TED Case Studies

Dolly the Sheep and the Genetically Modified Organism (GMO)Agreement


TED Home Page About TED Research Projects Sort Cases
TED Cases Issue Papers Site Index

I. Identification

1. The Issue

Dolly, the cloned sheep, was born in Scotland on July 5, 1996 and raised the stakes of cloning, bringing the world closer to the possibility of human cloning. Within the past four years cloning animals is now becoming common practice within the past four years, with the arrival of five generations of cloned mice, calves cloned both in Japan and the U.S., Tetra the monkey, and most recently, the five piglets. The key dilemma is just how far technology will go before a human is cloned, not to mention ethical issues that surround this science. Both an American doctor and a South Korean researcher have already created a human embryo, but both said they destroyed it. Add to this other genetically modified organisms (GMOs) that are being produced for economic benefit, and the economic,environmental and moral issues abound. Although GMOs today pertain mainly to food and seeds, the key issues are the environmental and health effects GMOs will cause while countries pursue the economic benefits, how GMOs will be traded and what risk consumers are willing to take.

History of Dolly the Sheep Cloned Mice, Cows, Monkey, Pigs Background on GMOs Ethics of Cloning Disagreement on Trade in GMOs Individual Country Labeling Laws Laws on Cloning and GMOs
Biosafety Protocol Genetically Modified Big Business
Exports and Imports of GMOs U.S. GMO Testing Process Environmental Concerns and Regulations Relevant Literature Comments

2. Description

Dolly the Cloned Sheep
The reality of GMOs began with a sheep named Dolly. Dolly was created by Scottish scientist Ian Wilmut and was the first mammal in history to be cloned from an adult cell. Since her donor cell came from the udder of a six-year-old sheep, which reminded Wilmut of Dolly Parton, he named her Dolly. He and his team used a cloning technique called nuclear transfer, where the donor cell is fused with an egg stripped of its nuclear DNA. The embryo was then implanted in a third surrogate sheep, who bore Dolly.

Although Dolly is a clone, she is not a true genetic clone of one sheep, since she does not have precisely the same genetic makeup as the adult sheep she was cloned from. This is because Dolly’s cells, from the adult udder’s sheep, are not the same as the egg, with which it was merged. It was shown that at least 99.5% of her cells came from the egg. Therefore, there can be physical differences between the two animals (Cloning Report: Dolly's Mixture 1). It is also appearing Dolly is suffering from cellular aging, developing twice as fast as a normal sheep. It was discovered her chromosomes are shorter than normal sheep of the same age (Cloning Report: Clones May Grow Old Before Their Time 1).

Reproductively Dolly has had four healthy lambs. Last year she had one baby, named Bonnie. This year she had triplets, who remain unnamed. All offspring of Dolly have been conceived naturally, fathered by David, a Welsh mountain ram. This was to demonstrate Dolly can reproduce naturally and to check for any unexpected genetic changes in offspring.

Cloning Other Animals...

Mice
Since the birth of Dolly, there has been a plethora of other cloned animals. U.S. researchers in Honolulu, Hawaii successfully cloned 5 generations of mice using a new micro-injection technique, different than Dolly's technique. All of the babies were healthy and reproductive (Researchers Clone First Mammals from Adult Cells Using New Technique 1).

Cows
Cows were the next link in mammal cloning. In 1998 Japanese researchers cloned eight genetically identical calves to boost country's beef and dairy industries using techniques similar to Dolly's. Japan could use this method for economic benefit, "duplicate[ing] cows that are proven to be ideal milk and meat producers," said the researchers (The Perfect Cow 1).

To create the cows the Japanese harvested nuclei from two types of cells, 6 from cumulus (surrounding eggs inside the ovaries) and 4 from oviductal cells (the lining of a cow's oviducts). The nuclei were transferred into ten donor eggs from one cow. The eggs were grown in the lab to the early embryonic stage, then implanted into 10 surrogate cows. Each calve is a duplicate of the one cow from which the cells were removed. At least 15 calves were cloned using Dolly's technique. Japanese researchers say they have a 23% success rate with oviductal cells, and 49% success with cumulus cells. American researchers have also cloned calves from cells taken from unborn cows, with a 12% success rate (The Perfect Cow 1).

Monkey
Tetra– a female monkey - was cloned from splitting a very early embryo into four pieces. This is amazing because Tetra is an identical clone, not like Dolly, who has genetic material from both the cell and egg that was hollowed out. Gerald Schatten, who led the research, split the embroyos after they reach an eight-cell stage. They were split into four parts. Each part had two cells. From these two cells came new embryos that were implanted into different mothers. Schatten called his method "artificial twinning." (Tetra, the Cloned Monkey, is Born 1)

Pigs
The first litter of five cloned piglets were born in March 2000, and there are high hopes that one day pig organs may be a suitable transplant for human organs. But first there are many hurdles to overcome before this becomes reality. Scientists have been successful in combating some of the pig's genes, to make the cells "less pig-like" and now a pig's gene is "about 95 percent human (Weiss "In Organ Quest" A7)."

The cloned pigs were created by removing a cell from a hog, removing genes that trigger human immune systems and inserting cells to genes that make the cell more human, fusing the altered cell with a gutted egg until the embryo stage, transferring the cell to a mother and waiting for a litter of identical clones to be born. Therefore, today's pig farms may be tomorrow's human organ banks - for kidneys, hearts and lungs needed by tens of thousands of patients. One analyst predicted a market of over $6 billion (Weiss "Transplant" A1).

In sum, here is a table of recently-cloned mammals.


History of Mammal Cloning
 Animal Country Year
1. Sheep Scotland 1996
2. Mice USA 1998
3. Cows Japan, USA 1998
4. Monkey USA 2000
5. Pigs USA 2000

GMOs

Besides animals, GMOs include food and seed biotechnology, which allows scientists to modify (transfer single or small groups of genes) crops, fruits and vegetables in order to develop foods with beneficial traits, such as improving taste, speeding up the ripening process and increasing resistance to insects. Globally there were over 69 million acres of GMO crops planted in 1998, 15% in developing countries (GMO Fact Sheet). It has been estimated that as much as 60% of food products currently sold in the U.S. contain some mix of GMO and organic products (GMO Fact Sheet). Currently no special labeling is required for products containing GMOs, since the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the U.S. does not regulate food products based on the process in which they were created. Only foods whose nutritional value or composition has been significantly altered or contain allergens require mandatory labeling (GMO Fact Sheet).

Ethics
In short, the issue of cloning comes down to ethics. Almost everyone, even Wilmut, believe human cloning is out of the question. "There is no reason in principle why you couldn't do it [with humans]. All of us would find it offensive." (Right or Wrong 1) In addition, there are so many unknowns: Could clones be allowed to clone themselves? Would it be a tool for the rich? And it is pertinent to remember that clones would not be exact replicas; they will develop differently because of different environments.

Recently a South Korean infertility clinic of Kyunghee University Hospital in Seoul, led by researcher Lee Bo-Yon, said he had cloned a human embryo, but destroyed it. If cloning of humans were allowed, at least one Harvard-educated physicist announced in 1998 that he was ready to set up a clinic to clone human babies and predicted up to 200,000 human clones per year could be produced once his technique was perfected. But for now human cloning remains an unpracticed and taboo issue.

Cloning of animals is already reality. The possibilities for health research include being used for research to prevent cancer, AIDS, diabetes, multiple sclerosis, leukemia, Parkinson's, and Alzheimer's (Researchers Clone First Mammals from Adult Cells Using New Technique 1). It could also improve our understanding of cellular and molecular activities in ageing and provide organs for transplant. But these uses also present numerous ethical dilemmas that are far from resolved.

3. Related Cases

Food
Basmati Rice Dispute
Bovine Hormone or BST
Canola and Genetics Trade
What is Chocolate?
CODEX Import Standards
EU BST Import Ban
Madcow Beef Trade
Olestra Trade 		Drink
Who Owns the Name Budweiser?
German Beer Laws
Mexico-U.S. Beer Dispute
Pisco Liqueur and Chile
Who Owns a Name? (Scotch case)
Genetics
Biosafety Protocol
Biodiversity Treaty
EU Bans on Genetic Imports
Life Patenting
Maize Bio Crops
EU-US Soybean Gene Dispute 		Intellectual Property
Cyber-Squatting and Trade Rules
Intellectual Property Rights of Feta Cheese
Merck Inbio Agreement
Mummy Trade and Their Return
Who Owns a Name?

Key Word Clusters
1. Continent = Global
2. Measure = Intellectual Property (Iprop)
3. Industry = Agriculture (Agric)

4. Draft Author

Amy Schulz (March 2000)

II. Legal Clusters

5. Discourse and Status


DISAGREEMENT and IN PROGRESS

On January 29, 2000, 140 countries adopted an agreement to regulate trade in GMOs (Hess 1). The conference took place in Montreal and is a legally binding agreement focused on "reducing potential risks from trade in genetically engineered seeds, food, microbes and fish (Hileman 5)." Labeling is required (for the first time in an international agreement) if a product contains GMOs, but would not require farmers to separate genetically modified (GM) grain vs. non-GM grain.

Called the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, the protocol will need to be signed and ratified by at least 50 countries. Countries can sign beginning in May 2000. The protocol is expected to take effect in two to three years, when countries will meet to discuss more specific labeling regulations (Hess 13).

The Biosafety Protocol came out of the Working Group on Biosafety, backed by the UN, which met February 14-23, 1999 in Cartagena, Columbia. Delegates from 174 countries gathered to discuss environmental impacts, public health, and how to use trade regulations to accomplish these goals. The United States was not a participant, but nonetheless managed to disrupt the conference and end the summit in chaos, with participants voting to suspend negotiations.

The Intergovernmental Committee for the Cartegena Protocol resumed in Montreal January 24-29, 2000 to adopt the Cartagena Protocol and interim arrangements. This would allow countries to review safety records before allowing a GMO into the country. Classification of GMOs is still being discussed. The U.S., Canada, Argentina, Australia, Chile and Uruguay would like the Protocol to be a subsidiary to the WTO. The EU and most other countries believe the Protocol and WTO should be co-equal. There was much discussion about this issue, as well as for precautions to ensure living modified organisms would not have adverse affects on biodiversity and people.

The Protocol applies to the transboundary movement, transit, handling and use of all living modified organisms that could have adverse effects on the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, taking into account risks to human health. Articles were included pertaining to pharmaceuticals, transit and contained use, notification, procedures for living modified organisms intended for direct use as food, feed or for processing, risk assessment and management, unintentional transboundary movements and emergency measures, information sharing public awareness and illegal transboundary movements.

In 1995 the agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, or TRIPS, came into effect under the WTO. The TRIPS agreement requires minimum standards on patents, copyright, trademarks and trade secrets based on industrial countries laws and regulations. TRIPS guarantees all WTO members the same level of protection and holds all countries to the same standards. Developing countries have until the end of this year (2000) to adjust their laws and least developed countries have until 2005. If a country fails to comply to the intellectual property rights obligations trade sanctions can be applied against it (Human Development Report 1999 67).

6. Forum and Scope

GMOs and WTO

As for GMOs, recommendations have been made for the WTO to work with the UN's Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), UNCTAD and the Secretariat of the Convention on Biodiversity (CBD) and focus on the possible impacts of trade in GMOs and genetically modified foods, particularly on domestic seed and food markets and how that will affect balance of payments and the trade balance. Genetically modified plant varieties could be covered by patents under the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (http://www.upov.int/), if a government allows a patent for the biological processes for the production of plants (and animals), which according to the WTO they have the authority to reject (http://www.wto.org/wto/about/agmnts6.htm).

GMOs and the WTO

The Japanese have been the only government to submit a proposal to the WTO's General Council in regard to GMOs. Dated October 4, 1999, this recommendation calls for the WTO's attention in discussing trade of GMOs (http://www.wto.org/wto/wt.htm - select WT/GC/W/365). It asks the WTO to consider the following points: (1) The great potential of genetic engineering should be appropriately acknowledged (2) The impact of genetic engineering and its application on the environment and human health should be fully evaluated, based on the most advanced scientific knowledge and expertise and (3) Consumers' concerns on the use of genetic engineering should be addressed appropriately. In June 2000, when the next WTO agricultural negotiations are held, Japan proposes to establish an appropriate forum to address GMOs issues. This forum would include discussions from a broad perspective in order to analyze the current situation of GMOs examine the issues which need to be addressed and consider their relationship with existing WTO agreements This forum would address several issues and create a forum for countries to discuss international trading and regulation concerns relating to GMOs and cloning, as well as examine safety and labeling of genetically modified foods.

Labeling

Since the Biosafety Protocol has not yet been passed, the scope of GMOs are being decided country-by-country. That is, each country is deciding if and how they want to acknowledge GMOs. As of October 1999 Canada is establishing a committee to create a voluntary standard for labeling food products containing GMOs. This standard will be managed by the Canadian General Standards Board. Japan requires mandatory labeling for GMOs to begin in April 2001. They want to let consumers know what they are eating. If the modification is too slight to be detected, such as in vegetable oil or alcoholic beverages, manufacturers are exempt from labeling. The government has only approved six genetically modified crops to be sold in Japan: soybeans, corn, rapeseed, potatoes, cotton and tomatoes (Marushko 2).

South Korea, Australia and New Zealand have also passed laws to require mandatory labeling on GM food. The government has not decided yet which products will be included and no dates have been set. But many European consumers consider GMOs unsafe and have protested them. Some retailers in Britain have even gone as far as refusing to sell GMOs.


Labeling Regulations in Various Countries
Country Labeling Required?
Australia Yes
Canada No, but voluntary labeling will begin soon
Japan Yes by 2001
New Zealand Yes
South Korea Yes
USA No

The EU currently accepts only GM corn and soybeans and is discussing a ban on GM seeds and food imports. Many Europeans are concerned about the food safety of GMOs.

Not surprisingly, both the U.S. and Canada are opposed to mandatory GMO labeling. In 1998 the U.S. exported $4.8 billion of GMOs to Asia alone (Factbox 4). In the same year US farms planted over 45 million acres of GMO plant varieties, mainly in cotton (45%), soybeans (38%) and corn (25%) (GMO Fact Sheet).

7. Decision Breadth

MANY

8. Legal Standing

LAW

Since the Biosafety Protocol has not yet been passed, current global regulations on cloning and modifying organisms are country-specific. To date, 19 European nations signed an agreement to prohibit cloning of humans at the beginning of 1998. It rules out all exceptions, even for an infertile couple. It would permit cloning of cells for research purposes. Countries that signed are Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Luxembourg, Moldova, Norway, Portugal, Romania, San Marino, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Macedonia and Turkey.

Germany and England did not sign. Germany did not sign citing the agreement is weaker than the current German law that forbids all research on human embryos, from the Nazi genetic engineering experiment period. Britain wanted to allow scientists to have scientific freedom. Experiments on human cloning were expected to begin as early as 1999 in Britain (Nineteen European Nations Sign Ban on Human Cloning 1).

Reaction to the two non-signers was disappointing. The French President, while at a European National Ethics meeting, stated, "Nothing will be resolved by banning certain practices in one country if scientists and doctors can simply work on them elsewhere. It is only at the international level that we will be able to prohibit cloning and genetic manipulation that could alter the characteristics of the human race." (19 European Nations Sign Ban on Human Cloning 2)

Current U.S. law bans federally funded research on human embryos, but not on private research. Liberal Democratic Senators Edward Kennedy (Massachusetts) and Dianne Feinstein (California) support a bill to place a 10-year ban on human cloning but allow cloning of human cells and tissues for research up to the point of transferring cloned cells to a woman's uterus. But presently the Republican and Democratic plans are stalled in the Senate due to lack of common ground (Journal Says Human Cloning Research Ban Would be Misguided 2).

GMOs in the US are regulated by the FDA, USDA and EPA, which have been world leaders in the development of rigorous and effective regulations. Several US domestic statutes are precautionary, which include the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act (FDA), the Toxic Substances Control Act (USDA) and the Federal Fungicide, Insecticide and Rodenticide Act (FDA) (GMO Fact Sheet).

To find out specific U.S. government laws regarding GMOs, click on
USDA, EPA and FDA laws, rules and regulations

All GMO foods are required by the FDA to undergo a complete food safety evaluation, directed by scientists and policy makers in the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition within the FDA (Food Biotechnology 2) As of 1992, only if a product contains milk, eggs, wheat, fish, crustacea, tree nuts and legumes (peanuts and soybeans) are companies required to state a potential allergen has been added to the food, but not that the food was produced using biotechnology (Food Biotechnology 4). U.S. government agencies also work with international regulatory agencies, like the OECD, to develop consensus on GMO issues.

III. Geographic Clusters

9. Geographic Locations

a. Geographic Domain GLOBAL


Area of Genetically Modified Crops Planted (Millions of Hectares)
Country 1997 1998
USA 8.1 20.5
Argentina 1.4 4.3
Canada 1.3 2.8
Australia .1 .1
Mexico .1 .1
Spain 0 .1
France 0 .1
South Africa 0 .1
Global Total 11 27.8

Information from "The Gene Giants."

b. Geographic Site GLOBAL

c. Geographic Impact GLOBAL

10. Sub-National Factors

NO

11. Type of Habitat

GLOBAL

IV. Trade Clusters

12. Type of Measure

PROTOCOL

Currently there is no official trade of cloned animals. But GMOs are frequently traded internationally. The largest exporters are the U.S. and Canada. Both countries are proponents of GMO trade and had to accept strong language "recognizing countries' rights to take precautions on imports (Hess 13)." And since the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety allows countries to review safety records before allowing a GMO into the country, some observers have pointed out countries could close their markets to GMOs.

For more information, please click on theBiosafety Protocol Summary

13. Direct v. Indirect Impacts

DIRECT

14. Relation of Trade Measure to Environmental Impact

a. Directly Related to Product: FOOD

b. Indirectly Related to Product: YES

c. Not Related to Product: NO

d. Related to Process: YES and GENETIC

15. Trade Product Identification

FOOD

16. Economic Data

Making money on GMOs is big business. Here are just a few of the many deals currently being made by businesses and governments:

*The U.S. exports $50 billion in GMOs in agricultural products accounting for 80% of global GMO trade.

*According to the International Seed Trade Federation, the world market for genetically engineered seeds is expected to reach $2 billion by the end of 2000, and will triple to $6 billion by 2005. By 2010 the Federation predicts sales for bioengineered seeds will reach $20 billion (The Gene Giants 1999).

*DuPont will pay $7.7 billion to buy Pioneer Hi-Bred International, the world's largest seed company (The Gene Giants 1999).

*Bayer (Germany) spent $1.2 billion to buy Chiron, one of the world's largest biotech companies (The Gene Giants 1999).

*And companies such as DuPont, Kellogg, ConAgra, Mars and Astra/Zeneca are rushing to engineer health foods in a market that is expected to reach $29 billion per year. Some examples of reasearch already being carried out include (from "The Gene Giants" 1999). :

-PepsiCo is using Proctor & Gamble's fake-fat, called Olestra, in its new line of fat-free snack foods

-Archer Daniels Midland is developing a non-diary frozen dessert using soy protein that is low-fat, low-cholesterol, lactose-free and a Vitamin E source

-Unilever will introduce a magarine with cholesterol-lowering ingredients derived from wood pulp. It will sell for 3-4 times the price of ordinary margarine.

-Dupont is conducting tests on soy protein in order to develop soy-based foods to lower cholesterol, fight osteoporosis and combat cancer.

17. Impact of Trade Restriction

HIGH

18. Industry Sector

FOOD

19. Exporters and Importers

MANY

Principle exporters are the U.S., Canada, Argentina, Chile, Uruguay, South Africa and Mexico. Japan is a major importer, as well as many other countries.

The U.S. exports 80% of the world’s GMOs, which is more than $50 billion in agricultural products. In 1998 U.S. farms planted over 45 million acres of GMO plant varieties, an increase of 250% from 1997 (GMO Fact Sheet 1). U.S. genetically modified exports include 25% of corn, 35% soybeans and 45% of cotton. (TED Case Studies: BIOTECH) U.S. genetically-modified agricultural exports just to Asia were $4.8 billion in 1998 (Factbox - GMO food regulations in Asia 4)

Japan is the major importer of GMOs, mainly from the U.S. Japan's major import is soybeans, 86.2 % of which come from the U.S. In just the first half of 1999 this was 2.45 million tons alone. The country also imported 9.13 million tons of corn in the first half of 1999, 96.5 % from the U.S. Japan is a major importer of prepared food products and also approved 22 varieties of six crops for import: soybeans, corn, rapeseed, potatoes, cotton and tomatoes (Factbox - GMO food regulations in Asia 4).

V. Environment Clusters

20. Environmental Problem Type

GENETICS

In the U.S. GM seeds are submitted to the USDA and EPA for a review process, where they undergo field tests on environmental impacts. Both the USDA and EPA use a science-based approach to risk assessment. The EPA monitors GMO environmental exposure to pesticides to insure there are no adverse effects on the environment. They measure potential risks for each new GMO created.

Before testing occurs, an application needs approval by the USDA and in some cases, the EPA. If granted approval, the agencies determine whether the new crop will pose any more environmental threat than the traditional variety and ecologists conduct outdoor testing under strictly controlled conditions. Recently in the U.S. alone researchers have done more than 370 outdoor tests in 35 states relating to 12 crops enhanced with biotechnology (Backgrounder 10). Field tests are currently being conducted on over 50 new food, fiber and feed crops (GMO Fact Sheet).

Environmental fears include engineered genes escaping in the wild and endangering biodiversity (Science and Technology 95). Questions are being raised about chemical fertilizer use and possible effects for non-GMO products (The Core of the Matter 18). And there are general concerns about food safety hazards. A study at Cornell University showed Monarch butterflies died after touching leaves dusted with GM maize (Ladika 44).

Another study done by a Scottish toxicologist "added insect-resistant genes and proteins to potatoes and fed them to rats. The animals suffered damaged immune systems, growth problems and shrunken brains. (Varrengia 1999)" His employer has discredited the findings but many other scientists have supported this study.

So far Austria is the only country to pass strict environmental protection regulations to fight GMOs. There organic farms have increased throughout the country to around 20,000. The country leads the EU in organic food produced - currently around 36% (Ladika 44).

21. Name, Type, and Diversity of Species

MANY

22. Resource Impact and Effect

LOW and PRODUCT

23. Urgency and Lifetime

MEDIUM and 3-5 years

Since international agreements are being designed as biotechnology improves it is necessary to convene frequently to discuss ramifications of GMOs and cloning issues.

It appears that cloning and GMOs are here to stay, despite public backlash in some countries. As with other scientific discoveries, I believe the biotech industry will continue to push the limits until a human clone is created. Whether this is a positive step is highly controversial and honestly I do not agree with it. Cloning animals for human use, such as the pig, also is in the distant future. Although much progress is still needed before it can become a reality, I believe in the next five to ten years it will become a common medical procedure, simply because of the demand for organ transplants.

Thus, trade is and will continue to be the driving force behind GMOs and cloning. Countries and companies want to capture the economic market and will use biotech to achieve these goals. This is where ethics and consumer choice plays a role. People will make moral judgement calls on what they will put into their bodies (such as genetically modified food) and what they will tolerate. This is why labeling is important. As can be seen from Austria, raising organic food and paying more money is a trend in all developed countries. I am sure this will become more popular as biotech improves.

Dolly has started a revolution, one that will continue after today's current electronic revolution. My personal belief is we, as a human race, should proceed with caution, taking into consideration safety, health and environmental concerns. The Biosafety Protocol meets this need. Listening to public opinion will be crucial to balance technological advancements with what people are interested in. However, I understand how difficult this will be, as trade and financial gain is too great, pushing nations to develop at a great pace.

24. Substitutes

Organic foods and animals are the alternatives to GMOs. Many small farmers already pride themselves on growing food without pesticides and herbicides, and are lobbying against GMO crops, due to unknown effects and environmental impact on nearby plants.

Austria is leading the way against GMOs. The government banned the planting of genetically modified maize, forcing both American seed companies, Pioneer and Monsanto, to cancel its planned planting programs in the country. Although the maize is designed to keep the European corn borer away and boost crop yields, the government nonetheless stood firm and today Austria is the EU leader in number of organic farms. In 1988 the country had 1,500 organic farms. By 1998 the number was close to 20,000 – or over 10 percent of the country's 8.4 million acres. The average farm size is between 50 and 75 acres (Ladika 44).


European Union Organic Farming
Country % of EU's Organic Farms # of Organic Farms (approximate)
Austria 36% 20,000
Italy 21% 11,550
Germany 12% 6,600
All Other EU Countries 31% 17,050

These organic farms grow a wide variety of fruits and vegetables, such as peas, carrots, tomatoes, cabbage, cucumbers, apples, peaches, apricots and plums. The result is rising demand in EU grocery stores, with almost every grocery store devoting a section to more expensive organic products (Ladika 44).

VI. Other Factors

25. Culture

NO

26. Trans-Boundary Issues

NO

27. Rights

YES

The most pressing human right involved in GMOs and cloning is awareness of what modifications were made in the production of the product. Therefore, the debate over labeling GMOs is important. Genetic engineering has taken place for over 20 years now, but there are very few domestic regulations and no international agreements (yet) that are binding (BIOTECH case). In the U.S. GMOs do not have to appear on a product's label. A small group of other countries are just now passing laws regarding labeling, sometimes under intense public pressure. These citizens are exercising the right of the consumer to be informed and make a choice.

28. Relevant Literature and Web Pages

Biosafety Protocol

Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety

Backgrounder - Food Biotechnology on 2/19/00

Biotechnology of Food on 2/19/00

Cartagena Protocol on Biodiveristy on 4/10/00

Clones may not grow old before their time on 1/30/00

"The Core of the Matter." March 1999. The OECD Observer, issue 216, pp. 17-18.

DNA graphic on 1/25/00 from "AltaVista's Free Use Images"

Dolly graphic on 1/25/00 from "AltaVista's Free Use Images"

Dolly, the cloned sheep, has triplets on 1/30/00

Dolly the Sheep on 1/25/00

Factbox - GMO food regulations in Asia on 2/24/00

The Gene Giants on 3/6/00

GMO Fact Sheet on 2/19/00

Hess, Glenn. "UN Countries Sign a Landmark Accord to Regulate Trade in Biotech Foods." February 7, 2000. Chemical Market Reporter, vol. 257, issue 6, pp. 1, 13.

Hileman, Bette. "At Last: A Biossafety Pact." February 14, 2000. Chemical & Engineering News, vol. 78, issue 7, p. 65-74.

Hileman, Bette. "Biosafety Pact Proving Elusive." January 31, 2000. Chemical & Engineering News, vol. 78, issue 5, p. 5.

Human Cloning Plans on 1/30/00

Human Development Report 1999. United Nations Development Program. New York, pp. 67-69.

Journal Says Human Cloning Research Ban Would Be "Misguided" on 1/30/00

Kolata, Gina. Clone: The Road to Dolly and the Path Ahead. 1998. New York.

Korea says human clone test succeeds on 1/30/00

Lakika, Susan. "Organic Farmers Lobby Against GMO Crops." September 1999. Europe, issue 389, pp. 43-44.

Nineteen European Nations Sign Ban on Human Cloning on 1/30/00

Pence, Gregory. Who's Afraid of Human Cloning? 1998. New York.

Orange digital picture, by Chris Zimmer on 3/15/00

The Perfect Cow on 1/30/00

Researchers Clone First Mammals from Adult Cells Using New Technique on 1/30/00

Right or Wrong on 1/25/00

"Science and Technology: A Conventional Argument." January 29, 2000. The Economist, vol. 354, issue 8155, p. 95.

TED Case Studies: BIOTECH on 3/20/00

Tetra, the cloned monkey, is born on 1/30/00

Tomato digital picture, by Chris Zimmer on 3/15/00

Verrengia, Joseph. "Biosafety Protocol Provides Juicy Debate on Genes." Charlston Newspapers. 1999.

Weiss, Rick. "In Organ Quest, Cloning Pigs May Be the Easy Part." The Washington Post. March 20, 2000, p. A7.

Weiss, Rick. "Transplant Researchers Clone 5 Pigs." The Washington Post. March 15, 2000, p. A1.

Who owns cloning? on 1/30/00

29.Comments

Comments?