Wednesday, January 4, 2012

GM Soybean Receives USDA Deregulation

MON 87705, a genetically modified soybean traded as Monsanto's Vistive®Gold oybeans has received deregulation approval by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA). The GM soybean produces soybean oil with increased levels of monounsaturated fat while significantly lowering saturated fat.
"With the availability of Vistive®Gold soybeans, farmers will soon be able to deliver an economical and sustainable source of nutritionally improved soybean oil to consumers and food companies," said Joe Cornelius, Monsanto global technology lead for food quality traits.
This USDA deregulation completes the regulatory processes in the United States, that would allow field testing and seed production within the United States, under strict stewardship guidelines until Monsanto has obtained the necessary regulatory approvals in the key soybean export markets. The Food and Drug Administration completed the consultation process in January 2011. The trait has also been approved for use in Canada.
See the news release at The Registry can be viewed at


farmland as an investment said...

I know many people are strongly opposed to GMO, but I personally believe it is one of the crucial aspects in agriculture if we able to feed an ever growing population. With arable farmland shrinking globally, plus climate change, GMO will be absolutely critical to avoiding starvation. I understand why purists may be opposed to GMO, but frankly speaking, back in the real world where real choices must be made GMO is just critical. I am sure many would disagree with me, but that's how I fell!

Bob said...

Seems as though you have an "vested interest" in large scale agriculture. The facts, according to both the FAO and WHO, is that with the agricultural resources and infrastructure that was in place back in 2001 the capacitty to feed people was nearly 100 times the current world population (over 600 billion,) even without GMO! The specious argument that we need these toxic, hazardous, poorly understood contructs of crops to feed a starving world is simply absurd propaganda.

farmland as an investment said...

Hi Bob: I totally respect your opinion, and it is your blog after all (and a well done one also). Whilst I am not an agricultural expert, I do have to wonder about the 100x figure, it seems pretty amazing to me. Here is a long article about the possible strain on food supplies from global warming - Again, certainly not a GMO expert, but respectfully maybe there is still some room for GMO to help combat this.

Bob said...

@ Farmland: In my 25 years working as a crop advisor and production consultant and farm manager in large scale commercial agriculture I was exposed to (and largely bought into) some of the arguments you advocate. Experience and reality have demonstrated to me that much of the reasoning used to promote industrial, energy and chemicaly intensive transgenic agriculture is extremely flawed. To rely on these patterns for the future stability and security of our world food production is very unwise. To depend on a small gene pool of monoculture crops to face future challenges like climate change is to repeat what occurred in Ireland in the 1840's. If you are indeed seeking answers to questions about how best to feed a burgeoning population I recommend that you look through some of the articles posted in the history of this blog beginning with the interviews with Dr. Don Huber about two posts below this one. My contention is that to best meet food needs on the planet models should include highly diversified, locally sustainable systems.

Anonymous said...

OK, thanks Bob, I appreciate your kind response and I will look through this with an open mind! By the way, speaking again of food security, here is an article about countries in the Middle East being greatly concerned with this -

Thank you again, Farmland