and they eat normal food then a lot of diseases that are prevalent on conventional farming would not be apparent to us.'" BBC News "World's first flu-resistant GM chicken 'created'")

 What Will The Consumers Think?
Well, there we have it, ladies and gentlemen. In the end, Consumer is King. So, what do YOU think? 

• At first glance, how do you feel about this GM chicken?
• What are your reservations?
• What are the benefits?
• Do you think you will support the production of GM flu fighting chickens when the time comes?
• Are you in favor of moving forward to GM swine flu fighting pigs?
• Do your opinions about these genetically modified chickens differ than your opinions about GM salmon, or other GM food products?
• If you raise your own chickens, are you hoping to get your hands on some GM chickens for your coop?

Food Safety Day: S. 510

At around 4:00pm (EST) today, the Senate will resume talks about S. 510, more commonly known as The FDA Food Safety Modernization Act. It seems, upon hearing about this bill and what it aims to do, that it should get a very simple thumbs-up. I do not think I am speaking out of turn if I say that we can all agree that something is amiss in food safety regulation in the United States and that whatever litmus test has been used in the past by the FDA is simply not cutting the mustard anymore - it needs modernization. However, the feverish debate over the passage of this bill shows that this may not be as cut and dry as it should be. Those who are in favor of the bill seem to take a stance of, "If this is the best we can get for now, I'll take it," and those who oppose are up in arms about the dramatic effects it will have on small and local farms, saying things like, "This is the end of food as we know it."

From my perspective, at the center of the debate are two virtues that always find themselves amidst all types of turmoil of the human condition: Trust and Money. One is so subjective and personal and the other, well... selective and often discriminatory.

Money

Let me begin with what has been often claimed to be the root of all evil: money. Whether you are talking about big agri-businesses or small local farms, one issue at the center of the debate is cost.

• How much will it cost those subject to this regulation to bring their business up to snuff with the new hoop they have to jump through? 
• Will they have to redesign their facilities, hire more staff or purchase different products in their production? 

Obviously, this is something that is going to be a larger burden on a smaller business. Many farmers opt not to be "certified organic" simply because of the cost, even though their product is just as organic as one with the label. This is a choice farmers knowingly make and hope that customers will understand. In terms of an FDA regulation, these same farmers will not be able to opt out of add on costs and hope for understanding... they do it or they are out of business. The evil side of money: IF they do it, they may STILL go out of business due to expense. 

Trust

The other 3,000 pound tomato in the room is trust.

• Who is the FDA?
• Will the FDA play buddy-buddy with old big-business pals?
• Has this bill been designed with loopholes for the big businesses to squeeze through in the guise of small business support?

Over the years, I have learned that many of the people behind the acronym FDA were folks who seemed to have a major conflict of interest in their past. Whether they were former employees, current shareholders or just taking a sabbatical from a food industry giant, it seemed once their past was unveiled my suspicion was engaged. So I understand the lack of trust in the FDA. I decided to see if that writing was still on the wall. Upon checking out the current organization of the FDA (this is really a light-handed investigation) I decided to focus on two positions: Director of Food Safety & Nutrition, and the current Commissioner.

Michael M. Landa, J.D., Acting Director of Food Safety & Nutrition Mr. Landa has spent at least the last ten years in the FDA, and many of them focusing on food safety. It seems as though he was a lawyer before that time. I have not been able to find any specific information on the work he did as a lawyer, but on his FDA profile page it does say that he spent at least some of that time as a council for them.

Margaret A. Hamburg, M.D., Commissioner of Food & Drugs Could I biased because she spent some time here in New York? Sure. Anyway, I can't find too much to scrutinize here. She's young and she has a background in medicine. This is helpful for the "drugs" end of the title and when there are outbreaks, but hopefully she is gaining all types of on the job food experience. She also worked in bioterrorism and seems to be quite a go-getter. The fact of the matter is, I don't see any history with any big food businesses!

I am sure there are a ton of other players in the game here. I don't know enough about the food politics to even know what to worry about in terms of who could be the problem, but I feel a little bit better knowing that the coaches of this team weren't trained in some other sport.

As for the loopholes in the bill... well, the real problem is I don't know how one could fix that. It seems as though the amendment to the bill has allowed for some leeway for smaller farms, so one issue being raised is: What's to stop a bigger farm from breaking itself into smaller farms just to take advantage? I don't know - vigilance from the regulators? Educated consumers?  I mean if we make up an amendment for every single "what if" then we will never get passed go on this one.


It is not perfect. I don't think it is horrible either. I think the  new amendment with considerations for the smaller businesses was needed. I think this is a step in the right direction... I hope.

The REAL Problem 
 
Let's think about it this way. Every single business - big, small, local, whatever - that is in operation right now has some way of making their ends meet (that's why they are in business right now). They each have a system that is working for them to hopefully be making a profit of sorts. Some of those businesses are operating in a way that you or I may completely agree with and some may not - we can agree on that. However, where we may disagree is on which practices are "right" and which are "wrong."

This bill is trying not to determine what is "right" or "wrong," but instead what is safe, but they have to find a way to regulate it. The real problem is uniform measurement/regulation/assessment. I see this problem in education all the time: someone has to decide what to asses, how to asses it and then determine what the consequences are. It is an impossible task to get all parties to agree on what is fair. The food industry is as diverse as the United States' student population and every group has their advocates. I understand this disagreement, but isn't it obvious that our current assessment is failing us?


I think I am leaning toward the "yays", hoping that those farmers in my Farmers Market can make it through, especially those who have bakeries on their premises. However, I will be watching this debate... perhaps amidst the furious comments, name calling and dismissal of opposing opinions a diamond in the rough, a person with the perfect solution will emerge!

Some Further Reading About S. 510 (make sure to check out the comments to feel the full fervor of the debate!):

• Food Politics blog on S. 510 by Marion Nestle
• NYTimes Op-Ed by Michael Pollan and Eric Schlosser
• S. 510 Hissing in the Grass on the Food Freedom blog & Update: Senate must vote on S 510 in the next 60 days
• S. 510: A Study in How Much You Trust the Government on Food Safety News and also S 510 Opinion: No Free Passes
• S 510 Food Safety Update by Slow Food USA
• and below, if you love legalese, is a widget to take you to OpenCongress, where you can actually read the whole bill!

Are you interested in taking action when it comes to your food? If so, here is some further reading for you!

• the fight against genetically modified salmon 
• safe food organizations and resources
• my favorite places on the web for food activism

UPDATE: Food Safety Bill Passes Senate