People have been trying to "tame" nature for centuries. Look at monk Don Perignon's attempts to serve a flat Champagne, for starters. He spent as much energy unsuccessfully supressing the bubbles as he did coming up with the favourite quaff.
Then there is the centuries-old tradition of France's fois gras. At present a three-month moratorium has been placed on the food which involves force-feeding birds to expand their liver because of bird flu risks - but the controversial process remains written into national law in Paris as part of the "protected cultural and gastronomical heritage of France".
Now the debate over leading-edge genetically modified foods is about go up a gear or two in Washington, D.C.
Among recent innovations have been DuPont Pioneer’s waxy corn hybrid, while a Penn State plant scientist have found a way to prevent "browning" of white button mushrooms. Both of these are so new that they have so far been beyond the reach of government regulation.
New gene-editing techniques like CRISPR are making this possible, and they are underscoring the fact that the regulatory system hasn’t kept up with the breakneck pace of biotechnological innovation.
Agricultural markets are now bracing themselves for an explosion of new plants designed using the precise gene-editing technology CRISPR, and regulators in both the United States and the European Union are struggling with how to assess their safety.
The United States' framework for reviewing new biotechnology products was drafted in 1986, so it didn’t envisage modern technologies when they legally defined genetic engineering.
The first generation of GE crops used a bacterium to ferry genes from one organism into another.
But CRISPR can knock out or precisely edit DNA sequences without leaving behind any foreign DNA. In fact, the DNA of a gene-edited crop could end up looking nearly identical to that of a conventionally bred variety.
So back to that waxy corn and brownless mushrooms. Last month, the US Department of Agriculture judged the two CRISPR-edited crops to be exempt from its review process because neither contained genetic material from species considered to be "plant pests."
What this suggests is not that regulators are trying to evade their responsibilities, but that the definitions that they must work within simply are out of date. It says more about regulation than it does about the fast pace of innovation. The former needs to be beefed up, not the latter tamed. But as so often, if regulation gets beefed up, it also could end up numbing the innovation that genetically-modified foods rely upon.
But one company which has attracted more than its fair share of criticism in the genetic-engineering industry, is beleagured Monsanto Company (NYSE:MON).
The company, which fairly much invented genetically engineered crops and turned itself into the world's biggest seller of seeds, has become a victim of its success.
Firstly, because of the backlash from some consumer lobbies against genetically modified food, patents on seeds, lawsuits against farmers for saving and replanting those seeds, and a perceived corporate influence over government food policy.
But secondly, because its growth has now attracted the attention of another corporate, Germany's chemicals group Bayer (ETR:BAYN). The inventor of aspirin, Bayer has offered to buy Monsanto for $42bn. Bayer is a much bigger company than Monsanto because it also owns large divisions that make pharmaceuticals and industrial chemicals.
Bayer, as predator, saw its share price drop this week on the news, especially as shareholders did not relish the prospect of additional debt to pay for the takeover. What is more, on Friday, one of Bayer's shareholders, John Bennett of Henderson Global Investors, labelled the bid "arrogant empire-building" and an "immediate destruction" of shareholder value, according to a report from Reuters.
But Monsanto might not be ready to celebrate either as analysts reckon the board will view the offer as way below fair value.
The deal, if it comes to it, will also represent another major sign of the consolidation in the seeds and pesticides sector. DuPont (NYSE:DD) is merging with Dow Chemical (NYSE:DOW.WD), and the state-owned China National Chemical Corp. is buying Swiss-listed Syngenta (VTX:SYNN), which is currently the world's biggest seller of agricultural chemicals.
What's in a name? Well, speculation is growing that Bayer which has been around for a fair few decades longer, will seek to drop the Monsanto name. But given Monsanto's pioneering legacy, might it also rebrand the US operation Bayer-Monsanto? It might prove a diplomatic way out for the German company accused of selling neonicotinoid insecticides, which some accuse of harming bees. We can only hope that Bayer's investor relations department continue the bid campaign in a better style than they evidently began it.
Monsanto shares closed up 0.96% at $101.52 on Friday, while Bayer shares ended in Frankfurt up 1.16% at EUR89.54, having fallen more than 8% on Wednesday in the wake of the Monsanto offer.