Outstanding article on the global battle over genetically engineered foods

[Guest guest]

" News Update from The Campaign "

 

Outstanding article on the global battle over genetically

engineered foods

 

Wed, 6 Oct 2004 05:10:04 -0500

 

News Update From The Campaign to Label Genetically Engineered Foods

----

 

Dear News Update Subscribers,

 

Posted below is an excellent article from the International Herald

Tribune

titled " Europe closes ranks on bioengineered food. "

 

This article does an outstanding job of giving a global perspective on

the

controversy over genetically engineered foods.

 

You will notice in reading the article that one of the primary reasons

genetically engineered foods are not sold in Europe is the requirement

for

labeling. Likewise, when we pass labeling legislation in the United

States,

the vast majority of food companies will remove genetically engineered

ingredients from their product lines in this country.

 

One of the most important things to remember is that NONE of the

genetically

engineered foods sold in the United States and Canada have been safety

tested for human consumption. The citizens of the United States and

Canada

are being used as guinea pigs in the largest feeding experiment in

history.

 

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has been derelict in their

duty

to protect the health of citizens from these risky foods. For example,

you

will recall the discovery a few years ago that StarLink corn,

unapproved for

human consumption, had contaminated nearly 300 food products on the

shelves of U.S. grocery stores. The StarLink fiasco is a classic

example of the failure of the FDA to effectively regulate genetically

engineered foods.

After more research is done, we may find that StarLink corn was just

the tip of the iceberg.

 

The biotech industry is aggressively fighting efforts to label

bioengineered

foods because if they are labeled, consumers will start asking

questions such as:

 

" Has this genetically engineered papaya been safety tested? "

 

Consumers will be disturbed when they discover the answer is:

 

" NO, that biotech papaya NOT been safety tested, and neither has the

corn, soy or canola! "

 

Once consumers become widely aware of the lack of safety testing,

sales will drop dramatically. At that point in time, the biotech

companies will be

forced to do what the FDA should have required them to do in the first

place: Safety test each new genetically engineered food before

allowing it to be sold for human consumption.

 

Passing labeling legislation into law is an essential first step in

effectively regulating genetically engineered foods.

 

Regardless of who gets elected president this November, we will get the

labeling legislation re-introduced into the 109th U.S. Congress early

next

year. We feel the political climate in 2005 will be such that we will

get a

lot more support from members of Congress for labeling genetically

engineered foods than we did in previous years.

 

The Campaign to Label Genetically Engineered Foods has some exciting

developments to share with you before the end of the year. Stay tuned

to

these News Updates for further details. And thank you for your

continued

activism and support!

 

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. "

 

***************************************************************

 

Europe closes ranks on bioengineered food

 

Elisabeth Rosenthal

International Herald Tribune

Tuesday, October 05, 2004

 

GENEVA - Some are smokers. Some drink too much. Some admit they love

red

meat. But virtually all shoppers here at the Migros Supermarket on the

bustling Rue des Paquis are united in avoiding a risk they regard as

unacceptable: genetically modified food.

 

That is easy to do here in Switzerland, as in the rest of Europe,

where food containing such ingredients must be labeled by law. Many

large retailers,

like Migros, have essentially stopped stocking the products, regarding

them as bad for public image.

 

" I try not to eat any of it and always read the boxes, " said Marco

Feline,

32, an artist in jeans, getting onto his bike (with no helmet). " It

scares

me because we don't know what the long-term effects will be - on people

or

the environment. "

 

The majority of corn and soy in the United States is now grown from

genetically modified seeds, altered to increase their resistance to

pests or

reduce their need for water, for example. In the past decade, Americans

have

happily - if unknowingly - gobbled down hundreds of millions of

servings of

genetically modified foods. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration says

there

have been no adverse effects, and there is no specific labeling.

 

But here in Europe - where food is high culture, if not a religion -

farmers, consumers, chefs and environmental groups have joined voices

to

loudly and stubbornly oppose bioengineered foods, effectively blocking

their

arrival at the farms and on the tables of the continent. And that, in

turn,

has created a huge ripple effect on trade and politics from North

America to

Africa.

 

The United States, Canada and Argentina have filed a complaint that is

pending before the World Trade Organization contending that European

laws

and procedures that discriminate against genetically modified products

are

irrational and unscientific, and so constitute an unfair trade barrier.

 

U.S. companies like Monsanto, which invested heavily in the technology,

suffered huge losses when Europe balked. As part of a public relations

effort, the U.S. State Department enlisted a Vatican academy last month

as a

co-sponsor of a conference in Rome, " Feeding a Hungry World: The Moral

Imperative of Biotechnology. "

 

In response to such pressure, the European Union has relaxed legal

restrictions on genetically modified foods.

 

In May the EU approved for sale a genetically modified sweet corn,

lifting a

five-year moratorium on new imports. Last month the European Commission

gave

its seal of approval to 17 types of genetically modified corn seed for

farming. But no one expects a wide-open market.

 

" We have no illusion that the market will change anytime soon, " said

Markus

Payer, spokesman for Syngenta, the Swiss agribusiness company whose

BT-11

corn got the approval in May. " That will only be created by consumer

acceptance in Europe. There is currently no inclination among European

consumers to buy these things. But the atmosphere of rejection is not

based

on facts. That is a political, cultural and media-driven decision. "

 

Indeed, the battle lines between countries for and against genetically

modified foods seem to be hardening. Several African countries have now

rejected donations of genetically engineered food and seeds, following

Europe's lead.

 

In Asia, reticence appears to be spreading. While countries like China

and

India are enthusiastically planting biotech crops like cotton,

genetically

modified food crops are having trouble winning approval.

 

Opponents of genetically modified foods " suggest that it is better for

thousands to die than for hungry people to risk eating the same corn

that

Americans have been eating every night for the last nine years, " Jim

Nicholson, U.S. ambassador to the Vatican, said at the conference there

last

week.

 

Africa's rejection is based partly on health and local environmental

concerns, but also on economic interests: Zambia and Mozambique have

discovered a good market in selling unmodified grain and soy to Europe,

supplanting the United States as European suppliers.

 

" In the U.S., genetically modified foods were a fait accompli; here in

Europe we succeeded in preventing that, " said Mauro Albrizio, vice

president

of the European Environmental Bureau, a policy group based in Brussels.

 

Genetically modified foods arrived on America's dinner plates with

little

fanfare in the mid-1990s as large-scale farmers in the United States

enthusiastically started planting the seeds, which increased production

and

reduced the amount of pesticide required. Convinced that bioengineered

food

was " as least as safe as conventional food, " the U.S. Food and Drug

Administration declared that a bioengineered lemon was the same as an

ordinary lemon, and did not require special labeling or regulation.

 

Today, nearly two-thirds of the genetically modified crops in the world

are

grown in the United States, mostly corn and soybeans. " In the U.S., a

large

part of the diet is actually bioengineered, " said Dr. Lester Crawford,

acting commissioner of the FDA.

 

" The first thing other nations want to know is how many illnesses or

adverse

reactions we've seen, " he added. " But we haven't actually had any

problems

at all with bioengineered foods. "

 

Vast amounts of money are at stake. Believing that genetically modified

foods would quickly catch on throughout the world as they had the

United

States, large biotech companies like Monsanto invested billions of

dollars.

At the same time, industry analysts said, companies turned a deaf ear

to

Europeans' love affair with food, as well as their food fears in the

wake of

mad cow disease.

 

Since the late 1990s the European Union has required that all food

containing more than tiny amounts of genetically modified materials be

labeled, and that all genetically modified products be submitted for

approval before sale in Europe. No products were approved during an

informal

moratorium from 1998 to 2003. In the past five years, many parts of

Europe

have enacted local bans on growing such foods.

 

In fact, most scientific panels have concluded that " foods derived from

the

transgenic crops currently on the market are safe to eat, " in the words

of a

recent report from the UN's Food and Agricultural Organization. But the

report also cautioned that crops must be evaluated case by case.

 

And low risk is not no risk. The 87 member states of the UN-sponsored

Cartegena Protocol on Biosafety this year required labeling of all bulk

shipments of food containing genetically modified products. The United

States has not signed the pact.

 

More important, though, is that the assessment of risk depends largely

on

the degree of proof that a country's consumers demand.

 

" In their personal lives people take lots of risk - they drive too fast

and

bungee-jump - but for food their acceptance of risk is very low, " said

Philipp Hübner of the Basel-Stadt Canton Laboratory in Switzerland,

which

tests products in that country for contamination with genetically

modified

organisms. But Hübner sees his work as detecting fraud in labeling

rather

than as public health.

 

" For most scientists it is not so much a safety issue, but an ethical

and

societal question, " he said. " This is what the public here has chosen,

like

Muslims choosing not to eat pork. "

 

In a survey conducted by the European Opinion Research Group in late

2002,

88.6 percent of Europeans listed the " quality of food products " as an

environmental issue with health implications.

 

But health fears, which can move markets, are not always consistent. In

some

parts of Europe, like Bordeaux, which have declared themselves freed of

genetically modified organisms, energy is supplied by nuclear power

plants.

 

To sell Sugar Pops cereal to European consumers, Kellogg's imports

unmodified corn from Argentina and spends extra money to make sure that

the

entire transportation and processing chain is free of bioengineered

products, said Chris Wermann, a company spokesman. The same cereal

contains

genetically modified corn in the United States. Both varieties contain

all

the usual sugars, artificial colors and flavors.

 

European advocates defend their right to be finicky. " This is not

ideology -

it's a pragmatic stand because of potential risks to health and the

environment, " Albrizio of the European Environmental Bureau said,

noting

that there is some evidence that genetically modified crops may trigger

more

allergies.

 

In terms of agriculture, there are some very clear-cut effects, since

genetically modified seeds tend to spread in the environment once they

have

been planted, making it hard to maintain crops that are organic and

free of

genetic modification. Scientists call this phenomenon " co-mixing. "

 

But to environmentalists and especially to farmers, it is potentially

devastating " contamination. " That is why the farmers of Tuscany and 11

other

regions of Italy have declared themselves free of bioengineering.

 

" Here in Italy every area has its own dishes that are tied to the local

farming, " said Andrea Ferrante, a small, serious man with a black beard

who

owns an organic vegetable farm in Viterbo. " So for us this is about

food

sovereignty, about the right of a community to decide how its food its

grown.

 

" We don't know if genetically modified seeds are bad for health. What

we do

know is that it will kill our farming. "

 

In fact, European farmers and consumers have so far created a firewall

against genetically modified organisms, one that the changing laws and

World

Trade Organization challenges may not breach easily.

 

" In theory you could sell GMO products here, with labeling, " Hübner

said.

" But I'm not aware of any products that are now being sold, because no

store

wants them on their shelves. "