We Can Empower Nature to Build a More Sustainable Planet
by Stephanie Batchelor, BIO
Our planet is racing towards an uncertain future. We’re already feeling the effects of climate change and its impact on our ability to support a growing world. Much of the climate conversation is focused on the negative effects of agriculture, but as the world’s population has swelled, so has the demand for healthy food and the need for sustainable solutions.As we advance through another decade in the 21st century, we must find innovative ways to transform the way we grow and produce food so that we can begin to reverse course.
Unfortunately, there is no silver bullet. Some argue that organic farming will lead us towards sustainability, but data tells us that 100% organic food production would hurt biodiversity and require an extraordinary amount of land to be cleared — land that has been so-far untouched.
Farmers and food producers alike need all tools at their disposal. Tools like synthetic biology. Using synthetic biology, we can boost nature’s ability to grow more food on less land and create food ingredients without harming the environment. For example, underneath the soil are millions of microorganisms working to provide the necessary nutrients to crops. Like a battery, these microbes are drained from the soil with each harvest. They must be replenished for the field to work properly again.
Farmers usually have two choices: clear new lands that are fertile—like what’s happening in the Amazon rainforest—or use fertilizers to supplement lost nutrients. Obviously, both have a significant environmental impact. With synthetic biology, we can give farmers another option and help the natural process of plant growth by engineering microbes to revitalize the soil. Farmers can then use previously depleted lands.
Synthetic biology also gives us new ways to sustainably develop food ingredients.Vanillin—one of the most popular synthetic ingredients in the world—makes up 99% of vanilla flavoring consumed but relies on coal and oil mining to produce. Through synthetic biology we can make vanillin that is molecularly identical to the bean without burning fossil fuels.
For its Impossible Burger, Impossible Foods uses synthetic biology to edit brewer’s yeast to produce hemoglobin—the protein that gives meat its mouth-watering taste and smell.
Companies are even using the technology to create bioplastics made from natural sugars found in agricultural residues and other byproducts of farming.
Every day I work with many of the synbio companies at the forefront of innovation. I’m inspired by the promise of the technology. But we can’t wait while the effects of climate change intensify. Tools like synthetic biology should be viewed as empowering the natural world, not hindering it.
GMO 2.0 is a Threat to Natural
by Karen Howard, Organic & Natural Health Association
It is not an understatement to say organic and all things natural are in a battle for survival, courtesy of GMO 2.0 and the National Bioengineering Food Disclosure Standard. The new federal standard intentionally upended the states’ rights effort for mandatory labeling, redefining “genetically modified” to the seemingly innocuous “bioengineering” standard. Organic & Natural Health predicted that the new standard would be a threat to the survival of organic. Our fears are becoming a reality with USDA’s suggestion these new techniques could be used in organic food production. Perhaps USDA was bolstered by the President’s decision to simplify regulatory pathways for GMOs, reducing the standards for scientific review by federal agencies.The threat to the natural health products industry became immediately evident with the regulation’s failure to label GMO ingredients in processed foods if testing did not reveal their DNA. Now it’s fair game to not identify the artificial, synthetic products being introduced into the supply chain.
We are modifying an entire ecosystem from scratch under the guise of scientific advancement, and at the expense of consumer demand for transparency and traceability in food, beverages and dietary supplements. Data from Free Form Market Monitor shows that households who prioritize the purchase of non-GMO do so because they believe GMOs to be unsafe. Spins data supports that. Non-GMO sales increased 30% in a three year period ending June, 2019. On the flip side, the number of companies engaged in developing crops and products using biotechnology has increased 181% over the past three years. The standard bearer crops we are well acquainted with—soy, potato, canola—are now being joined by apple, eggplant and pineapple. Joining in the parade are the new microorganism and enzyme inputs and ingredients, derived from algae, bacteria, enzymes, microbial cultures and starters, and yeast. We’ve left the Non-GMO Project to bar the gates from these ingredients slipping into the supply chain, reliant on attestations until we successfully develop the testing methodology to identify gene-edited crops, and synbio supplements and ingredients.
We are behind in our efforts to educate the consumer on this new technology. Our efforts to secure synthetic ingredients, like astaxanthin, for identity testing has failed. And we consider the reticence these companies to share their product information of major concern. DSHEA doesn’t have the teeth stay to mandate disclosure. These ingredients are not going away, but we might if we ignore consumers’ explicit demands for transparency.

