Despite its own admission that it will cause an up to sevenfold increase in chemical pesticide use, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) is poised to approve a new type of genetically engineered seed built to resist one of the most toxic weedkillers on the market.
Now, total approval hinges on the Environmental Protection Agency. If that federal body approves the new GMO, farmers will be free to plant corn and soy seeds genetically manipulated to live through sprayings of Dow’s Enlist Duo herbicide, a chemical cocktail containing both glyphosate and the antiquated, toxic chemical 2,4-D. Ironically, in the 1990s, chemical companies said the development of GMOs would eliminate the need to use older, more dangerous chemicals like 2,4-D. But as GMO use ramped up over the last few decades, chemical use increased, and many weeds are no longer responding to glyphosate, the main ingredient in Roundup and the current chemical of choice for GMO farmers. This has created a “superweed” crisis, resulting in millions of acres of U.S. fields’ being infested with hard-to-kill weeds.
With this week’s USDA final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) suggesting approval of the new GMO is eminent, many food and public-safety experts say the American public faces unprecedented risks as a result of the decision. After all, current chemical use is so high that foods now actually contain “extreme” levels of glyphosate. Because it’s a systemic weedkiller, it actually winds up inside of food. Adding 2,4-D to the mix is even more concerning, given its ties to cancer.
“USDA’s announcement is an outrageous abdication of USDA’s responsibility to protect our health and our food supply. The Obama Administration has ignored the interests and demands of millions of Americans, members of Congress, and scientists, farmers, and health professionals,” says Andrew Kimbrell, executive director of Center for Food Safety.
Farmers are upset about the decision, too. “Weed resistance is a major problem for farmers, and we need a solution. This decision shows that the only options USDA is willing to consider are ones that lead to increased profits for chemical companies. We need to get off the pesticide treadmill, not increase the speed,” says George Naylor, a Center for Food Safety board member and an Iowa corn and soybean farmer.
The approval comes despite USDA’s acknowledgment that Dow’s crops will trigger a three- to sevenfold increase in agricultural use of 2,4-D, foster 2,4-D resistance in weeds, and inhibit farmers’ use of nonchemical weed-control methods. “USDA’s decision represents a huge setback for farmers and sustainable agriculture. Independent scientists have linked 2,4-D to cancer, Parkinson’s disease, and other maladies,” says Bill Freese, science policy analyst at Center for Food Safety. “Introduction of 2,4-D-resistant corn and soybeans will dramatically increase use of this toxic herbicide, leading to more disease, environmental harm, and increasingly intractable weeds for farmers.”
The adoption of this new generation of GMOs also threatens farmer’s market favorites like tomatoes, peppers, grapes (and wine!), and potaotes. An 2,4-D drift could cause these crops to become mangled and deformed, or even outright kill them.
For more reasons to reject GMOs, check out the biggest GMO myths, busted.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.