The Politics of GMOs: Sound Science vs. Sound Bites

1. The Politics of GMOs:Sound Science vs. Sound Bites Canola Council of Canada Puerto Vallarta, Mexico March 23, 2004

2. Fairchild’s mule Resistance to new technology is not new Thomas Fairchild

3. 1906 “We have recently advanced our knowledge of genetics to a point where we can manipulate life in a way never intended by nature. We must proceed with the utmost caution in the application of this new-found knowledge.” Resistance to new technology is not new • — Luther Burbank

4. Resistance to new food is not new • Coffee was outlawed or restricted in Mecca, Cairo, Istanbul, England, Germany and Sweden • “The body becomes a mere shadow of its former self; it goes into a decline and dwindles away. The heart and guts are so weakened that the drinker suffers delusions, and the body receives such a shock that it is though it were bewitched.” • — French doctors • 1674

5. Tomatoes were considered poisonous in the U.S. until 1830 • Colonel Gibbon Johnson ate a “wolf peach” on courthouse steps in New Jersey • A crowd of 2,000 gathered to witness a suicide • Potatoes were believed to cause a variety of diseases, including leprosy, fever, tuberculosis and rickets Resistance to new food is not new

6. Frankenfoods • Monarch butterfly • StarLink corn and tacos • Mad cow disease Drumbeat of negative press

7. CBI vision • Improve people’s understanding and acceptance in order to create a marketplace that allows the world to benefit from the products of agricultural and food biotechnology

8. Canada • Mexico • United States The reach

9. Global affiliates • Africa • Argentina • Australia/New Zealand • Brazil • Chile • Columbia • Europe • India/ Southeast Asia • Japan • Korea

10. Sound science vs. sound bites • “Demagoguery beats data in making public policy.” • — Rep. Dick Armey • Former U.S. House Majority Leader • “Facts are stubborn things.” • — John Adams • 2nd president of the • United States

11. Documenting Adoption

12. Canola: 68% • Corn: 58% • Soybean: 48% Biotech crops gain ground with U.S., Canadian farmers Percentage Source: USDA, NASS

13. Global biotech acreage: Double-digit growth for seventh straight year Acres Source: ISAAA

14. 7 million farmers in 18 countries

15. Documenting the Benefits

16. Economic benefits in the United States • Adoption of six biotech crops has: • Increased annual production by 4 billion pounds • Improved farmer income by $1.5 billion • Reduced pesticide spraying by 46 million pounds • — National Center for Food • and Agricultural Policy

17. Potential economic benefits in the United States • Adoption of 32 additional cultivars could: • Increase annual production by 10 billion pounds • Total: 14 billion pounds • Reduce annual farmer costs by $1 billion • Total: $2.5 billion • Reduce annual spraying by 117 million pounds • Total: 163 million pounds • — National Center for Food • and Agricultural Policy

18. Environmental benefits: Sparing the plow • No-till acres increased 35 percent to 55 million acres since biotech crops introduced • Reduces soil erosion 1 billion tons per year • Saves $3.5 billion in water treatment and waterway maintenance • Saves farmers 309 million gallons of fuel per year • Improves wildlife habitat — Conservation Technology Information Center

19. Environmental benefits: A smorgasbord • Prevent soil erosion by increasing no-till farming practices • Improve water quality through the use of more benign herbicides • Improve air quality through no-till farming that reduces greenhouse gas emissions • Increase biodiversity through more no-till farming • More beneficial insects, more habitat for birds and other wildlife • — Council of Agricultural • Science and Technology

20. Perception vs. RealityWhat do people really think about biotech?

21. I accept and support the technology and would be comfortable buying and eating the food. I believe biotechnology has important benefits and that the risks are low. I know at least something about biotechnology. How research tracks progress T I M E I know biotechnology exists. AwarenessAgreementAcceptance

22. Opinion leaders General public Gatekeepers Overall support steady: Out of sight, out of mind Would you say you strongly support, somewhat support, somewhat oppose or strongly oppose … using biotechnology to develop new varieties of crops such as cotton, corn, soybeans and wheat or are you neutral?* Monarch followed by StarLink Percent support * The words “and wheat” were added to the question in March 2002

23. New medicines Feed the world Hardier crops Agreement with benefits: Trend is positive Percent who agree that each is true of biotechnology Healthier foods Renewable fuel resources Fewer pesticides General Public

24. Consumers have grown more certain about the long term benefits of biotechnology. “The use of biotechnology in farming will be good for our society in the long term, regardless of what some people say now.” + 6 points % AGREE Total % Agree/ Depends - 8 points % DK/ DEPENDS

25. Canada

26. Agreement with most biotech benefits remains stable Percent among general public who strongly or somewhat agree New meds Hardier crops More food Less chems Healthier foods Renewable fuels

27. Biotech foods increasingly viewed as safe Percent among general public who say GM crops are: Safer/safe as other crops/foods Pt Chg W1 W11 Don’t Know 23 13 -10 Depends 2 5 +3 Safe/Safer 40 47 +7 Less Safe 35 35 0 Less safe than other crops/foods

28. Percentage who say biotech benefits outweigh risks is increasing General Public Opinion Leaders +7 +6

29. Consumers prefer biotech sweet corn • “Despite widespread perceptions of consumer concerns regarding the use of genetic engineering in food production, GE varieties outsold conventional sweet corn by a margin of 3:2.” • — University of Guelph • Food Safety Network

30. Mexico

31. Majority agrees with biotech benefits Percent who “strongly” or “somewhat” agree Q19a-e: I’m going to read you some statements. Please tell me whether you strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree or strongly disagree with each of these, or do you not know? Caution: Due to sampling change for Wave 4 (Jun-03), cannot make trending statements against Waves 1-3. Wave 4 excludes those not aware of biotechnology.

32. ‘Benefits only companies’ tops concerns Percent who “strongly” or “somewhat” agree Q19f-l: I’m going to read you some statements. Please tell me whether you strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree or strongly disagree with each of these, or do you not know?

33. Concerns high about overall food safety Q13: How much, if at all, do you worry that foods you buy might not be safe to eat?

34. China, Mexico, Brazil and U.S. have most favorable views of biotechnology Percentage of support Source: Environics/GlobeScan

35. Europeans are reassessing their position on biotechnology • Consumers are getting more balanced information: • 2003 • 43 percent heard from opponents • 41 percent heard from both sides equally • Only a 2 percent gap in the balance of information • 2002 • 17 percent gap • 2001 • 29 percent gap Source: ABE, 2003

36. Reassessing: Fewer Europeans say biotech crops and foods are less safe Percentage of people who say biotech crops and foods are less safe than other crops and food. Percentage of support Source: CBI, June 2003

37. Reassessing: More Europeans say “don’t know” when asked if they would buy biotech food Percentage of respondents Source: ABE, June 2003

38. Turning the tide: 2004 headlines • “Doctors 100% behind decision to allow GM maize” – Scotsman.com • “Uganda gives cautious approval to GM food” – SciDev.net • “Chile may expand range of genetically modified products” – Dow Jones • “EU Food Agency clears Monsanto rapeseed” – The Ledger • “GM food crops to be planted in weeks” – Sydney Morning Herald • “China eyes GM food crops to cut costs” – Reuters • “GM cotton farming in SA a success” – Business Day • “Premier for GM foods in Sweden” – Oresund Food Excellence

39. Turning the tide: 2004 headlines • “World biotech plantings increase by 15 pct” – Reuters • “Double-digit record growth continues for biotech crops worldwide, says ISAAA report” – DallasNews.com • “GM technology transforms farming” – Ontario Farmer • “Ontario farmers continue to increase their use of biotechnology” – AgCare

40. Challenges Ahead • Lack of awareness, information • New product acceptance • Wheat • Animal biotech • Trade disputes/market access • Chronic hunger, poverty

41. Jury is still out . . . June 2003 Awareness % Heard little/nothing about biotechnology 66 % Benefit Awareness – Don’t know Less Pesticides 39 More food 20 Healthier food 32 Hardier crops 29 Renewable fuels 42 % Agree with concerns – Don’t know Health risks 30 Environmental risks 33 Inadequate testing 33 Inadequate regulations 37 % Safety of biotech foods/crops – Don’t Know 21 % Benefits outweigh risks – Don’t Know 19 % Good for society in long term – Don’t Know 20 % Support GM foods – Neutral 25 % Support biotech crops - Neutral 22 Benefits Concerns Acceptance

42. Support grows with knowledgePercent who support biotech to … Develop new varieties of crops Genetically modify foods June ‘03

43. Council for Biotechnology Information www.whybiotech.com • Helping improve people’s understanding of the benefits of agricultural and food biotechnology

44. The Politics of GMOs:Sound Science vs. Sound Bites Canola Council of Canada Puerto Vallarta, Mexico March 23, 2004