AGRICULTURE-BRAZIL: Battle Over Transgenics Rages On

By Mario Osava Reprint | | Print |

Mario Osava

RIO DE JANEIRO, Mar 8 2004 (IPS) - The cultivation of transgenic soy beans is harmful to human health, the environment and agriculture, according to the Brazilian Consumer Defence Institute (IDEC), a government agency.

But Monsanto, the U.S.-based biotech giant that produces genetically modified (GM) soy beans, wholly disagrees.

Monsanto, which holds the patent rights on Roundup Ready (RR) soy, the GM soy beans that have come to dominate cultivation of the crop worldwide in less than a decade, faces stiff resistance in Brazil from environmentalists and other sectors, including parts of the government.

RR soy is resistant to Roundup, a broad-spectrum herbicide also developed by Monsanto, whose active ingredient is glyphosate.

Fields of GM soy can be sprayed heavily with Roundup, thus cutting labour and other costs.

But one of the drawbacks is that ”there is 50 to 100 times more glyphosate residue in soy-based foods,” which is ”simply unacceptable to those who make an effort to eat a healthy diet,” Marilena Lazzarini, general coordinator of IDEC, said in an interview with IPS.

Brazil’s health authorities gave the okay to that increase in the level of residue of the herbicide. But Lazzarini said studies have shown that higher levels of traces of glyphosate in food can lead to genetic damages to human blood cells, as well as tumours, changes to the reproductive system, and lesions in the salivary glands and stomach lining.

According to Brazil’s Environment Ministry, the use of glyphosate rose nearly threefold between 1998 and 2001 in the southern state of Río Grande do Sul, where the cultivation of RR soy is especially widespread, said Lazzarini.

But Monsanto Brazil’s director of communications Lucio Mocsányi told IPS that the use of glyphosate in that state basically increased in absolute terms, due to the fact that the area planted in soy beans doubled from 4.8 million hectares in the 1996-1997 planting season to 9.8 million in 2003-2004.

Mocsányi said the amount of glyphosate sprayed per hectare grew only 10.4 percent between 1998-1999 and 2002-2003, according to a study by the Kleffmann consultancy. He added that the increase was accompanied by a 42.2 percent drop in the use of selective herbicides, which meant the overall use of agrochemicals actually dropped, along with the costs.

With respect to the supposed threat to human health, Mocsányi said glyphosate’s low level of toxicity to human beings has been demonstrated by studies carried out in several countries.

He also said the Brazilian National Health Vigilance Agency had set a maximum level of glyphosate residue in soy-based foods at ten parts per million – only half of the level allowed by the United States and determined to be safe by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO).

IDEC and Monsanto are waging a battle on several fronts, in the midst of the ongoing controversy over GM crops in Brazil.

The government agency won a legal battle in 1999, in a joint lawsuit filed with the international environmental watchdog Greenpeace, when a court banned the planting of RR soy in Brazil until an environmental impact study was carried out, as required by the constitution.

IDEC also has public opinion on its side, as indicated by a poll conducted by the Brazilian Institute of Public Opinion in December, which found that 73 percent of respondents were opposed to the deregulation of GM crops until studies showed conclusively that they did not pose a threat to human health or the environment.

But in practice, IDEC has lost the fight. RR soy first began to enter Brazil from the south, with seeds smuggled in from neighbouring Argentina, and it now accounts for more than 80 percent of all soy beans planted in the state of Río Grande do Sul.

Last year, the government granted after-the-fact authorisation to sell illegally planted GM soy beans. The exception was extended this year with the addition of a permit allowing farmers to plant the seeds they had saved.

The government introduced a bill in October in an attempt to come up with a definitive solution. Environmentalists support the version that made it through the lower house, but it may still be modified by the Senate.

Both Monsanto and IDEC base their arguments on scientific research. But they offer differing interpretations of some data.

The transnational corporation says the advantages of the transgenic crop are clearly demonstrated by farmers’ preference for RR soy over conventional soy beans.

According to estimates by the U.S.-based International Service for the Acquisition of Agrobiotechnology Applications (ISAAA), 55 percent of the soy beans planted worldwide are transgenic. The United States and Argentina account for 84 percent of the total 67.7 million hectares planted in GM soy.

But Lazzarini described it is a ”bad option” chosen by the farmers, based on a short-term vision, which also fails to take into account the risks to consumers.

”There is evidence that several kinds of weeds are becoming resistant to glyphosate,” which means more herbicides will be needed in the future, further aggravating the risks to the environment and health, said the head of IDEC.

”In three or four years, farmers will be facing the need to use more herbicide, and to pay royalties to Monsanto,” she added.

Furthermore, glyphosate is ”extremely persistent in the environment,” and pollutes rivers, said Lazzarini.

Mocsányi denied that allegation, saying ”glyphosate breaks down naturally in the soil after it is sprayed, and thus does not pollute the water table.” He pointed out that it has been authorised for use in yards in the United States and other countries, in the Galapagos islands nature reserve in Ecuador, and in the ruins of Pompei in southern Italy.

He also argued that there is no environmental risk of genetic contamination of other plants, because soy has no ”wild cousins” in Brazil, and because soy beans reproduce through self-pollination, which he said makes the transfer of genes nearly impossible.

But Lazzarini said that in areas where glyphosate has been sprayed, ”the populations of beneficial insects, birds and small mammals have been reduced,” because the herbicide destroys the vegetation they depend on for food and shelter.

In addition, research has revealed low levels of nitrogen-fixing bacteria in those areas, while plants have been found to be more vulnerable to disease.

However, Monsanto says that on the contrary, the environment benefits by the reduced use of other herbicides resulting from the cultivation of GM crops, and by the fact that glyphosate facilitates ‘zero-tillage’ or ‘direct planting’ – an ecologically friendly practice that leaves the biological remains of the previous season’s crop to form a soil cover.