EU Parliament’s Environmental Committee Supports Relaxing Rules on Genetically Modified Plants

by Samuel Petrequin (Associated Press) Lawmakers on the European Parliament’s environment committee on Wednesday backed a proposal to relax rules on genetically modified plants produced using so-called new genomic techniques, prompting strong criticism from environmental groups.

The issue of genetically modified organisms divided the European Union for a generation before the bloc adopted legislation in 2001.

The Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety adopted its position on a European Commission proposal to relax those rules with 47 votes to 31 with four abstentions.

The European Parliament is now expected to vote on the proposed law during its Feb. 5-8 plenary session before it can start negotiations with EU member countries, which remain divided on the issue.

Earlier this month, 37 Nobel prize winners and other scientists urged EU lawmakers to support new genomic techniques, or NGTs, and “reject the darkness of anti-science fearmongering.”

The committee agreed that all NGT plants should remain prohibited in organic production. It also agreed on a ban on all patents filed for NGT plants, saying it will help “avoid legal uncertainties, increased costs and new dependencies for farmers and breeders.” READ MORE

Excerpt from Washington Post: Today, there are only a few genetically modified crops in production, but those that exist are widely grown. In the United States, 94 percent of all soybeans, 96 percent of all cotton and 92 percent of all corn was genetically modified as of 2020, according to the Food and Drug Administration. These crops became popular because of their ability to withstand glyphosate, a key ingredient in the herbicide known as “Roundup.” Other countries that grow genetically modified crops widely include Canada, Brazil and India.

No major scientific research has found that genetically modified crops cause health problems in humans. In a 400-plus-page report published in 2016, the National Academies of Science found that “no substantiated evidence that foods from GE [genetically engineered] crops were less safe than foods from non-GE crops.” The report urged analysis of such foods by the traits that they include, rather than how they were created.

At the same time, a small but growing body of research has argued that GM foods could play a significant role in cutting carbon emissions. In a study published last year, researchers at the University of Bonn in Germany and the Berkeley, Calif.-based Breakthrough Institute found that widespread use of these crops in Europe could cut the agricultural sector’s emissions by 7.5 percent.

Another study found that the use of GM crops globally saves around 23 million metric tons of carbon dioxide every year — equal to removing around half of all vehicles from roads in the United Kingdom.

There are two primary ways genetically engineered crops could cut carbon emissions.

First, they can be more productive, creating higher yields for farmers and allowing them to grow more food on less land. One global analysis found that GM crops on average lead to a 22 percent increase in yields. At the same time, one-third of all emissions from agriculture are from deforestation and the destruction of other natural areas — as farmers expand and grow more crops, they cut down trees that are storing CO2 in their trunks and leaves.

If farmers can grow their crops on less land, less forest is converted into farmland, allowing trees and landscapes to store more carbon. “That decrease in deforestation is the big reason why yield increases cut emissions,” said Emma Kovak, a senior food and agriculture analyst for the Breakthrough Institute.

Other scientists say crops with herbicide resistance can require less tilling. “Every time soil is tilled, it releases carbon back into the atmosphere,” Smyth said. Herbicide-resistant corn, for example, can endure being sprayed by weed-killing agents, preventing farmers from having to till the land to remove weeds.

But the environmental community is split. Some activists say focusing on climate change obscures the real problem with genetically modified crops: the role of big corporations in controlling food production. READ MORE