There's dancing and singing in the streets of the Land of Biotech Bashers. , the world's largest biotech seed company, has announced it will .
" for the environment, for farmers and consumers," gushed spokesman Ben Ayliffe. It's "the end of , Tony Juniper, director of the green group . "It is the final nail in the coffin."
All of which brings to mind upon reading his own obituary that "Rumors of my death have been greatly exaggerated."
In 2003, the global area of biotech crops according to the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications, an even greater expansion than the year before. The "167 million acres was grown by 7 million farmers in 18 countries, an increase from 6 million farmers in 16 countries in 2002," says an ISAAA report. In the last eight years, the number of biotech crop acres worldwide increased by a staggering 40 fold.
, planted biotech acreage increased 10 percent in 2004.
If it's true as Ayliffe claims that "," then farmers must be growing and then burning them just to spite the environmentalists.
But no, "," said , chairman and founder of ISAAA. "They continue to rapidly adopt biotech crops because of significant agronomic, economic, environmental and social advantages."
Why the Shredded What?
Perhaps the best evidence that the wheat in question, called "," is is that the single gene Monsanto added to it is also in Monsanto's . It gives the plant resistance to the herbicide (which Monsanto sells as "Roundup") and allows fields to be sprayed "" without harming the crops. Not only do those soybeans comprise the most popular biotech crop in the world, they also grown in the United States, and we've been . (And have lived to tell the tale!)
So why the shredded wheat?
St. Louis-based Monsanto says the decision was economics based. The biggest problem was that . In any case, Monsanto's wheat investment in the past year was of the company's $500 million research and development budget.
Another problem for Roundup Ready Wheat is that while, like all Roundup Ready crops, by requiring less tilling of the land and reducing herbicide runoff, a farmer's first job is to make money. The simply wasn't as great as seen with other biotech crops.
Consumer Acceptance
"Nobody that I've talked to in business has the least scientific, technical or food safety objection to biotech wheat," CEO Daren Coppock of the told me. "But they are concerned with the customer."
But consumer acceptance clearly was a factor.
That's why even some mainstream opposed it. So far, the vast majority of biotech crops grown have been used for animal consumption or cotton materials. Biotech soybean meal and oil and biotech canola oil are in practically everything we eat, it seems. But they constitute minor ingredients compared to "the staff of life."
Start with the traditional status of bread and hence wheat, mix in a cup of hysteria from the competing and environmentalists, and you get farmer fear that all wheat products would be disparaged.
Monsanto's move was "a recognition, since wheat is closer to the human food chain, that it's a lightning-rod issue," Frank Mitsch, an analyst with , told . Further, " () and the farmers who grow it is significant."
Thus it makes sense for Monsanto to wait until consumer awareness catches up to its wheat, even as such as potatoes; new types of cotton and corn; tomatoes, and rice. It hopes to commercialize the wheat in when more biotech traits could be added to the crops.
This could include under development from Monsanto competitor , although Greenpeace struck a blow for "consumer choice" when . Others being tested are and . All four traits could be .
And then? Perhaps genetically-engineered wheat will be the "final nail in the coffin" for those spreading anti-biotech hysteria.
This article appeared on TechCentralStation.com on May 17, 2004.