Plum Tuckered:
Genetically Engineered Plum Approved for Market

From: Napa Valley Herald
Saturday, AUG 04, 2007
By Erica Martenson

On June 27, 2007, the USDA deregulated its own transgenic plum tree despite overwhelming public objection. The USDA developed the transgenic plum for resistance to the plum poxvirus by inserting two genes from viruses into the tree's genome, one from the poxvirus itself.

During the public comment period, the USDA received 1,725 comments from farmers, agricultural organizations, consumers, consumer groups, academia, and scientists with those against the approval (1,708) outnumbering those in support (17) by 100 to 1.

While this plum tree would not likely be marketed in California in the near future, since there is virtually no plum pox virus present here, California's plum producers (which produce 86% of the country's plums), home gardeners, consumers, and environmentalists have much to fear from its introduction in other parts of the United States or Canada.

Plums are insect-pollinated, so these transgenic plums would readily cross-pollinate with native, garden, and commercial plums over long distances.

In the article, "Transgenic Plum Gets USDA Non-regulated Status Based on False Claims of Safety," two geneticists, Dr. Joseph Cummins and Dr. Mae Wan-Ho, wrote that "a small RNA molecule was present in high concentrations in the transgenic plum" and that "small RNAs are potentially lethal to mammals," which should raise concerns among both consumers and environmentalists.

Organic produce, by the USDA's own definition, cannot be genetically engineered; therefore, contamination of organic plum trees by transgenic DNA should be of concern to organic plum producers, as well as those who wish to purchase and consume organic produce.

Overseas market rejection of genetically engineered food in Europe and Asia has been massive and persistent; therefore, the contamination of plums (organic and conventional) destined for export should be of concern to those producers.

The contamination of wild plums, such as the endangered Laroda plum, or Napa County's own native plum, the Sierra plum, threatens their preservation.

These are just a few of the concerns that individuals and organizations raised during the public comment period all of which the USDA disregarded by granting this approval.

For more information on genetically engineered trees, including this GE plum tree, please visit the Stop GE Trees Campaign at http://www.stopgetrees.org/. In addition, please write your public officials at the county, state and federal levels, asking them to place a moratorium on genetically engineered organisms until they have been proven safe to the public health and the environment, and until market issues have been addressed.

Erica Martenson Preserving the Integrity of Napa's Agriculture (P.I.N.A.)