Guest guest Posted August 27, 2004 Report Share Posted August 27, 2004 > " News Update from The Campaign " > <newsupdate > Global news on GMOs > Fri, 27 Aug 2004 05:45:10 -0500 > > News Update From The Campaign to Label Genetically > Engineered Foods > ---- > > Dear News Update Subscribers, > > The global battle over genetically engineered foods > rages on. > > Activists in France continue to rip up crops, while > the Prime Minister of > Thailand gives approval to allow open-field trials > of genetically modified > crops. And now the World Trade Organization (WTO) is > going to bring in > scientists to debate the safety of genetically > engineered foods before > ruling on the United States case against the > European Union (EU). > > Posted below are five articles that cover all these > details. > > The first two articles will discuss the WTO case the > United States has > against the European Union. Please be aware that the > second article is from > a pro-biotech organization. However, it does give an > interesting perspective > on the battle that is going on in the EU. > > The third article briefly reports on the latest > destruction of crops by > activists in France. > > The fourth and fifth articles discuss the recent > approval of open-field > trials by the Prime Minister of Thailand and the > controversy that move has > created. > > Craig Winters > Executive Director > The Campaign to Label Genetically Engineered Foods > > The Campaign > PO Box 55699 > Seattle, WA 98155 > Tel: 425-771-4049 > E-mail: label > Web Site: http://www.thecampaign.org > > Mission Statement: " To create a national grassroots > consumer campaign for > the purpose of lobbying Congress and the President > to pass legislation that > will require the labeling of genetically engineered > foods in the United > States. " > > *************************************************************** > > > Transatlantic GMO trade war delayed > > 27.08.2004 > EUobserver.com > By Lisbeth Kirk > > The outcome of the transatlantic trade dispute over > Genetically Modified > (GM) foods has been delayed. > > The World Trade Organisation (WTO) Panel in Geneva, > which is hearing the > case, has decided to bring scientists into the > debate on the safety of GM > foods and crops before it reports on it. > > The United States, Canada and Argentina filed the > case last year in the WTO > over the EU's de facto moratorium on approving > genetically modified foods > for sale in Europe. > > US farm exporters estimate the ban has stopped > annual sales of > bio-engineered corn to Europe worth some $300 > million, the Washington Post > reported. > > Into the long grass? > The US Government has been fighting to prevent the > panel from calling in > scientists while the European Union, for its part, > has questioned whether > the WTO is the appropriate place to settle such > disputes and has pushed for > scientists to be involved in the debate. > > " The first round of this dispute may have gone to > Europe but the long term > implications of this case could be devastating for > everyone " , said Adrian > Bebb of the environmental group, Friends of the > Earth Europe. > > " The long term effects of GM foods and crops are > unknown. Every country > should have the right to put public safety before > the economic might of the > biotechnology industry " , said Mr Bebb. > > The WTO Panel was initially expected to report on > the case before the end of > this year, but is now to deliver its report late > March, according to the > Washington Post. > > In a previous case over the use of beef hormones the > scientific debate > lasted for over 600 days. > > Ending the GM moratorium > The EU lifted its six-year moratorium on genetically > modified food in > spring. > > On 19 May, the European Commission gave the go-ahead > to market a modified > strain of sweet corn known as Bt-11 made by Swiss > agrochemicals company > Syngenta. > > The EU executive took the decision only after member > states had failed to > agree among themselves whether or not to lift the > ban. > > Another herbicide-resistant corn was approved for > animal feed in July. In > this case also, the European Commission took the > decision after ministers > from the 25 member governments had reached deadlock. > > The United States has said it will continue with its > WTO case until it sees > a " predictable, ongoing process " based on science, > not politics, according > to the Washington Post. > > The US also opposes the EU's strict labelling saying > it unnecessarily scares > away consumers. > > *************************************************************** > > > NOTE: THIS ARTICLE IS FROM A PRO-BIOTECH > ORGANIZATION > > Biotech: One Step Forward, Two Back > by: Greg Lamp > > Source: AgBioView Newsletter > > What was heralded as a turning point for accepting > biotech crops in the > European Union (EU), now almost appears to be a > farce. When the EU decided > to allow imports of Syngenta's biotech Bt-11 sweet > corn last spring, many > breathed a sigh of relief. It was the first biotech > approval in six years. > Was the EU finally making strides to end its > five-year moratorium on > approval of new biotech crops? > > The U.S. had earlier asked the World Trade > Organization (WTO) to force the > EU to end its ban. The U.S. claims the EU policy > violates global trade > rules. The EU, of course, claims its not violating > any trade laws. > > Have we been duped? > > Now, with the new Bt-11 sweet corn approval, it > appears the EU, indeed, is > following the rules. That is, unless you dig deeper. > Syngenta submitted the > regulatory dossier for Bt-11 sweet corn as food in > the EU in Nov. 1998. > > According to WTO rules, says Kim Nill, technical > issues director for the > American Soybean Association, " If the EU approves > one new biotech product, > they're no longer considered to be blocking > biotech's progress. " In this > case, they (EU) knew Syngenta wasn't going to > actively market sweet corn > there, " he says. > > BT-11 is still being marketed here in the U.S., but > very, very little is > being exported, says Sarah Hull, Syngenta > spokesperson. " It's not a > commercially significant event (biotech product) for > us in Europe, " she > adds. " It did not have major financial implications > for us - at all. " > > The fallout, then, is that the EU has as much as two > to three more years > before they'll have to fully approve another biotech > product to remain in > compliance with WTO rules, Nill explains. Since the > EU approved the sweet > corn, it essentially ends the offending action which > ends the moratorium. > " The farce Bt-11 approval has given them (EU) > breathing space, " says Nill. > " This whole approval issue has taken a step > backward. It's a joke. " > > The EU regulatory system seems to be moving forward > at a quicker pace, says > Helen Inman, chair of the National Corn Growers > Association Biotechnology > Working Group and farmer from Bancroft, IA. " But, " > she says, " we've been > frustrated at the slowness of the process and have a > long way to go before > the moratorium on biotech products is effectively > ended. " > > Currently, there are about 30 genetically engineered > products and foods in > the pipeline awaiting approval for import into the > EU. " Even if they march > forward at one every six months, it's just too > slow, " says Nill. " The > products are already outdated in the U.S. by the > time they get through the > approvals. " > > What makes the whole approval process even more > frustrating is that once > products are approved, they have a 10-year shelf > life and then need to be > renewed. " Since Roundup Ready crops were introduced > in 1996, those products > are up for renewal in 2006, " Nill says. > > Fair trade continues to be the issue here. Still, > being an optimist, I'd > like to think any forward movement is progress. Stay > informed and support > associations that work to get you a fair shake. > > Second Corn Approval > > At press time the EU was on its way to approving the > second corn event, > Monsanto's NK603 for feed and industrial use in the > EU. NK603 cannot be > marketed until the commission approves the > application for food use, which > could be delayed until October or November. > > *************************************************************** > > > Genetically modified crop destroyed in France's > south > > MONT-DE-MARSAN, France, Aug 25 (AFP) - A field of > genetically modified maize > planted by the US group Monsanto in south-western > France was ripped up this > week by unidentified individuals, police said > Wednesday. > > The destruction occurred in the village of Magescq > overnight Monday, > officers said, adding that the company was expected > to lodge a formal > criminal complaint against persons unknown on > Thursday. > > Several groups in France, including farmers and > anti-globalisation > campaigners, are hostile to genetically modified > crops, saying they may pose > a danger to the environment and the food chain. > > Several fields of such hybrid plants have been torn > up in the past, notably > by activists loyal to French farmer and > anti-globalisation leader Jose Bove. > > *************************************************************** > > > Asia heads towards use of GMO foods, despite > activist protests > 27 August 2004 1204 hrs (SST) > > HONG KONG, Aug 27 : A decision by Thailand, one of > Asia's prime agricultural > producers, to allow open-field trials of genetically > modified crops marks > another milestone for the controversial products in > the region, as > governments ignore activists' concerns, industry > analysts said Friday. > > Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra announced > last weekend he had given > the nod to the trials. Several other countries were > expected to follow suit, > while the Philippines and China already have huge > plantations producing > crops such as corn, as well as cotton. > > The United States is the world's biggest producer of > genetically modified > organisms (GMOs) but has faced an uphill battle in > persuading other parts of > the world - from Europe to Africa and the Middle > East - to accept the > products. > > But industry analysts, and even green groups which > oppose their > introduction, say the tide is turning in favour of > the new products. > > Japan approved field-tests of the so-called > " super-crops " more than 15 years > ago but has since been cautious and has yet to > approve their cultivation. > > However Australia and New Zealand have recently > relaxed their opposition and > signalled a readiness to consider GMO tests. > > But the big change comes with the change in attitude > among developing > countries which need to find easy ways to feed their > growing populations. > > " Generally Asia is becoming far more accepting of > GMOs because many > countries are developing and have growing > populations that they can't feed, " > Cheng Luk-ki, scientific research and conservation > head of Hong Kong-based > Green Power, told AFP. > > " They need to find enough food to feed their people > and are willing to > accept anything that promises that. " > > Genetically modified crops have their genetic makeup > engineered by > scientists to boost beneficial characteristics, such > as nutritional value, > and remove detrimental ones, such as susceptibility > to pests. > > They come with the promise of bumper harvests and > higher yields, tempting > carrots to dangle before impoverished farmers in a > region with some 720 > million people living below the breadline. > > But opponents of the use of GMOs say the crops are > dangerous and the way > they are marketed will end up ruining many of the > farmers who hope to make > their living from growing them. > > GMOs, they say, are " super strains " that could > muscle other varieties of > plants into extinction. > > They also fear the crops have not been fully tested > and could pose health > problems not yet apparent. > > They are further opposed because distribution of GMO > seeds is controlled by > Western companies who tie growers into contracts > they may not be able to > honour, thus extending the poverty cycle. > > Many rich nations, particularly in Europe where > public opinion is largely > hostile to GM foods, have fended off the GMO > onslaught. > > As a result aid workers such as Ramesh Kadkha, > international food rights > campaigner for poverty-relief group Action Aid, > believes Asia has become the > new battleground for GMO acceptance. > > " Some governments are very poor and not very strong > -- they are attracted by > the promises of the big GMO companies, " Kadhka told > AFP. > > " But while they come with big promises and big money > they also come with big > clouds. " > > Critics argue that weak regulatory systems in the > region are at fault, > giving GMO multinationals ample room to operate. > > They cite India as an example of what can go wrong > when controls are loose: > There, thousands of farmers have found themselves in > greater debt after the > GM cotton seeds US biotechnology company Monsanto > said would boost yields > failed. > > " There is a case pending before the Supreme Court > against the company as > they tried to bypass our weak regulatory system, " > said Vandana Shiva, > activist and founder of voluntary organisation > Research Foundation for > Science, Technology and Ecology. > > " What we have appealed to the court to do is to > strengthen the regulator. " > > Certainly, not all of Asia is yet persuaded of the > value of these products. > > Taiwan has tight labelling requirements for food > containing GMOs as a means > of monitoring the products' spread there and > Pakistan, where controls are > very lax, announced this week it was looking into > similar legislation. > > Other nations, however, appear more welcoming. > > " We are open to research in genetically modified > crops but we have to be > really cautious before we can recommend an open > field trial for them, " said > Achmad Suryana, head of the Indonesian agriculture > ministry's Research and > Development Agency. - AFP > > *************************************************************** > > > Reversal of Ban on GM Crops Incenses Activists > > IPS Correspondents > > BANGKOK, Aug 23 (IPS) - The reversal by Thai Prime > Minister Thaksin > Shinawatra of an earlier ban on the planting of > genetically modified (GM) > crops has inflamed environmentalists, farmers' > groups and consumer networks, > with food experts warning that this could mean > exposing Thais to serious > health risks. > > Thaksin's announcement was made over the weekend > after he chaired a meeting > of the National Biotechnology Policy Board (NBPB) at > the Science Ministry. > > ''We are not going to promote GM crops, but we will > not slam the doors shut > on their development. We will allow for their > plantation and > commercialisation as we do for other crops,'' > Sakarindr Bhumiratana, the > NPBP's secretary, told reporters as he relayed the > premier's decision. > > ''We need a policy change. Otherwise Thailand will > fail to keep abreast of > the global current in the GM-crop trade,'' added > Sakarindr. > > In 2001, Thailand imposed a ban on field trials of > GM crops, and terminated > ongoing field trials of GM cotton and corn carried > out by the transnational > corporation Monsanto. The government also banned all > commercial planting of > GM crops. > > The government's weekend decision has incensed > environmentalists, who have > vowed to wage an all-out campaign against the prime > minister's re-election > campaign, next year, if he decides to go ahead with > the cultivation of GM > crops in the country. > > ''If Thaksin doesn't stop GM crops, we will stop him > from having another > term as prime minister,'' Witoon Lianchamroon, the > director of BioThai - an > environmental group devoted to the preservation of > biodiversity in Thailand > - told IPS. > > Witoon accused the U.S. government of putting > pressure on Thailand to > reverse the previous policy on GM crops to benefit > U.S. biotech businesses > under the upcoming Thai-U.S. Free Trade Agreement > (FTA). > > ''The FTA is the main motive for Thaksin to reverse > the 2001 decision and we > have proof that before the weekend policy decision > was made, Monsanto sent > its people over to lobby the government,'' said > Witoon. > > ''The conflict of interest is obvious at the policy > level. And a decision > affecting the whole of Thailand has been made > without the participation of > environmental and consumer groups and people's > organisations,'' he pointed > out. > > The issue of GM crops flared out in the open in late > July when the > environmental group Greenpeace managed to prove that > a government research > station in the north-east province of Khon Kaen that > was planting GM papaya > was the source of contamination of one of the > country's most important > staple foods. > > The environmental group became concerned when it > twice tested batches of > papaya seeds, from the native species 'Khak Dam Tha > Phra', sold by the > research station to farmers. Independent laboratory > tests showed that > packages of papaya seeds sold by the Department of > Agriculture's own > research station contained genetically modified > seeds. > > ''No study has been conducted on the long-term > effects of GM crops on the > environment and human health, so why is the > government rushing to > commercialise it in the country?'' asked Jiragorn > Gajaseni, executive > director of Greenpeace South-east Asia. > > Greenpeace accused the government of putting the > Thai people and the > environment at risk. > > ''At the time when the basic principles of genetic > engineering are under > challenge from new scientific research, the > government seems to be > deliberately ignoring the warnings of many > scientific institutions around > the world,'' said Jiragorn. > > ''The Thai public expects the government to be > knowledgeable about the > latest scientific developments and not act > recklessly by rushing to > commercialise GM crops,'' he added. > > The Consumer Network, a coalition of consumer rights > groups, on Sunday > released its first official statement announcing it > would work with organic > farmers' groups to oppose the government's plan. > > ''We held discussions and concluded to put pressure > on the government to > reconsider the policy as well as call for a > biosafety law and improvements > to GM labelling,'' said Saree Ongsomwang, > coordinator of the Consumer > Network. > > But Greenpeace is also worried about the possible > adverse effects of GM > foods on public health. > > ''Even if there has been some testing, the long-term > effects to humans are > unknown. The full ramifications of modified genes > escaping and mixing with > unmodified ones are unknown,'' said Janet Cotter, a > Britain-based scientist > working for Greenpeace, in an interview. > > GM papaya, for instance, has been genetically > engineered to be resistant to > the ringspot virus. It is made by cutting a gene > from the ringspot virus and > forcing it into the cell of a papaya. > > This is done by randomly shooting the gene millions > of times with a gene gun > with the hope that it gets into the plant cell. As > part of this process, > another virus and bacteria resistant to antibiotics > are added. In terms of > human health risks, the build- up of antibiotic > resistance is also a > concern. > > ''The only requirement for approval is that the GM > food should be grossly > similar to its natural counterpart. However, a GM > food may not only be > grossly similar, but almost completely identical > with its natural > counterpart and yet contain an unexpected and > undiscovered very harmful > substance,'' Cotter pointed out. > > ''It is a scientifically well-recognised fact that > genetic engineering can > cause the appearance of such unexpected > substances,'' she said. > > The British scientist said these unexpected > substances are very difficult to > detect, and unless the Thai government had > sophisticated testing mechanisms, > people could be subject to severe health risks. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.