GM crop - bee disease link etc.
Originated from: [log in to unmask]
Norfolk Genetic Information Network (ngin)
http://members.tripod.com/~ngin
---
1. Bee disease - GM crop connection possible
2. Testimony with more detail on GMO and bees
---
Looking at the issue of GMOs and bees in general and more specifically a
possible connection between the US, Canada, on the one hand, and
Argentina, on the other, involving (a) the widespread and recent
cultivation of GM crops containing tetracycline resistant genes and (b)
the sudden simultaneous emergence of tetracycline resistance in bees in
these two geographically isolated areas, resulting in disease
devastation of bee colonies that had previously been easily treatable
against the world's mosty dangerous bee disease.
---
1. Bee disease - GM crop connection possible
http://www.biotech-info.net/bee_j_editorial.html
"Letter to the editors of bee journals"
Joe Rowland
Commercial Beekeeper
Secretary/Treasurer of the Empire State (New York) Honey Producers
Association
October 2000
AFB - GM crop connection possible
Dear Editor,
The New York State Legislature has been considering enactment of a
moratorium on the cultivation of genetically modified (GM) crops, and/or
requiring labeling of products containing GM ingredients.
State legislative committees held public hearings on this subject during
October 2000. I was invited to testify at these hearings. Although I am
no authority on the topic, I decided to review publicly available
information pertaining to the possible impact of GM crops on honeybees,
and present this material at the hearing. I identified three main areas
of concern.
1.There is an alarming lack of publicly available information evaluating
the effects of GM crops on bees. Biotechnology corporations fund
research on GM crops in their efforts to gain regulatory approval for
the marketing of GM varieties of corn, soybeans, canola, cotton, and
other crops. This research supposedly proves beyond a reasonable doubt
that these novel genetic combinations are safe to introduce into the
environment. Canadian researcher, Mark Winston, recently attempted to
gain access to the results of research that assessed the effects of GM
crops on honeybees. Canadian government authorities acknowledged that
such research had been conducted, but refused to provide any details.
Their refusal was attributed to the fact that such research is
confidential and owned by the undisclosed biotechnology corporations who
funded the studies in question. I believe FDA/EPA policy is similar in
this regard. This lack of openness raises serious credibility issues
regarding corporate claims about the safety of GM crops. If their
research is solid, then why is it kept secret?
2.Laboratory studies carried out by the French government research
institute INRA indicate that pollen from some GM crops shortens the
lifespan of adult bees. Also, it seems to cause some learning
dysfunctions that could result in the disorientation of foraging bees.
Disoriented bees may become lost or unable to locate nectar sources.
3.Possibly the most important public disclosure came out in June, 2000,
when German researchers at Jena University showed that genetic material
from GM canola crossed the species barrier, and was positively
identified in bacteria that reside in the guts of honeybees. I believe
this is the first publicly documented case of horizontal gene transfer
from GM crops to bacteria. This discovery may have major implications
for the future of GM crops. One main objection to GM crops has focused
on the fact that during genetic manipulations required to create GMOs,
antibiotic-resistant "marker" genes are combined with the so-called
genes of interest. These combined genes are inserted into the target
plant. Within the plant, the antibiotic resistant gene has no expression
and is harmless. However, if this gene were able to transfer from the GM
plant and enter another bacterium, that bacterium would become
antibiotic-resistant. This might render commonly used antibiotics
useless against diseases attacking humans and livestock, including
honeybees.
Bees in the US are increasingly afflicted with a strain of antibiotic
resistant American foulbrood (AFB). Before the advent of antibiotics,
this bacterial infection was the most serious bee disease in the world.
Tetracycline had been used effectively against AFB for 40 years until
1996. In that year, tetracycline resistance was confirmed in both
Argentina and the upper Midwestern states of Wisconsin and Minnesota.
Since then, it has spread to at least 17 states in the US, including New
York, and to parts of Canada. During the 1990s, millions of acres of
Round-up Ready crops were planted in the US, Canada, and Argentina.
According to my information, the antibiotic resistant gene used in the
creation of Round-up Ready crops was resistant to tetracycline. After 40
years of effective usage against an infective bacterium found in the
guts of honeybees, suddenly two geographically isolated countries
develop tetracycline resistance simultaneously. A common thread between
the US, Canada and Argentina is the widespread and recent cultivation of
GM crops containing tetracycline resistant genes.
I spoke about this with Dr. Hachiro Shimanuki, who until recently was
the research leader of the USDA/ARS bee research lab in Beltsville, MD.
He is not aware of any attempt to analyze the resistant foulbrood for
genetic pollution from GM crops. I think that the technology exists to
be able to determine whether these AFB bacteria have the Round-up Ready
gene. That gene should have tagged along with the tetracycline resistant
gene if in fact this antibiotic resistant AFB was due to horizontal gene
transfer between GM crops and foulbrood bacteria.
I want to stress the speculative nature of this possible GMO/antibiotic
resistant AFB connection. However, if it is true, the public health
implications are enormous. A documented antibiotic resistant gene
transfer into a disease organism would strongly indicate that the FDA
should re-assess the potential human risks associated with GM crops, and
possibly revoke federal approval for the sale and consumption of some of
these modified plants.
As an industry, I think we should immediately request, through our
local, state, and national associations, that the FDA analyze samples of
antibiotic resistant AFB in order to determine whether or not a genetic
transfer has occurred from GM crops.
If we act together, the FDA will find our combined resolutions to be a
powerful stimulus to investigate this matter in a timely fashion.
Biotech corporations have maintained that we should trust their research
findings that secretly prove to Federal regulators that GM crops are
safe. I would suggest that it would be wise to maintain a healthy
skepticism on this matter. Often there is a fundamental conflict between
the corporate interest in short-term profit, and the public interest in
the health and safety of the people. In fact, we have recently seen
examples of this conflict exposed in the courts concerning other
corporations.
I believe that we all are now participating in a vast GMO experiment
without our informed consent. Many European beekeepers are fiercely
opposed to the cultivation of GM crops in the vicinity of their
apiaries. It is well within the realm of possibility that we should be
too.
Sincerely,
Joe Rowland
2495, Montrose Turnpike,
Owego,NY 13827
---
2. GMO testimony
Submitted by Joe Rowland to the N.Y. Assembly standing committees on
agriculture, consumer affairs and the assembly task force on food, farm,
and nutrition policy
October 3, 2000
Thank-you for inviting me to testify on the subject of genetically
modified organisms. I'm a commercial beekeeper, and the
secretary/treasurer of the Empire State Honey Producers Association. I
also sit on the executive committee of U.S. Beekeepers, a national trade
association.
Honeybees are an important component of our agricultural economy. Many
crops are dependent on honeybee pollination for cost effective
production. A recently published Cornell study set the honeybee's value
to U.S. agriculture at 14.6 billion dollars. An additional value accrues
to home gardeners and wildlife who forage on wild seeds and fruit set as
a result of bee pollination. Over ? of the 3 million colonies kept in
the U.S. are now trucked around the country for the purpose of
pollinating our crops. Thousands of colonies are moved into N.Y. every
year and provide a valuable service to N.Y. farmers and consumers.
Sadly, bees and beekeepers have had a rough time recently. We must
contend with 3 exotic pests introduced over the past 15 years. The
wholesale price of honey in inflation-adjusted dollars is lower than at
any time since World War II. There also has been a resurgence of
American Foulbrood, which had been successfully controlled by
antibiotics in the past.
Are GMO's a real or potential threat to honeybees? I've tried to answer
this question by searching for publicly available research on the
subject and by drawing on my own knowledge of honeybee biology.
Honeybees collect and consume nectar and pollen. Nectar is a complex
sugar solution which provides carbohydrates. There is very little
protein from forage plants in nectar. Since GM plants generally express
their special characteristics in the form of biologically active
proteins, there is probably not much danger to bees from nectar.
Pollen is their protein source, and when collected from GM crops,
contains the modified gene structure of the GMO. It may also contain
novel proteins produced by the modified plant. Pollen is the male
fertilizing component of flowering plants and so is a concentrated
source of genetic material. Damaging effects to bees from GMO's are most
likely to result from pollen. A colony of honeybees will collect and
consume approximately 75 lbs of pollen in a year. Corn, canola,
soybeans, and cotton yield pollen that is collected by bees within
foraging range of these crops. All of these crops have GM varieties
which are extensively cultivated in the U.S. Field tests in England have
shown that bee colonies 4.5 km from GM canola fields collect GM pollen.
Bees forage in all directions, and pollen grains are transferred between
bees within the colony through bodily contact. It is
theoretically possible that small quantities of GM pollen can be
transported up to 9 km from GM crops.
The recommended isolation distance between GM crops and non-GM crops in
England is 200 meters for corn, and 50 meters for canola. It seems to me
that these distances are arbitrary and based more on convenience than on
actual isolation of GM crops.
Professor Mark Winston, a Canadian bee research specialist, has
attempted to review scientific studies pertaining to bees and GMO's. As
you might expect, most GM research has been conducted by the
biotechnology companies who create GMO's. What I did not expect is that
this research is considered proprietary information, and not subject to
public scrutiny. Prof. Winston contacted the
Canadian Food Inspection Agency and encountered a brick wall. Their
response was that, yes, honeybee larvae or adults had been examined in
tests with GM pollen. They would not reveal what GM crops were tested,
who did the testing, what the experimental protocol was, or the results
of the tests. Information which is absolutely essential for the
independent validation of Biotech company
claims regarding the safety of GMO's is unavailable to the GMO consuming
public. It is my understanding that FDA policy is similar to the
Canadian Food Inspection Agency. This veil of secrecy does not serve the
public interest and should be lifted as a precondition for EPA approval
of GMO's. Proprietary research on presently approved GMO's should also
be publicly accessible.
There are a few publicly reported studies regarding the effect of GM
pollen on honeybees. Minh-Ha Pham Deleque has done some work on this
area for the French government research institute, INRA. She has studied
the effects of GM pollen from varieties of canola and soybeans on
honeybees in a
laboratory setting. Her findings indicate that none of the tested
pollens kill adult bees outright, but that they may shorten their
lifespan and cause some behavioral changes, particularly in a loss of
their ability to learn and to smell. This may cause foraging bees to
"forget" where flowers or even their own hive is located. Obviously,
some issues have been raised by this work which need to be further
explored.
The most important research finding in this area has recently come from
Jena University in Germany. Researchers there have shown that a gene
used in GM canola transferred to bacteria in the guts of bees. I believe
this is the first publicly documented case of horizontal gene transfer
from GM crops to bacteria within any animal. This discovery may have
major implications for the future of GM
crops. One main objection to GM crops has focused on the fact that
during genetic manipulations required to create GMO's, antibiotic
resistant "marker" genes are combined with the so-called genes of
interest. These combined genes are inserted into the target plant
together. Within the plant, the antibiotic resistant gene has no
expression and is harmless. However, if this gene were able to transfer
out of the GM plant and re-enter a bacterium, this bacterium would
become antibiotic
resistant. This might render commonly used antibiotics useless against
diseases attacking humans and livestock, including honeybees.
At the beginning of my testimony, I mentioned the fact that bees in the
U.S. are increasingly afflicted with a strain of antibiotic resistant
American Foulbrood (AFB). Before the advent of antibiotics, this
bacterial infection was the most serious bee disease in the world.
Tetracycline had been used effectively against AFB for 40 years until
1996. In that year, tetracycline resistance was confirmed in
both Argentina and the upper Midwestern states of Wisconsin and
Minnesota. Since then, it has spread to at least 17 states, including
New York. During the 1990's, millions of acres of Round-up Ready crops
were planted in the U.S. and Argentina. According to my information, the
antibiotic resistant gene used in the creation of Round-up Ready crops
was resistant to tetracycline. After 40 years of effective usage against
an infective bacterium found in the guts of honeybees, suddenly 2
geographically isolated countries develop tetracycline resistance
simultaneously. A common thread between the U.S. and Argentina is the
widespread and recent cultivation of GM crops containing tetracycline
resistant genes.
I spoke about this with Dr. Haricho Shimanuki who until recently was the
research leader of the USDA/ARS bee research lab in Beltsville, M.D. Dr.
Shimanuki is not aware of any attempt to analyze the resistant foulbrood
for genetic pollution from GM crops. I think that with the proper
equipment these bacteria could be inspected for the presence of the
Round-up Ready gene. That gene should have tagged along with the
tetracycline resistant gene if in fact this unlikely coincidence was due
to horizontal gene transfer between GM crops and foulbrood bacteria.
Since the public health implications of this are of major proportions, I
would urge you to immediately direct funds to a suitable independent
research facility such as Cornell for the purpose of determining whether
or not this unwelcome gene transfer has occurred. If so, the state of
N.Y. should recommend to the FDA that the approval for GM crops
containing antibiotic resistant gene markers be reviewed
and possibly revoked immediately.
Biotech corporations have maintained that we should trust their research
findings which secretly prove to Federal regulators that GM crops are
safe. I would suggest that it would be wise to maintain a healthy
skepticism on this matter. Often there is a fundamental conflict between
the corporate interest in short term profit, and the public interest in
the health and safety of the people. In fact, we have recently seen
examples of this conflict exposed in the courts concerning other
corporations.
I think there are enough valid uncertainties about GMO's to justify NYS
to require labeling of GM foods. The world is now participating in a
vast GMO experiment. New Yorkers should have the choice of opting out of
this experiment if they so desire. GM food labeling would partially
provide this option.
Thank you.
---
-
Robt Mann
consultant ecologist
P O Box 28878 Remuera, Auckland 1005, New Zealand
(9) 524 2949
|
