90% of U.S. Sugarbeets are Genetically Modified!

GMO sugarbeets (4.00 / 5)

The following is a bit wordy, but I would really appreciate it if anyone can help me come up with some suggestions for the "Endangered Species" folks.
----------------------------------------
22 May 2009

Wayne Zink, CEO
Endangered Species Chocolate
5846 West 73rd Street
Indianapolis, IN 46278

I have bought your product for some time.  I prefer anything I purchase to be organic, but since I like your chocolate (the one with the black panther on the wrapper), and your company ethics, I have accepted the non-organic status.

I now have a problem with the sweetener used - beet sugar.  Recently I have read several articles stating the much of the beet sugar produced is now genetically modified.  I will not knowingly buy genetically modified foods,  for my own health and the health of the planet.  (Yes, I know, I have "ignored" the soy lecithin as it was not available in any form but GMO for a few years.  It is now - hint, hint.)

I don't know if it's possible for you to assure me that you do not use and will not use genetically modified beet sugar, but without the knowledge that I am not consuming GMOs I cannot continue to buy the chocolate.  I'll have to settle for something not as tasty to me.

Sincerely,

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Karen,

First of all, thank you so much for the lovely letter of 22 May 2009.  I appreciate your kind words and the kind tone you used to ask your questions regarding genetically modified ingredients.

We are truly in a pickle here at ESC.  And maybe you can help us out by thinking this through with us.  First, so you know, once we learned of the beet sugar situation, we purchased our beet sugar ahead and made sure that our beet sugar is not genetically modified for now.  We can absolutely assure you of this through December of this year.  

Second, we have many customers who need to consume chocolate sweetened with beet sugar because they suffer from an allergic reaction and in some cases a negative auto immune response to any type of cane sugar.  These folks tell us that they would prefer our use of beet sugar even if it means the sweetener had the possibility of being genetically modified.

Finally, as we examine how we can tell our customers if we are actually using beet sugar that has been genetically modified we have another challenge:  because of how the beet sugar is refined, there is no protein present to carry the DNA necessary to test if the beet sugar is modified.  Hence, all beet sugar whether modified or not will test negative for modification.

So in the instance of GMO beets, the refined beet sugar does not carry any genetically modified material.  

We are working our way through this right now, and I have had conversations with folks just like you who have said to us that if we change from using beet sugar they would not purchase our products.  

After you have had a chance to think about this, would you mind sharing with me your thoughts?  We want to do the right thing, and care a great deal about you and your feelings on this one.  

My best,

Wayne Zink
CEO
Endangered Species Chocolate
5846 W. 73rd. Street
Indianapolis, IN 46278
T: 317.387.4372
F: 317.387.5372

 

---

by: sombra @ Fri May 29, 2009 at 21:28:50 PM CDT

oh wow (4.00 / 4)

want to put him in touch with Robyn O'Brien of AllergyKids? I'll send her this comment so she can take a look at it. She's very anti-GMOs and she's got a new book out (The Unhealthy Truth).

"I can understand someone from Iowa promoting corn and soy, but we are not feeding the world, we are feeding animals and soft drink companies." - Jim Goodman

---

by: Jill Richardson @ Fri May 29, 2009 at 23:51:03 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I think their best bet (4.00 / 3)

if they still want to use beet sugar and don't want to use sugar produced from GMO beets, is for them to contract with a farm or farms to grow sugar beets with them. Then they'll need to find a processor, or contract with an existing processor to extract/dry the sugar for them. It's a pain, but I think it can be done.

Regarding locavores as elitists - explain to me how supporting local business is elitist....

---

by: Joanne Rigutto @ Sat May 30, 2009 at 10:44:24 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

That should have been (4.00 / 3)

to grow sugar beets FOR them.

Regarding locavores as elitists - explain to me how supporting local business is elitist....

---

by: Joanne Rigutto @ Sat May 30, 2009 at 10:45:05 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

any scientist would find this discussion silly at best. (0.00 / 0)

Note: no one has offered any facts or data that there is any health concerns about GMO sugar.

The letter from the choco man notes that DNA shows no difference. They can't tell any difference in modified or non modified beet sugar! The only difference is in the mind of some consumers!

As a 2nd generation beekeeper who sometimes needs to feed sugar to keep my hives from starving in drought or before winter I can tell you I have heavily researched sugar and HFCS. All of the HFCS is made from GMO corn now. As noted here all the beet sugar is GMO. We still have cane sugar non GMO but that will change soon as new varietes are introduced with the intention of increasing parameters that benefit the ethonal industry in places like Brazil. those in the know will know that cane suagr ethanol is one of the clear winners in the path to develop biofuels.

Anyhow back to sugar. WIth the increased numbers of dying honeybees several leading scientist in the bee world looked deeply into the question if GMO's and GMO based sugar played any role in the losses. The answers are clearly and undisputed NO!

When HFCS is made it goes through a very aggressive process of milling and breakdown with enzymes. The result is that there is no way to deterimine if the final HFCS is from regular corn or GMO. There is no measurable variables and no known difference.

WHile I am not a fan of HFCS as a food additive from a science perspective HFCS is nothing but liquid sugar.

GMO beet sugar made into sugar syrup to feed bees likewise has no known variable that distinguishes it from non GMO sugar syrup.

But yet this silly notion persists that somehow anything GMO is all evil, unhealthy and bad for the environment.

I'm sorry but drawing a conclusion based on political alliances  and shunning the scientific evidence is potentially ignorant.

The Failure to Yield report referenced in the post fails in its initial hypothesis that the only reason farmers chose GMO is for yield increases.

In the Heartland here my friends and neighbors vary from organic to conventional and many shades in between.  What the conventional farmers tell me who use GMO seeds is they save significant amounts of fuel using GMO, they also cut back or eliminate insecticides when growing corn. Thirdly they use roundup which in the realm of herbicides is the least bad actor of them all.  Organic corn growers BTW are left with no way to weed their crops short of diesel fuel to cultivate their fields. So what waste more petro or use a herbicide?  

Apparently the 10's of millions of farmers worldwide who have chosen GMO crops are all apparently idiot zombies who are unable to determine if there are any environmental or economical incentives to use GMO.

I would find the argument put forth in the post that somehow GMO beet sugar is bad if the author Jill had ANY data to back up the implication this is unhealthy or bad for the environment.

I find this blog really to be a very good source of info and very well thought out and written EXCEPT the constant theme that GMO's are evil bad and blah blah blah.

The fact is there is a fair amount of misinformation in print and online distorting the fact that GMO's have advantages and some of them advantages that reflect values that many of the readers of this blog most likely  support.

STOP the auto pilot dissing of everything GMO related and we might help move our country forward in repairing our Food System is my advice.  My prediction is that GMO will play an important role in the future for producing crops that are less damaging to our environment and in fact that is already happening if some people would quit the auto pilot dissing and have a more open opinion and look at the body of evidence, not just the selective evidence that they choose to reference.

respectfully submitted

Bud

---

by: bud dingler @ Sat May 30, 2009 at 17:46:07 PM CDT

This scientist does not find the discussion silly, (4.00 / 5)

neither silly at best nor silly at worst.

Curiosity compels: as far as you are concerned, did anything in your comment respond to the substance of Jill's post?

---

by: count @ Sat May 30, 2009 at 18:28:52 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

A sugar is a sugar is a sugar (4.00 / 5)

is not actually accurate. HFCS is fructose, sugar from beets I think is glucose, sugar from milk is lactose, and then there are all the other 'ose's each with slightly different properties, and interacting with the body's various systems differently even though they are all sugars. Just as all wheat's aren't the same, neither are all sugars.

One of the issues I have with the use of GMO's, aside from the patent issues, is the loss of genetic diversity in yet another crop. The way things are going, eventually, even if a manufacturer wanted to use a component from a non-GMO you won't have a choice any more. Even if you can find a farm or farms to custom grow for you, there's the issue of finding seed, and if you're planning on saving seed to plant for the next year's crop, there's the matter of getting that seed cleaned. As someone who cleans seed by hand, I have a deep appreciation of seed cleaners, even a little vacuum cleaner, let alone the big cleaners that can clean enough seed to plant hundreds or thousands of acres.

That's the nice thing about consumers buying from small producers like you and me. We can at least preserve some genetic diversity in crops and animals, as well as the skills necessary to preserve that diversity. As nice as the seed bank at Svaalbard is, it's a very small, very fragile thin thread to hang all our hopes on as far as preserving the genetic diversity of the agricultural plants in this world.

Regarding locavores as elitists - explain to me how supporting local business is elitist....

---

by: Joanne Rigutto @ Sun May 31, 2009 at 00:37:46 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Thank you (4.00 / 3)

I quite agree with you. Biodiversity is antithetical for the way GMO companies make profits. It's a lot more profitable to do the R&D for 1 variety of GM seed and sell it to everybody, than to do R&D for 50 varieties and sell less of each of them. And that fact is something that just can't be avoided.

"I can understand someone from Iowa promoting corn and soy, but we are not feeding the world, we are feeding animals and soft drink companies." - Jim Goodman

---

by: Jill Richardson @ Sun May 31, 2009 at 00:44:15 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Sugar from sugar beets is sucrose and (4.00 / 2)

sugar from sugar cane is the same thing, sucrose. Sucrose is 50% glucose and 50% fructose. HFCS is called HFCS because it has slightly more fructose than glucose. In HFCS, the ratio fructose:glucose is 55:45 instead of 50:50.

The ratio of fructose to glucose in HFCS was chosen to match the ratio in honey.

---

by: count @ Sun May 31, 2009 at 01:33:43 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

here's why I oppose GMOs (4.00 / 3)

http://www.lavidalocavore.org/...

"I can understand someone from Iowa promoting corn and soy, but we are not feeding the world, we are feeding animals and soft drink companies." - Jim Goodman

---

by: Jill Richardson @ Sun May 31, 2009 at 00:45:55 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I respect Jills intellect and hard work (0.00 / 0)

I just can't help but listen to the farmers near me here and see how they farm and see the real benefits of GMO.

I encourage everyone to visit large farmers and see and hear first hand what GMO really means.

Reduced petro use and no insecticides in some cases.

Sounds like a move towards sustainable farming.

I'm not sure what biodiversity has to do with anything since we havbe seed savers and many small growers keeping the diversity alive. In commodity farming it usually comes to down to a couple of strains of a particular crop.

In the honeybee world in which I live, honeybees are not native to North America and neither are soybeans or corn or sugar beets.

We are not going back to the times before the First Nation people were displaced. Commodity farming is here to stay - get over it and try and work it to be more sustainable.

One of the biggest things we can do to promote local small farms is look at fed and state incentives to lower the cost of entry for small farmers. Startup costs for land and so on is enormous. Our Ag subsidize should be going to the little guy/gal. Like in the beekeeping industry we will always have the little operators and the large industrial kind. there is nothing inherently wrong with that. What's wrong is our government subsidizing the people who least need it.  

I'm off to put empty honey collection boxes on my hives today. It seems like we are in a post global warming period in the last 18 months. Last summer it hardly was in the 80's and this summer is shaping up to be the same. This greatly affects the blooming of flowers and the honey we get.

Has any one googled sunspot activity lately?

http://wattsupwiththat.com/200...

We are in the least period of sun activity since the early 1900's. Also google the Maunder Minimum and learn how instead of fearing global warming we could actually be in the beginning of a protracted period of global cooling as the sun's activity great decreases. how this interacts with increased CO2 is anyones guess. Science is pretty much in its infancy when it comes to climate and the affects of the sun. You would hardly know that listening to the MSM. They talk like its a done deal we're all going to roast.

We live in interesting times and sometimes things are not as black and white as they first appear. The media has a way  of not foreseeing what is really happening instead they focus on the sensational and the stories with momentum. Anti GMO thinking also has momentum and the reality may be much much different if you allow yourself to think outside the box.  

---

by: bud dingler @ Sun May 31, 2009 at 10:54:53 AM CDT