desired trait. The technology has sparked controversy as
scientists, activists and the general population argue over
whether global food and nutrition needs warrant technology
that modifies the genetic code of life.
The challenge of public perception is compounded by
a prohibitive regulatory system. It can take years and cost
up to $100 million to bring a single genetically engineered
crop to regulatory approval. For the vegetable seed indus-
try, the economics aren’t feasible. Revenue generated from
most vegetable seed varieties cap around $800,000. That’s
insubstantial revenue, compared to field crop seeds (many of
which are genetically modified) that generate revenue in the
billions, Bradford explains.
Bradford says the potential for transgenics in plants is
enormous. He points to a UC Davis project with flowering
plants that, through transgenics, could create vegetables
that flower uniformly on command. In warmer climates,
vegetables that flower prematurely don’t produce food. Ma-
nipulating the DNA of the plant would enable it to provide
substantial yields of food and seed in a wider array of cli-
mates.
“You can put in a gene that triggers flowering and spray
it with something like sugar to turn it on. This can’t really be
done with traditional plant breeding,” he says.
In a 2015 study by the Pew Research Center, 88 percent of
scientists in the American Association for the Advancement
of Science — the world’s largest general scientific society —
said GM crops are safe for human consumption. The science
has proven thousands of times there is no difference that is
found between genetically modified crops and those pro-
duced through non-GMO methods, Van Deynze explains.
The controversy prevents researchers from developing
transgenic technologies beyond the laboratory and into mar-
ketable applications in vegetable seed production. “There
are so many awesome projects on the shelf beneficial for re-
ducing pesticides and all kinds of things that we just can’t
find a way to do without using transgenics,” Bradford says.
But only 37 percent of U.S. adults trust GMOs, according
to that same study. Even one member of the Flavr Savr team
is skeptical. Belinda Martineau is a former genetic engineer
with Calgene who helped develop the tomato and is now a se-
nior writer at the Center for Healthcare Policy and Research
at UC Davis. She says GM crops have the potential to create
human allergens, mutations and toxicity.
While under regulatory review, the Food and Drug Ad-
ministration questioned how the Flavr Savr developers knew
they inserted only the intended DNA. What they found sur-
prised Martineau. It turned out much more than the targeted
January 2018 | comstocksmag.com
55