Hillary Rodham Clinton Supports GMOs

clinton In a speech before the world’s largest biotechnology gathering on Wednesday, Hillary Rodham Clinton expressed enthusiastic support for the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in agriculture and for federally-sourced financial subsidies designed to keep companies from leaving the U.S. She also declared her desire to get industry representatives around a table to have an “intensive discussion” about “how the federal government could help biotechs with insurance against [financial] risk.”

The global biotech industry grew 11 percent last year with revenue of $262 billion. Acknowledging the “Frankensteinish” depictions communicated by those in opposition to the use of GMOs in agriculture, Clinton did not attempt to argue against their many warnings. Instead, she suggested that the negative perceptions of GMO agriculture could be fought if a more positive spin were promoted. Clinton suggested to the thousands of industry people in the room that “‘drought resistant’ sounds like something you’d want” instead of “genetically modified.”

Clinton supports “[GMO] seeds and products that have a proven track record.” She specifically acknowledged the type of drought-resistant seeds she championed during her tenure as the U.S. Secretary of State. During her speech at the San Diego Convention Center a group protesting against GMO foods marched outside. At least 26 countries ban GMOs from their agricultural land and/or their marketplaces.

Critics point to a number of issues against the use of GMOs in agriculture, starting with the warning that genetic engineering interrupts a food plant’s genetic code, thus possibly creating toxins, allergenic agents or altering the nutritional value of the food produced. Another warning is that pollens from GMO plants are inevitably released into the atmosphere, thus pollinating non-GMO plants and forever altering the latter’s more pristine genetic codes.

A third warning from critics is that GMOs can actually kill other organisms. For example, corn genetically modified with the Bt toxin (the intention was for the plant to manufacture its own pesticide) has been found responsible for the destruction of monarch butterfly larvae. Similar impacts could effect other plant and animal species, critics say.

Perhaps the most sinister argument of the anti-GMO crowd is that the trend is the final blow in the century-long global decline of small farmers. Power, they say, is concentrated with the very few corporations that own the patents for the plant seeds, and this dictates in farmers an addictive dependency on the must-be-purchased seeds and chemical inputs. Indeed, many see the epidemic of Indian farmers committing suicide (270,000 between 1995 and 2012) as being sourced in the inevitable abyss of debt generated by the requirement to buy ever-more-costly chemicals and GMO seeds.

Clinton charges an average of $200,000 per speech and her support for GMOs was made clear in last week’s 65-minute presentation. After her speech the overflow lunch crowd heard California Governor Jerry Brown tell all who would listen of his desire for their industry to see California as friendly to biotech. Brown told the industrials not to worry, that “I’m holding the line (on taxes and regulations).”

By Gregory Baskin

BIO International
Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News
Times of San Diego

41 Responses to "Hillary Rodham Clinton Supports GMOs"

  1. country boy   July 24, 2014 at 10:18 pm

    It’s true, Gmos are safe and if you support the anti gmo viewpoint you are unknowingly supporting possible future global food shortages. The Organic method has worked for thousands of years but never before has the world population been anywhere close to this high.

  2. wheatgluten   July 16, 2014 at 9:14 pm

    shes one crazy biatch

  3. whocares   July 12, 2014 at 3:53 pm

    She thinks it SAFE, Then let her chow down on this crap and I hope she CHOKES to death!!!

  4. Michael Schultheiss   July 11, 2014 at 5:35 pm

    Gregory, I would like to commend you for a well-written article. You did an excellent job with this. I have a couple of things I would like to add by way of answering (and rebutting) a couple of the allegations made by the anti-GMO crowd.

    First, this:

    “Another warning is that pollens from GMO plants are inevitably released into the atmosphere, thus pollinating non-GMO plants and forever altering the latter’s more pristine genetic codes.”

    I can see how one might think that GM crops have less “pristine” genetic codes, but consider a couple of things. First, practically all domestic crops have been extensively modified from their wild states.

    Second, and this is more to the point, genetic modification through lateral gene transfer occurs in nature. For example, retroviruses can infect germ-line cells in sexually reproducing animals. They can then be passed down as part of the genetic code through sperm or eggs. Something on the order of nearly eight percent of the human genome consists of these endogenous retroviruses (ERVs):


    “Indeed, many see the epidemic of Indian farmers committing suicide (270,000 between 1995 and 2012) as being sourced in the inevitable abyss of debt generated by the requirement to buy ever-more-costly chemicals and GMO seeds.”

    Due credit to you, Gregory, for reporting this without endorsing it! The tragedy of Indian farmer suicides is much more complex and multi-causal than the anti-GMO propaganda would have you believe, and it is simply unfounded to blame the phenomenon on GMOs.



  5. tom   July 11, 2014 at 2:03 pm

    Your aggressive ignorance is amazing. It has been shown that him crops don’t increase yields substantially. Hybridization is the traditional method of improving crops and livestock and is a natural method that allows the sharing of genetic traits by members of the same genus. Lab-created gmos break the genetic boundaries set up by millions of years of evolution and could never occur naturally. GMOs are created solely for shareholders and profit. The environment, ecology, and health are not considered when they sold. Those in favor of gmos are merely toting the corporate line and favoring profit over the future and our health.

    • Jill   July 11, 2014 at 4:08 pm

      Right on Tom!

  6. shoofoolatte   July 11, 2014 at 10:47 am

    This looks like a story based on political motivation rather than actual fact. I’m looking further into it.

  7. Connie Loewen   July 9, 2014 at 8:48 am

    Perhaps MS. Clinton does not know enough about the risks or she is being paid for her opinion. Either way, it is not good.

  8. Gregory Baskin   July 7, 2014 at 2:17 pm

    Please see my recent article about the speaking fees Hillary Rodham Clinton generates: https://guardianlv.com/2014/07/hillary-rodham-clinton-speaking-fees/.

  9. Laurie armer   July 7, 2014 at 10:50 am

    We need to go to the source. Where are these GMO seeds produced? In Kauai where children and adults are getting sick from the toxins infused into the seeds. Lets take this serious it is a global issue. Its not just about your preference.

  10. erichbacher   July 7, 2014 at 8:05 am

    In the interest of fairness, you should know I wrote about this article.

    • HITGFRY   July 7, 2014 at 9:21 am

      erichbacher you wrote this article, not greg baskin? I don’t understand. It says “by Greg Baskin”. Explain please? Thanks

      • erichbacher   July 7, 2014 at 12:28 pm

        wrote about, not wrote. The link continues to be automatically removed, but it is at Grounded Parents.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.