GE “EnviroPig” Project Stops Research | Civil Eats

GE “EnviroPig” Project Stops Research

This week, the University of Guelph, the Canadian university that developed the genetically engineered (GE) “Enviropig,” announced it is closing down its research. The Center for Food Safety (CFS) is now calling on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to stop any work on approving the GE pig. For years CFS has criticized the developers of the “EnviroPig” for engineering an animal specifically to fit into large-scale and highly polluting concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs).  CFS has also criticized the genetically engineered “AquAdvantage” salmon developed by AquaBounty, Inc.–also under review by the FDA–which was similarly engineered to grow better in the confined tanks of industrial fish farming operations.

“There’s a lot of green lipstick on this pig,” said Andrew Kimbrell, Executive Director for the Center for Food Safety. “The whole idea of genetically engineering a pig to fit into an unsustainable production model and then dubbing it “enviro” is ridiculous. Given recent industry and consumer backlash, it’s no surprise that funding for this misguided research has dried up.”

The “Enviropig” was engineered using genetic material from a mouse and an E. coli bacterium to reduce phosphorus in the pig’s feces. The University of Guelph began its GE pig research in 1995 and requested food safety approval from regulatory authorities in Canada and the U.S. in 2009. While Canada approved reproduction of the GE pigs in February 2010, no government has approved the “Enviropig” for human consumption and no GE pigs have been sold commercially.

According to recent news reports, the Canadian hog industry group Ontario Pork has redirected its funding away from GE pig research. Lacking this funding, the university is ending its program to breed the genetically engineered pigs.

The announcement comes after years of mounting rejection by farmers, pork producers and consumers.  In a statement appearing in Reuters Canada yesterday, Paul Slomp of the National Farmers Union said, “[t]he GM pig was going to drive consumers away from eating pork if it was ever approved for market. This GM pig fiasco could have permanently damaged (Canada’s) domestic and international pork markets.”

Last year, Olymel, a pork processor in Quebec, announced it would not sell meat from Enviropigs even if the animals were approved for marketing. Other pork industry players are also leery of such biotech efforts. For example, the leading U.S. pork producer Smithfield Farms stated it would not sell meat from animal clones even with FDA approval, and that the company relies on traditional breeding.

“The U.S. government should quit wasting taxpayer dollars on what amounts to an engineered sham for the hog industry,” continued Kimbrell. “Consumers have made clear that they don’t want to eat genetically engineered animals. The FDA should stop its review of this GE pig immediately.”

Today’s food system is complex.

Invest in nonprofit journalism that tells the whole story.

Recent polls show that consumers do not want to eat these genetically engineered animals. An October 2010 poll by Thompson Reuters found that nearly 65 percent of consumers would not eat genetically engineered fish or meat and 93 percent consumers would want GE animals to be labeled if approved for consumption.

Support for GE labeling recently garnered media attention when a record-breaking one million public comments were sent to the FDA late last month in support of a legal petition filed by CFS calling on the agency to require the labeling of GE foods.  Fifty-five Members of Congress joined Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR) and Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) in a letter to FDA in support of the legal petition.

Originally published by the Center for Food Safety

We’ll bring the news to you.

Get the weekly Civil Eats newsletter, delivered to your inbox.

Jaydee Hanson works as a policy analyst for the Center for Food Safety on issues related to nanotechnology, animal cloning and animal genetic engineering. He also works for the Center’s sister agency, the International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA) where he directs their work on human genetics, synthetic biology and nanotechnology. He is the US co-chair for the Nanotechnology Taskforce of the Transatlantic Consumers Dialogue and a fellow of the Institute on Biotechnology and the Human Future. Read more >

Like the story?
Join the conversation.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

More from

Farm Bill

Featured

Popular

A Native-led Land Trust Is Working to Empower Indigenous Youth Through Kelp Farming

Sugar kelp remnants from Native Conservancy's test site in Simpson Bay, Prince William Sound. (Photo By Tesia Bobrycki)

Journalist-Turned-Cattle Farmer Beth Hoffman on the Impossible Math of Starting a Farm

Beth Hoffman raking hay on her tractor.

Keeping a Detailed Record of the Changing Climate Could Save This Tribe’s Foodways

The RACCA team in the field. (Photo courtesy of Megan Mucioki)

Op-ed: The Pandemic Didn’t ‘End Hunger’—It Exposed Systemic Racism Instead

low angle view of african american man with scarf on face holding placard with racism is a pandemic lettering against blue sky