Fundamental flaw in process-based regulatory capture Alan McHughen University of California, Riverside, Ca. 92521 alanmc@ucr.edu

US process trigger for regulation Process of GE (rDNA, transgenic, etc.) plus: USDA– ‘Plant pest’ (variable interpretation) EPA ‘Pesticidal properties’ including PiPs (e.g. viral sequences in Plum Pox resistant plum) FDA ‘Animal drugs’ e.g. Aqua Bounty salmon Fallacy: These may conform to respective statutory authority, but exempt non-GE products posing identical (or greater) risks.

EU Regulatory Capture Definition of ‘GMO)’ (Directive 90/220 EC, amended in 2001/18/EC): ‘… an organism in which the genetic material has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally by mating and/or natural recombination.’ Except: i) mutagenesis and ii) cell fusion (unless rDNA is also used, in which case regulations apply) Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (16) This Regulation should cover food and feed produced "from" a GMO but not food and feed "with" a GMO. (e.g., sugar, but not chymosin) Fallacy: All French grapes are grown on French scions grafted onto US vine rootstock. Does not occur in Nature.

Fallacy Illustration: GE sugarbeet GE sugarbeet plants undergo Photosynthesis Sucrose (sugar) is sequestered and stored in the tuberous root Upon harvest, the sucrose is extracted and purified, packaged and sold to consumers. No GE DNA, protein or other ‘substances’ remain Yet in EU, the sugar must be labeled as “GE” Other products from (GE) plant photosynthesis 6CO2 + 6H20 (light)  C6H12O6 (sugar) + 6O2 4B acres of GM crops worldwide since 1996 pumping unlabeled O2 into the Global atmosphere.