Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

WEEKLY_WATCH_number_84

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

> WEEKLY_WATCH_number_84

> " WEEKLY_WATCH " <info

> Thu, 5 Aug 2004 22:59:56 +0100

 

>

---------------------------

> WEEKLY WATCH number 84 - and monthly review

>

---------------------------

>

---------------------------

> from Claire Robinson, WEEKLY WATCH editor

>

---------------------------

>

> There's a subtle but interesting development in the

> way biotech proponents push GM for the third world.

> Like contaminated meat buried in a hamburger, GM is

> being bracketed with widely accepted or

> vaguely-defined " goods " like irrigation and " modern

> agricultural technologies " in the hope that the

> entire package will be swallowed without question.

> The increasing use of this grimy used-car salesman

> technique (get the customer to confirm their name is

> Smith, and to agree that the weather has turned

> cold, and they're more likely to acquiesce to your

> next suggestion that they buy the car) points to the

> lack of genuine success stories from the biotech

> camp and is testament to the industry's growing

> desperation (see FOCUS ON AFRICA).

>

> In the US, a second county has voted to ban the

> production of GM crops and animals, and there are

> more ballots in the pipeline (see NORTH AMERICA).

> But industry's main focus is on the federal

> government. In the run-up to the election, the

> Democrats have recruited a former Monsanto man,

> lobbyist Toby Moffet, to bring down presidential

> candidate and people's champion Ralph Nader (see

> LOBBYWATCH: US ELECTION SPECIAL).

>

> Finally, watch out for some encouraging reviews of

> Dr Ignacio Chapela's tenure issue and, relatedly, of

> the damage wrought by Berkeley's controversial

> academic-industrial partnership with the Swiss GM

> giant Syngenta - CORPORATE TAKE OVER OF SCIENCE

>

> Claire claire

> www.lobbywatch.org / www.gmwatch.org

>

>

---------------------------

> CONTENTS

>

---------------------------

> PHARMING

> FARMING

> FOCUS ON AFRICA

> FOCUS ON ASIA

> NORTH AMERICA

> EURO-NEWS

> CORPORATE TAKEOVER OF SCIENCE

> TALES OF TWO GENE SCIENTISTS

> LOBBYWATCH: US ELECTION SPECIAL

> REST OF THE MONTH'S TOP STORIES

> DONATIONS

>

>

---------------------------

> PHARMING

>

---------------------------

>

> + USDA TOLD TO DISCLOSE BIOPHARM LOCATIONS IN HAWAII

> The federal government must reveal where companies

> grow GM pharmaceutical crops in Hawaii, a judge

> ruled on 4 August. Public interest groups are

> seeking the information to force the government to

> study the environmental impact of the crops. The

> government and industry contend public disclosure

> could lead to crop vandalism and corporate espionage

> of trade secrets.

>

> US District Judge David Ezra ordered the US Dept of

> Agriculture to identify where four companies have

> received permits for open-field testing of

> pharmaceutical crops in Hawaii and to reveal the

> locations to the environmental group Earthjustice

> and the Center for Food Safety, a nonprofit.

>

> " It's definitely a victory, " said Isaac Moriwake, an

> attorney for Earthjustice. " It's basically an

> affirmation that the defendants haven't been able to

> show that this kind of information is confidential. "

>

> Ezra gave the USDA another 90 days to prove that

> releasing the locations to the public would cause

> irreparable damage to the biotech industry. That

> step could force biotech companies to look elsewhere

> to conduct their pharma crop tests, a biotech

> industry representative said.

>

> Representatives for both sides of the issue said

> this would be the first time in the US that

> locations of biopharm tests would be revealed to an

> outside party. That could set a precedent for

> similar disclosures in other states and could pave

> the way for disclosing the locations of all GM crop

> research.

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4206

>

> + BAN PLANT-BASED GM PHARMACEUTICALS

> Prof Joe Cummins and Dr Mae-Wan Ho call for a global

> forum and a ban on testing pharm crops, especially

> in Third World countries.

>

> Excerpt:

> There is an urgent need for proper international

> regulation on the testing and production of

> plant-based pharmaceuticals. The first step may be a

> wider discussion of the drawbacks and dangers of

> plant-based pharmaceuticals as well the " advantages "

> put forward by proponents in academe and

> corporations. The overlooked dangers of pharm crops

> include pharmaceuticals that are toxic, that could

> produce immune sensitization followed by

> anaphylaxis, or oral tolerance leading to loss of

> immunity to pathogens; and general loss of

> confidence in the food supply.

> http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Banpharmcrops.php

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4195

>

>

---------------------------

> FARMING

>

---------------------------

>

> + GENETICALLY MODIFIED SCAM

> An excellent article from Julie Newman, National

> Spokesperson of the Network of Concerned Farmers,

> looks at GM crops from an Australian farmer's

> viewpoint.

>

> Excerpt:

> ...we have been reassured that consumers will be

> able to have a choice as coexistence is possible and

> farmers can market as non-GM if they want to. Wrong

> again! It has been proven that farmers cannot avoid

> unwanted GM contamination in our crops. Rather than

> expect the GM grower to contain their product, the

> GM industry expected farmers to all market on the

> consumer rejected GM market to remove opposition and

> deny consumer choice.

>

> For those of us farmers wanting to market on the

> consumer preferred " GM-free " market we were expected

> to tolerate the costs and liabilities involved. We

> were expected to break the law and market

> contaminated produce after signing guarantees and

> indemnities declaring no contamination.

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4197

>

>

---------------------------

> FOCUS ON AFRICA

>

---------------------------

>

> + GMOS THE WAY OUT OF HUNGER?

> As Kenya faces another famine, " experts " are

> announcing in the press that irrigation and adoption

> of GM crops could be the way out of hunger.

>

> An article in the East African Standard says: " Dr

> [Florence] Wambugu, who was behind the production of

> the first genetically modified sweet potato in

> Africa in the early 1990s, says that GMOs are the

> only way out of the food crises in less developed

> countries. She says that biotechnology can easily

> develop drought and pest resistant crops. "

>

> Biotechnology can easily develop drought resistant

> crops? Not according to Professor Tim Flowers,

> School of Biological Sciences, University of Sussex,

> who says, " Evaluation of claims that biotechnology

> can produce salt-tolerant crops reveals that, after

> ten years of research using transgenic plants to

> alter salt tolerance, the value of this approach has

> yet to be established in the field. Biotechnologists

> have reasons for exaggerating their abilities to

> manipulate plants. If 'biotechnology' is to

> contribute tolerant crops, these crops may still be

> decades from commercial availability. The generation

> of drought tolerant crops is likely to have a

> similar period of development. "

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=1564

>

> Note how Wambugu, who hyped the now failed GM sweet

> potato project for years, has to reach beyond GM for

> biotech success stories: " One example of successful

> application of biotechnology has been the experiment

> involving farmers growing tissue-culture bananas in

> East Africa. Farmers who have participated in the

> trials have trebled their incomes and doubled their

> yields. "

>

> Recently Wambugu trumpeted another biotech success

> with eucalyptus trees but the suspicion is that

> these are also most likely the product of tissue

> culture and not GM.

>

> Note also that the article links irrigation and

> biotech as if the availability of water and GM were

> all part of the same wave of the future!

> For more on Wambugu:

> http://www.gmwatch.org/profile1.asp?PrId=131 & page=W

>

>

---------------------------

> FOCUS ON ASIA

>

---------------------------

>

> + ISAAA SET TO LAUNCH KNOWLEDGE CENTRE IN INDIA

> As part ofthe current biotech industry assault on

> India, the US-based International Service for the

> Aquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA) is

> slated to launch a new 'knowledge center' in India -

> it's second in Asia - to be housed in the

> International Crops Research Institute for the

> Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT).

>

> This 'knowledge centre' will be launched at the

> three-day conference on 'Agricultural Biotechnology:

> Ushering in the Second Green Revolution' beginning

> August 10. The conference is being organised jointly

> by ISAAA, Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce

> and Industry (FICCI) and the Chennai-based MS

> Swaminathan Research Foundation, as a means of

> hyping GM and pushing for a revised regulatory

> system in India that will help to fast-track GMOs.

>

> The ISAAA, backed by the biotech industry, already

> has centres in North America, Africa and south-east

> Asia.

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4199

>

> For lots more on ISAAA:

> http://www.gmwatch.org/profile1.asp?PrId=66 & page=I

>

> + CLARIFICATION: SHANTHU SHANTHARAM

>

> In an item in Weekly Watch 83, " INDUSTRY ASSAULT ON

> INDIA - FAST-TRACKING CAMPAIGN CONTINUES, BIG PRO-GM

> CONFERENCE COMING " , we said that Dr Shanthu

> Shantharam, who is lobbying for the faster uptake of

> GM crops in India, is an employee of GM giant

> Syngenta.

>

> Dr Shantharam has asked us to point out that he is

> no longer a Syngenta employee but is " an independent

> consultant on biotechnology and biosafety and

> environmental risk assessment of GM crops with my

> own consulting firm of Biologistics International. "

>

> Our statement that Dr Shantharam is an employee of

> Syngenta was based on information made available on

> the website of his own company, Biologistics

> International - still there at the time of writing:

>

> " Dr Shanthu Shantharam is the Regulatory Compliance

> Manager at Plant Sciences Division, Syngenta Basel,

> Switzerland. Until recently, he was the Head of

> Stakeholder Relations and Technology Communications

> in the same company. At the corporate headquarters,

> Shanthu is leading a project to develop company

> guidelines and standard operating procedures to

> ensure highest level of biotechnology regulatory

> compliance in different parts of the world where

> Syngenta is conducting biotech business... "

> http://www.biologistics.us/profile.htm

>

> The use of the present tense seems unambiguous.

> However, we accept Dr Shantharam's assurance that he

> has now left Syngenta and are happy to correct the

> record.

>

> Dr Shantharam's recent exit from Syngenta does not,

> however, reassure us of his independence. Regarding

> the issue of someone acting on an apparently

> independent basis when they have been an employee of

> a heavily interested party, note our comment on

> ex-Syngenta employee Willy De Greef's recent

> contribution to Nature Biotechnology:

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4130

>

> The Centre for Science in the Public Interest

> recently recommended that " journal editors require

> authors to disclose any financial arrangements they

> have had with private firms within the past three

> years, regardless of whether those arrangements

> relate to the subject of the article, and that the

> conflicts be published if they are in any way

> related to the article's subject. "

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4137

>

> Dr Shantharam also complains that we have

> mischaracterized his views on Bt cotton and the

> adequacy of regulatory systems. We maintain that we

> have represented his views fairly but leave it to

> readers to judge for themselves. To see Dr

> Shantharam's email in full along with our reply, see

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4207

> To see Dr Shantharam's article on how GM foods are

> regulated, see

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4194

>

>

-------

> NORTH AMERICA

>

-------

>

> + TRINITY COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, BANS GM CROPS AND

> ANIMALS

> On 3 August Trinity County, California became the

> second county in America (after Mendocino Cty) to

> ban the production of GE crops and animals. By a

> vote of 3-1, Trinity County Supervisors adopted the

> ban in an effort to protect Trinity's local economy

> and environment. Four other California counties will

> vote in November to ban GE crops (Marin, Butte,

> Humboldt, and San Luis Obispo).

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4202

>

> + GM SUPERSPUDS FOR CHINA?

> Canadian company Penn Biotech Inc are promising to

> meet the burgeoning Chinese appetite for french

> fries and potato chips with superspuds

> " bio-engineered " by the Korea Research Institute of

> Bioscience and Biotechnology. However, a closer look

> at the details has raised the suspicions of The

> Vancouver Sun. The paper reports that Penn Biotech

> is listed on the OTC Bulletin Board, the dregs of

> North American equity markets. It started trading

> last October after acquiring rights to the

> bio-engineered potatoes from the Korea Research

> Institute of Bioscience and Biotechnology. Purchase

> price was $31,228 US, plus a one-per-cent royalty on

> gross sales.

>

> The paper says " this extremely modest price tag

> indicates that the technology isn't worth much,

> unless the institute is banking on a big royalty

> stream. But if it is, why did it sell the rights to

> a company with no track record whatsoever? "

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4204

>

>

-------

> EURO-NEWS

>

-------

>

> + BIG CONFERENCE TO BRING BIOTECH TO EUROPE

> An 'ABIC 2004' conference in Cologne (12-15 Sept

> 2004) aims to bring 'AgBiotech back to Europe':

> " With the imminent lift of the de facto moratorium

> on genetically modified food, the implementation of

> new European regulations and a more competitive

> European market, this conference is important as

> ever to give new impulses to the European AgBiotech

> research and AgBiotech business in Europe. "

>

> Curiously, ABIC appears to have few European

> connections. Here are some of its directors (more at

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4204) -

> most of whom seem to connect to Canada, and the

> prairie city of Saskatoon in particular.

>

> *Bernard Laarveld - Chair: ABIC Foundation. Head of

> Department of Animal and Poultry Science, University

> of Saskatchewan, Canada. Dr. Laarveld actively

> supports economic and corporate development for the

> Saskatoon biotech community. Also co-founder of

> Minerva Animal Health Corporation Inc.

>

> *Ashley O'Sullivan - President and CEO Ag-West

> Biotech, Saskatoon, Canada. Previously worked for

> Monsanto Canada.

>

> *Armand Lavoie - Saskatoon, Canada. Vice President

> Western Canada of Foragen Technologies Management

> Inc.

>

> *Lawrence B. Schook - Chicago, Illinois, USA.

> President and CSO Pyxis Genomics which has

> operations in Canada and US

>

> *Graham Scoles - Associate Dean. College of

> Agriculture, University of Saskatchewan, Canada.

> Teaching and research in area of plant biotech.

>

> *Gerry Brown - Director, Business Development

> Branch, Saskatchewan Research Council. Experience of

> broad range of corporate environments including

> small biotech company and Esso/Exxon family.

>

> *Roger Kemble - President of Syngenta Biotech, Inc.

> (SBI), Research Triangle Park, NC, USA. Also worked

> for Allelix Inc. (in Canada) and Pioneer Hi-Bred,

> prior to Syngenta.

>

> You can see why this crowd want agbiotech " to go

> Europe! " As it says of ABIC's Chairman:

> " Dr. Laarveld actively supports economic and

> corporate development for the Saskatoon biotech

> community. "

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4204

>

>

---------------------------

> CORPORATE TAKEOVER OF SCIENCE

>

---------------------------

>

> + REVIEW OF TENURE REFUSAL UNCOVERS CONFLICTS OF

> INTEREST

> The academic rights of an ecologist at the

> University of California, Berkeley, may have been

> violated when he was denied tenure last year,

> according to a report from the academic senate.

>

> Ignacio Chapela was an outspoken critic of

> Berkeley's controversial academic-industrial

> partnership with the Swiss agribiotech firm

> Syngenta, which ended last year. He was also the

> lead author of a disputed paper in Nature in which

> he asserted that genes from genetically modified

> crops had flowed into Mexican maize, and had become

> scattered throughout the genome (D. Quist and I. H.

> Chapela Nature 414, 541-543; 2001). After a storm of

> criticism about the paper, Nature withdrew its

> support for the article, but the authors stand by

> their research.

>

> Against this background, Chapela was denied tenure

> at Berkeley's College of Natural Resources in

> November 2003 (see Nature 426, 591; 2003). He

> appealed.

>

> The resulting report, issued on 28 June, claims that

> Jasper Rine, a geneticist at the university who sat

> on a key committee reviewing Chapela's tenure, had

> conflicts of interest. It says that Rine had

> financial dealings with biotech firms, oversaw the

> Syngenta agreement and had cited Chapela's Nature

> paper as an example of poor science in one of his

> classes. Both the dean of Chapela's college and his

> department chair requested that Rine be taken from

> the committee four times; but Rine did not excuse

> himself nor did the committee chair ask him to

> leave. The report also says there was

> " unjustifiable " delay in the tenure-review process.

>

> " I am glad the senate is able to rise to the

> occasion, " says Chapela, whose contract has been

> extended while he appeals. ... As the senate

> continues its inquiry, Chapela is hoping for a

> second tenure review. He has also filed two claims

> that may precede a lawsuit. In April, he accused the

> university of discrimination, saying that he was

> denied tenure because he is Hispanic. Early last

> month, he claimed he was victimized by the

> university for speaking out against the Syngenta

> deal.

> - Nature 430, 598, 05 August 2004

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4203

>

> + PEER REVIEWERS GIVE THUMBS-DOWN TO

> BERKELEY-NOVARTIS DEAL

> A team of scholars says universities should avoid

> unusual and controversial research agreements such

> as the one the University of California at Berkeley

> had with the company formerly known as Novartis. The

> university had invited the team of outside scholars

> to evaluate its relationship with the company.

>

> The arrangement at Berkeley, in which nearly an

> entire department of biology participated in a

> five-year, $25-million corporate-sponsorship

> agreement, was " outside the mainstream for research

> contracts with industry, " the team of evaluators

> concludes.

>

> " While an intriguing experiment, there appears

> little rationale for repeating the approach, " they

> say in their report.

>

> The report also suggests that Berkeley's

> relationship with Novartis created a potential

> conflict of interest among administrators that

> affected the tenure review of a faculty member,

> Ignacio Chapela, who was an outspoken critic of the

> agreement. He was denied tenure in late 2003. The

> report does not offer an opinion on whether Mr

> Chapela should have received tenure, but it does

> state that " there is little doubt " that the

> Berkeley-Novartis relationship was a factor in the

> tenure decision.

>

> The agreement " played a very clear role and an

> unsatisfactory role in the tenure process " of Mr

> Chapela, said Lawrence Busch, a professor of

> sociology at Michigan State University, who headed

> the evaluation.

> ...

> The deal created the impression that the department

> was " on the dole " and " biased toward the funding

> source, " [busch] said. " Universities as institutions

> can only be objective observers on the scientific

> and regulatory scene to the extent that some

> distance remains between them and industry funding

> sources. "

> - Chronicles of Higher Education, July 30, 2004

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4200

>

> + TAVERNE'S CONFLICT OF INTEREST

> Lord Dick Taverne recently contributed a pro-MMR

> (measles, mumps, and rubella) vaccine article to the

> British Medical Journal in which he argues against

> legal aid being granted for a claim against its

> manufacturers.

>

http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/329/7459/239

>

> In the article he is billed as the Chairman of Sense

> about Science. The BMJ requires disclosure of

> interests. Glaxo SmithKline is a major vaccine

> manufacturer and, specifically, an MMR manufacturer.

> Taverne fails to mention any link between Sense

> about Science and Glaxo even though the company is

> listed as one of the lobby group's donors.

>

http://www.lobbywatch.org/profile1.asp?PrId=127 & page=T

> http://www.senseaboutscience.org.uk/Donors.htm

>

> + REGULATORS THREATENED FOR VOICING DOUBTS ABOUT

> PRODUCT SAFETY

> Richard Brook, CEO of the charity Mind and a member

> of the UK government's Medicines and Healthcare

> Products Regulation Agency, resigned from the Agency

> when it tried to cover up serious side-effects of

> the controversial anti-depressant Seroxat. Brook

> says he was threatened with legal action by

> Professor Kent Woods, chief executive of the MHRA,

> if he revealed the data. Brook says his colleagues

> at the Agency " appeared more interested in putting

> their reputations, and those of drugs companies,

> before the safety of patients. "

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4205

>

> Brook is not the first member of a supposedly

> independent committee to come under heavy pressure

> to fall in line with industry's wishes. During the

> UK government's public debate on GM in 2003, two

> scientists, Carlo Leifert and Andrew Stirling, fell

> foul of pro-GM members of the UK government's

> Science Review Panel. Leifert resigned and Stirling

> said his career and future funding had been

> threatened unless he stopped questioning the safety

> of GM foods.

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=1214

>

> This month, two members of the UK government's

> committee on radiation risks were barred by

> government lawyers from voicing fears about the

> dangers from radiation from nuclear plants. Dr Chris

> Busby and Richard Bramhall say the risk of cancer

> from low-level radiation dangers is greater than

> realised. But lawyers at Defra, the environment

> ministry, have sent letters to all 12 members of the

> committee warning them that they could be sued for

> defamation if they include Bramhall and Busby's

> 'minority report' in their report.

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4205

>

>

-------

> TALES OF TWO GENE SCIENTISTS

>

-------

>

> + LIFE, THE UNIVERSE, AND... NOTHING

> Francis Crick, the scientist credited with

> discovering the molecular construction of DNA, who

> died in July, was " a great scientist who was deluded

> about the power of science " , says Bryan Appleyard in

> an interesting retrospective for the Sunday Times.

>

> Excerpt:

> Crick ... produced a strange book in 1994 called The

> Astonishing Hypothesis. What, he said, was

> astonishing was that identity and free will are

> nothing more than " a vast assembly of nerve cells " .

> Why such a blank statement of an ancient scientific

> orthodoxy should be astounding to anybody was never

> explained. In addition, we have had the hard

> scientistic propaganda of Stephen Hawking and

> Richard Dawkins. The latter's " selfish gene "

> hypothesis turns the human being into a mere

> gene-replicating machine. Such strange fetishisation

> of the gene has proved to be one of the most bizarre

> and implausible post- Christian cults.

>

> Meanwhile, James Watson, one of the least pleasant

> individuals with whom I have ever had dealings, has

> travelled the conferences of the world making

> increasingly shocking statements based on his

> personal creed of scientism. I once asked him: if we

> found the gene for homosexuality and removed it from

> the human gene pool, what would be the impact on

> society? He thought for a moment, then replied,

> " Less ballet. "

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4205

>

> + GENE THERAPY PIONEER WF ANDERSON ARRESTED FOR

> MOLESTATION

> Internationally prominent gene therapy researcher Dr

> William French Anderson has been arrested. He's

> charged with sexually molesting a girl over a

> four-year period. The 67-year-old scientist was

> arrested at his Los Angeles home. The county

> district attorney's office says he's charged with

> six felony counts of assault. It accuses Anderson,

> who was the girl's karate coach, of abusing her at

> his home from 1997 to 2001.

>

> Anderson is the University of Southern California

> researcher who has been leading the charge on both

> somatic and human germline gene therapy.

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4205

>

>

---------------------------

> LOBBYWATCH: US ELECTION SPECIAL

>

---------------------------

>

> + US: CAN MONSANTO'S RAIDER VANQUISH NADER?

> Toby Moffett is a well-connected Washington lobbyist

> employed at the Livingston Group, a powerful lobby

> firm begun by former Republican representative

> Robert Livingston. Moffett was previously a

> vice-president of Monsanto. In his youth Moffett

> worked for Ralph Nader and now as he did in 2000 he

> is trading on his " Nader's Raider " past to raise

> hefty contributions for a well-oiled attack campaign

> against Nader's run for the presidency.

>

> According to the Seattle Times, " anti-Nader groups

> have been organized for months. But the efforts have

> taken 'a huge move' recently in fund raising,

> research and a detailed attack plan, Moffett said.

> 'This guy [Nader] is still a huge threat,' he said.

> 'We're just not going to make the same mistake we

> made in 2000.' ... A memo given to potential

> supporters said Moffett's group, United Progressives

> for Victory, will do research, community organizing,

> media outreach and Internet marketing aimed at

> weakening Nader's standing. Nader called it a smear

> campaign and said, 'It's the Democrats' undemocratic

> attempt' to quash third-party candidates. "

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4201

>

> A black woman and former Green candidate, Donna

> Warren, has told the Democrats to stop trying to

> sabotage Nader:

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4201

> Warren launched a lawsuit against the CIA and the US

> Justice Dept for deliberately allowing crack cocaine

> to flow into California as part of the US's support

> for Contra rebels in Nicaragua. She lost her son to

> crack cocaine.

> http://www.donnawarren.com/ciacont.html

>

> + CANDIDATE CAUSES STIR IN CONGRESSIONAL CAMPAIGN

> OVER HIS SUPPORT FOR EUGENICS

> Nashville, Tenn.: Republican congressional candidate

> James L. Hart acknowledges that he is an

> " intellectual outlaw. " He is an unapologetic

> supporter of eugenics. He believes the country will

> look " like one big Detroit " if it doesn't eliminate

> welfare and immigration. He believes that if blacks

> were integrated centuries ago, the automobile never

> would have been invented.

>

> He shows up at voters' homes wearing a bulletproof

> vest and carrying a gun, and tells them that " white

> children deserve the same rights as everyone else. "

>

> Despite his radical views, Hart may end up winning

> the Republican nomination because he is the only GOP

> candidate on the ballot in Thursday's primary.

>

> " I would characterize him as a racist, an elitist, "

> said write-in candidate Dennis Bertrand, a financial

> analyst and former military officer. " His idea of

> ... genetically altering the human race in order to

> build a super race with super intelligence is

> appalling. "

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4201

>

>

-------

> REST OF THE MONTH'S TOP STORIES

>

-------

>

> + 900 INDIAN FARMERS COMMITTED SUICIDE IN LAST 2

> MONTHS

> In India, in the past two months, 900 farmers have

> committed suicide. It's a stark reminder of Devinder

> Sharma's recent warning that to talk of the need to

> usher in the " second Green Revolution " without first

> ascertaining where the equation has gone wrong with

> the first " will be mankind's greatest folly " . The

> tragedy is, says Devinder, that while the scientific

> community and the policy makers will escape

> scot-free, it is farmers in the years to come who

> will continue to be sacrificed on the altar of

> agricultural development.

>

> Devinder is calling for an end to the obscene

> diversion of public funds into hugely expensive GM

> crops while millions are going hungry. He points out

> that in India nutritious food containing on average

> around 9 per cent in protein is being left to rot in

> the countryside, while biotechnologists are

> celebrating the production of GM potatoes containing

> a mere 2.5 per cent of protein.

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4070

>

> + INDUSTRY ASSAULT ON INDIA - FAST-TRACKING CAMPAIGN

> CONTINUES, BIG PRO-GM CONFERENCE COMING

> PV Satheesh of the Deccan Development Society has

> warned how, unperturbed by the problems already

> inflicted on the country by GM cotton, " the powerful

> industrial lobby in India has been instrumental in a

> process that might completely dismantle the Genetic

> Engineering Approval Committee of the Ministry of

> Environment and Forests and hand over the control to

> an industry-dominated committee in the name of a

> fast track approval " .

>

> As part of the biotech industry's campaign to weaken

> India's regulatory system, the Federation of Indian

> Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI) will hold

> a big GM promotional - an " International Conference

> on Agricultural Biotechnology " entitled " Ushering in

> the Second Green Revolution " at Federation House,

> New Delhi, Aug 10-12, 2004.

>

> FICCI is operating in partnership with:

>

> (1) The International Service for the Acquisition of

> Agri-Biotech Application (ISAAA) - a U.S.-based, GM

> promotion and 'transfer' agency whose board has

> contained leading biotech industry executives and

> which enjoys multi-million dollar funding from

> Bayer, Cargill, Dow, Monsanto, Novartis, Pioneer,

> Syngenta, in addition to funding from the

> Rockefeller Foundation and Western governmental

> funding agencies.

> http://www.gmwatch.org/profile1.asp?PrId=66 & page=I

> and

>

> (2) The MS Swaminathan Research Foundation (MSSRF)

> headed by the green revolution scientist, MS

> Swaminathan, who has been in charge of a government

> task force set up to revise India's regulatory

> system. Swaminathan has a disturbing talent for

> dressing up the industry's agenda in the rhetoric of

> village India, women's empowerment, etc.

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4179

>

> The main conference organisers, FICCI, has already

> stated that it wants to see the Genetic Engineering

> Approval Committee's powers curtailed by " changes in

> rules relating to production and handling of

> micro-organisms, cells and genetically modified

> organisms (GMOs). "

>

> The biotech lobby's main concern is over what they

> see as stagnation in the GM crop sector in India.

> Shantu Shantharam spells it out with his complaint,

> " all we have is one stupid Bt cotton to talk about. "

> India's prominence within the developing world makes

> what the biotech lobby sees as the slow introduction

> of GM crops into India particularly frustrating.

>

> Significantly, Shantaram, who is a frequent

> spokesman on these issues, presents himself simply

> as " Dr Shantu Shantaram, Biologistics International

> USA " . In fact, Dr Shantaram is a former employee of

> GM giant Syngenta.

>

> While at Syngenta, Shantaram developed the

> corporation's PR strategies for biotech projects,

> including Golden Rice. Prior to that he worked for

> the US Department of Agriculture. Biologistics

> International is Shantaram's " consulting firm " on

> biosafety. No doubt he will be putting that

> expertise to good use to help India usher in its

> " Second Green Revolution " .

>

> Much of the drive to reform India's regulatory

> system has its roots in a forum on regulatory

> development set up by Syngenta, in which MS

> Swaminathan took a prominent part. Syngenta's forum

> established many of the principles behind the

> proposals for regulatory reform now being brought

> forward.

>

> The aim seems clear: to weaken India's regulatory

> system and then use it as a blueprint to sell to

> other Asian countries - just as South Africa's

> fast-track system is now being promoted as a model

> for the entire continent.

>

> See:

> Ushering in the Second Green Revolution -

> International conference in New Delhi

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4179

> Clipping the wings of India's regulators

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4183

> Industry asault on India

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4193

>

> + AFRICABIO EXPOSED AS INDUSTRY LOBBY GROUP

> Until now AfricaBio, which presents itself as a

> civil society organisation - " The NGO taking

> biotechnology to the people of Africa " - has

> remained vague about who it represents and who funds

> it. It describes itself as " a non-political,

> non-profit biotechnology association " and claims a

> " wide spectrum " of support.

>

> Some, however, have questioned its claims to be a

> disinterested part of civil society. At the World

> Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in

> late August 2002, AfricaBio unsuccessfully sought to

> gain formal access to civil society sessions at the

> Summit.

>

> AfricaBio complained that " despite repeated

> requests " to be included in the programme, its

> " participation was refused " on the grounds that it

> was an industry body seeking to dilute the impact of

> genuine NGOs. Despite the refusal, AfricaBio's

> supporters did attend the Civil Society Forum and

> worked with others to undermine it, by first

> expressing dissent from the floor and then staging a

> walkout. AfricaBio was also represented at a

> carefully staged pro-GM protest rally at the Summit.

>

> But disputing AfricaBio's claim to a broad-based

> civil-society style membership has been difficult in

> the absence of precise details about that membership

> - details AfricaBio has consistently refused to

> furnish.

>

> However, Mariam Mayet, a lawyer with the African

> Centre for Biosafety, was present at AfricaBio's

> launch on 27 October 1999. At that launch a list of

> " founding members " of AfricaBio was on a sheet in

> the folder given out to participants.

>

> They include AgrEvo South Africa; Carnia Seed [this

> has been bought by Monsanto]; Delta and Pine Lands

> SA. Inc; Monsanto SA Ltd (Monsanto has voting rights

> in AfricaBio); Novartis South Africa Ltd; Pioneer

> Hi-Bred RSA Ltd; Sensako [a seed company that has

> been bought by Monsanto]; Innovation Biotechnology

> [company owned by Muffy Koch who is on a

> sub-committee of the Advisory Committee which

> provides expert technical advice on South Africa's

> regulatory decisions on GM]; University of Cape

> Town, Dept of Microbiology [the Dept is headed by

> Jennifer Thompson, who is also an advisor to the

> biotech-industry funded Council for Biotechnology

> Information in the US, a Board Member of the

> biotech-industry backed ISAAA and Chair of the

> African Agricultural Technology Foundation, which

> receives backing from the industry and USAID to

> introduce GM crops into Africa].

>

> Note that under AfricaBio's membership and voting

> rights, business members have 5 votes, while

> research organisations and non-business members

> have, respectively, 2 votes and 1 vote.

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4031

>

> + ROW OVER MUTANT AIDS DRUG

> South Africa is to become the guinea pig for the

> production and testing of an HIV/Aids vaccine that

> will be grown in GM plants. But local environmental

> activists have warned they will fight the project,

> for which the European Union has granted 12 million

> euro (about R80-million) over five years.

>

> The first field trial of the GM vaccine is likely to

> be carried out in South Africa because there are

> fears that crops might be vandalised in the UK. The

> trial will be carried out by the Centre for

> Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), based in

> Pretoria. Possible host plants for the drug include

> maize and tobacco.

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4185

>

> The irony of this proposal to genetically engineer

> an anti-HIV drug into plants will not be lost on

> those who have read Leonard Horowitz's seminal book,

> Emerging Viruses: AIDS and Ebola - Nature, Accident

> or Intentional? (Tetrahedron, 1996). Horowitz

> follows a scientific paper trail which concludes

> that the HIV virus was either accidentally or

> deliberately created through genetic engineering in

> US laboratories.

>

> + GM 'PHARMING' PROJECT FOR EUROPE

> In an attempt to head off public hostility to GM in

> Europe, the industry has shifted its focus from food

> to pharming. The European Union has handed over 12

> million in taxpayer Euros to research the production

> of drugs in plants - and the UK's John Innes Centre

> is among the first in line to trouser its share of

> the cash. Of course, the European public won't

> tolerate pharmacrops growing amongst its food crops,

> so the dirty side of the business will be done in

> Africa!

>

> The aim of the " pharming " project is advertised as

> being to use plants to produce vaccines and

> treatments against major diseases including AIDS,

> rabies, diabetes and TB. Which sounds very noble,

> but GM WATCH has already discovered that one of the

> two projects planned for the UK involves developing

> cheap pig vaccines, presumably to assist industrial

> agriculture.

>

> The consortium, called Pharma-Planta, will develop

> the concept from plant modification through to

> clinical trials. The scientists involved will be all

> too familiar to GM WATCH readers: Phil Dale, who

> worked so hard to bring us GM food plants, Paul

> Christou, who was at the forefront of the attacks on

> Ignacio Chapela over his maize contamination

> research, and Julian Ma, who has been at Peter

> Lachmann's shoulder in his attacks on the BMA and

> others.

>

> The John Innes Centre will also be involved in

> " exploring biosafety issues " associated with pharma

> plants.

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4118

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4141

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4131

>

> GeneWatch UK report on pharma crops:

>

http://www.genewatch.org/CropsAndFood/Reports/Producing_Drugs_in_GM_Crops.pdf

>

> + THE TRUTH ABOUT THE " NGOs " BEHIND THE LETTER TO

> THE FAO

> A letter from representatives of " NGOs " to the UN

> Food and Ag Organisation in support of that body's

> recent report hyping GM crops for the third world,

> brings a whole new meaning to the word " NGO " .

>

> Most of the signatory organisations are free-market

> libertarian groups who campaign against restrictions

> on almost anything, i.e. they're anti-Kyoto, pro-GM,

> pro-smokers' rights, etc. Several receive funding

> from biotech corporations like Monsanto, plus other

> corporate sponsors. For instance, one signatory, the

> Free Market Foundation in South Africa, acknowledges

> funding from GlaxoSmithKline, Monsanto South Africa,

> Eli Lilly, British American Tobacco, and Exxon

> Mobil.

>

> And then there's signatory Horacio Marquez, a

> Partner in The Latin America Finance Group, Inc. of

> Princeton, New Jersey. If you think they don't sound

> much like your normal NGO, you're right. They're

> investment bankers! LAFG at one time headed a group

> planning to take over Chiquita, the controversial

> multinational (formerly United Fruit). One can

> imagine what a commitment such an " NGO " must have to

> safeguarding the future of small farmers!

>

> You can read the letter at

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4165

> We've provided links below many of the signatories

> to GM WATCH or other profiles where you can find out

> more about the background of the signatories and

> what kind of " NGOs " they represent.

>

> + HEALTH CANADA FIRES 3 SCIENTISTS

> Three senior Health Canada scientists known for

> questioning the department's commitment to

> veterinary drug safety have been fired. Health

> Canada claims the reason for the termination of Shiv

> Chopra, Margaret Haydon and Gerard Lambert has

> nothing to do with their outspokenness.

>

> But Steve Hindle, president of the Professional

> Institute of the Public Service of Canada,

> disagrees: " This is retribution for having spoken

> out about what's going on at Health Canada and the

> concerns they have around the safety of drugs for

> veterinary use, " he said.

>

> Chopra and Haydon protested against the approval in

> Canada of Monsanto's GE bovine growth hormone,

> variously known as rBGH, BGH or by its brand name

> Posilac. In the wake of Chopra's and Haydon's

> revelations, the drug was not approved in Canada and

> is now quietly being withdrawn from sale in the US

> by Monsanto. It's also banned in the EU.

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4143

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4153

>

> + FUNDING AND BIASES NEED TO BE EXPOSED BY MEDIA AND

> SCIENCE JOURNALS

> Two articles from the Center for Science in the

> Public Interest address the vital need to disclose

> possible conflicts of interest of those who

> generate/author reports in the media and science

> journals.

> Full articles:

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4137

> Summaries:

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4168

>

> + EU HALTS GM AGAIN

> The EU's 25 national governments failed to back a

> European Commission proposal to open Europe's door

> to imports of Monsanto's NK603 maize.

>

> Adrian Bebb of FoE Europe said, " The European

> Commission has now failed seven times in a row to

> get enough support to approve new genetically

> modified foods. Their position is increasingly

> untenable and clearly incompatible with the wishes

> of the citizens and Governments of Europe. It is

> time that they put the welfare of the European

> public before the business interests of the

> biotechnology industry. "

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4150

>

> + BASF'S GM DIVISION MAY QUIT EUROPE

> An article in the Financial Times says BASF, the

> world's largest chemical company, may move its GM

> crop research to the US unless Europe becomes more

> receptive to new technologies. Jurgen Hambrecht,

> chief executive, said the German chemicals giant

> could not afford to keep investing in research if

> there was no market for its products. The

> Anglo-Swiss agrochemicals company said it would

> close its laboratories because of the poor business

> outlook for the technology.

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4116

>

> + BIOTECH INVESTMENT BUSY GOING NOWHERE

> In an article for ISIS, GM Watch editor Claire

> Robinson takes a look at the biotech industry's

> track record and prospects. This article can be

> found on the I-SIS website at

> http://www.i-sis.org.uk/BIBGN.php and also at

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4134

>

>

-------

> DONATIONS

>

-------

> Our thanks to all of you who have donated to GM

> WATCH. You can donate online in any one of five

> currencies via PayPal, at

> http://www.gmwatch.org/donate.asp OR by cheque or

> postal order payable to 'NGIN', to be sent to: NGIN,

> 26 Pottergate, Norwich, NR2 1DX, UK. We appreciate

> your support.

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...