RNA Crop Sprays, Terrana, and Why the Tech Raises Questions
“Terrana™ fuses nature’s intelligence with machine intelligence to generatively design versatile RNA-based solutions for every aspect of plant health from seed to stem – a revolution for modern agriculture.” Terrana is on the cutting edge ot transhumanism and should stop all experiments. ⁃ Patrick Wood, Editor.
In May 2023, Dr. Tenpenny wrote an article asking this: “what are they doing to our fruits and veggies?” Back then she flagged Apeel coatings that keep produce fresh for days. Since that article the debate around agricultural tech has intensified.
Who’s Behind It?
Terrana positions itself as an RNA platform for plants and promotes the line “it fuses nature’s intelligence with machine intelligence to design RNA-based solutions for every aspect of plant health from seed to stem.” Investors include Flagship Pioneering, which contributed $50 million and is known for helping launch Moderna. That connection fuels unease for many observers.
Company founders have said, “We can do so many things with this,” and that promise is exactly why critics are wary. The concept of crop resilience and plant health sounds helpful, but the breadth of possibilities invites scrutiny. Questions focus on intent, oversight, and long-term ecological effects.
What Are They Developing?
Terrana and others are exploring at least 15 directions for RNA in agriculture, including plant vaccines and protective agents. Much of the messaging emphasizes early-phase research and non-commercial status, which is the usual reassurance. Skeptics note that early research often expands quickly into real-world uses.
RNA approaches aim to reduce pesticide use by targeting pests, diseases, and stress with precision. That precision comes through gene silencing, a process that already exists in nature but is being replicated and engineered for specific targets. The worry is not only effectiveness but potential unintended impacts when that precision meets messy ecosystems.
RNA Use on Crops
There are two main RNA approaches in farming: plants engineered to produce protective RNA and sprayed RNA applications. The engineered route changes plant DNA to produce the RNA and is passed to future generations, making it a genetic modification. Spray-on RNA is presented as a non-genetic, transient pesticide-like application that breaks down in rain, sunlight, and soil.
Proponents say spray RNA affects only target pests and that humans already ingest RNA in food without harm. Regulators like the Environmental Protection Agency are expected to run safety assessments before approvals. Critics point out that past approvals, such as for widely used chemicals, did not always prevent large-scale problems.
Products Are Already In Use
RNA tech is not purely theoretical: SmartStax PRO Corn uses engineered RNA to combat the western corn rootworm and is planted in multiple countries. Calantha is a sprayable RNA insecticide targeting the Colorado potato beetle and received regulatory approval in 2024. Other crops and sprays under development include soybeans with altered oil profiles and non-browning apples, plus measures for armyworms, caterpillars, mildew, and Fusarium.
The Possible Future?
Regulators and manufacturers argue that RNA sprays do not change DNA and cannot survive digestion or affect mammalian cells. They also claim specificity prevents cross-species effects, insisting “They’re incompatible with human genes!” Yet some scientific pathways, like RNA interference in humans, are acknowledged and raise questions about delivery, persistence, and exposure. The public memory of contested safety claims from vaccine rollouts heightens skepticism about blanket assurances.
Why Worry?
Concerns include environmental persistence, harm to beneficial insects like bees, and unknown effects if engineered insects interact with wildlife or humans. Alpha gal syndrome illustrates how unexpected biological interactions can cause severe reactions even without bioengineering: a tick bite triggered a fatal response in a documented case. Meanwhile, targeted genetic edits, such as GalSafe pigs engineered in 2020 to remove alpha-gal, show how quickly interventions can move from rare conditions to engineered solutions.
That mix of novelty, rapid development, and incomplete understanding is why many call for cautious oversight and transparent data sharing. Trust in regulatory institutions is fragile, and history includes instances where oversight fell short. Watching these technologies closely and demanding strong, independent safety data makes sense for anyone concerned about food, health, and ecosystems.