Guest guest Posted November 5, 2004 Report Share Posted November 5, 2004 WEEKLY WATCH 97 and monthly review " GM WATCH " <info Thu, 4 Nov 2004 21:46:26 GMT --------------------------- WEEKLY WATCH number 97 - and monthly review --------------------------- --------------------------- from Claire Robinson, WEEKLY WATCH editor --------------------------- An important CAMPAIGN OF THE WEEK aims at preventing the European Commission from dismantling national GM bans in Europe under pressure from the World Trade Organisation. Meanwhile, the EU Commission also seems to be planning to lead us all down the biotech path in the name of a 'vision' led by the usual corporate suspects (see EUROPE). Don't miss a great interview with GM Watch's founder. You can find the interview in full with multiple links to related articles and background material here: http://www.gmwatch.org/p1temp.asp?pid=49 & page=1 I've selected the section dealing with the US-industry assault on the South (see LOBBYWATCH) but the rest of the interview is well worth reading. It ranges over the industry's attacks on GM-critical scientists, Monsanto's PR dirty tricks campaign, the herd mentality that drives the uptake of GM crops, and the early history of GM Watch. Finally, look out for some telling articles in our ASIA section that more than bear out the points in the interview about the extraordinary US-industry onslaught on the South. Claire claire www.lobbywatch.org / www.gmwatch.org --------------------------- CONTENTS --------------------------- LOBBYWATCH EUROPE CAMPAIGN OF THE WEEK FOOD SAFETY: NEW REPORT ASIA THE AMERICAS AUSTRALASIA QUOTE OF THE WEEK REST OF THE MONTH'S TOP STORIES DONATIONS ------- LOBBYWATCH ------- + GM WATCH INTERVIEW http://www.gmwatch.org/p1temp.asp?pid=49 & page=1 Here's the last part of a wide ranging interview by Marina Littek of Italy's Green Planet website with GM Watch founder, Jonathan Matthews. Jonathan: ....even though the reality of GM crops is lacklustre, the industry's PR machine works overtime to maintain the fiction that it's a glittering success. A week before the publication of the most recent [Dr Charles] Benbrook report showing how much GM crops have increased, rather than decreased, pesticide use, up pops a report from an industry funded institute saying the exact opposite. It's beyond belief that that timing was accidental. That institute was funded to do that job of work, precisely to smother what Benbrook - a scientist who for 7 years presided over the National Academy of Science's Board of Agriculture - was disclosing. And that same kind of hype and concealment's going on right around the world... In India you've got Monsanto pumping out studies and claims that GM cotton is great for Indian farmers... and at the same time you've got carefully conducted research in India showing the diametric opposite. You've also got protests going on and even stories of farmers killing themselves because their crops failed, but Monsanto's PR machine captures far more of the headlines... In Indonesia Monsanto had to pull GM cotton out completely because of all the problems, and yet I regularly see claims that Indonesia is one of the Asian giants embracing GM! Marina: You've also investigated how the industry manufactures support in the South. Jonathan: A few years back I wrote an article called The Fake Parade exposing how a widely reported pro-GM march by farmers in South Africa was actually carefully orchestrated by pro-corporate lobbyists and how it fitted into a wider pattern of manufactured support from the South. http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?ArcId=288 We've got special sections on the website just tracking the corporate lobbyists active in Asia and Africa because they are such a problem there. In fact, in countries like South Africa they're practically running the show - and that's partly why the biotech industry's headed down South. You've got " experts " there who are up to their ears in industry interests and yet who are being allowed to play a leading role in developing regulatory protocols and legislation governing GM crops. It's because of this that South Africa's become the industry's open door to Africa. One of these lobbyists was quoted the other day saying, " If the activists don't get their way, we're going to see biotech crops spread right up through Africa " . Then on top of the industry and its tame scientists, you've got the US using diplomatic pressure and bilateral trade agreements, and you've got USAID pouring money into GM crop-related schemes. They're all trying to browbeat African and Asian governments into accepting weak biosafety regulations and GMOs. Marina: Your last Pants on Fire award celebrated one of those lobbyists. Jonathan: Yes, we gave the award to the Kenyan scientist, Florence Wambugu, who typifies the kind of thing that's going on. She's a Monsanto protege and, if you read the citation, it almost defies belief that somebody could be so shameless in the way she's promoted this technology. Wambugu claims GM will literally solve all the problems of Africa. She said somewhere that GM crops would lift the whole " African continent out of decades of economic and social despair " . Her career as a propagandist has been built out of a Monsanto GM sweet potato project that she was recruited for. For year's she's hyped that project around the world's media as the answer to hunger and as the way to massively increase sweet potato yields in Africa. She wears traditional African dress and speaks in such evangelical terms that some journalists have even assumed that the project must already be working out in the fields, that Kenyan farmers are already reaping the benefits and that it's already helping to feed the hungry. But when the results of the 3-years of field trials were finally published, it emerged the whole thing was a total flop. The GM crop didn't give the virus resistance it was supposed to and the yields were worse than those of the conventional sweet potatoes that it was supposed to replace. Yet despite this disaster, Wambugu's still going around proclaiming the project a success! And she's had all kinds of awards and honours bestowed on her by the industry and their pals, as if she had achieved something quite remarkable. So we thought she should be given the one award that she really deserved - the Pants on Fire award. Marina: But, some people would ask, given Africa's problems, what's the alternative? Jonathan: It's a fair question. Aaron deGrassi from the Institute of Development Studies has carefully researched these kind of GM showcase projects in Africa, and he's found that while in empirical terms they're a failure, they help generate great PR. And that's the problem - that's their real purpose. He contrasts these expensive PR confections with more humble projects, such as one on sweet potatoes in Uganda which - with a fraction of the huge investment that's gone into the Monsanto project - has used conventional means to breed a sweet potato that is virus resistant, that is popular with farmers and that actually doubles yields. So here's this great success, which could be even bigger if more resources were behind it, and yet all the world hears about is the likes of Wambugu puffing GM. Articles have appeared saying she and Monsanto are 'reshaping the future' and 'serving millions' in Africa, but their projects have actually wasted literally millions of dollars and helped feed precisely nobody. This is what we pointed out in her award citation. These industry PR confections are a massive and shameful distraction from the real task of assisting the poor and hungry in Africa. There are some important projects out there which are already succeeding in a quiet way despite being massively under resourced. They involve ecologically-friendly farming systems that are suited to the needs and conditions of small-scale farmers in Africa. They offer the chance of greater food security and sustainable livelihoods without environmental devastation. Another Africa is possible, but to get to it we have to stop the biotech industry and the USA using all their leverage to force the world into a GM cul-de-sac where genetically modified crops are relentlessly promoted as the panacea to all our problems. FOR THE FULL INTERVIEW: http://www.gmwatch.org/p1temp.asp?pid=49 & page=1 ------- EUROPE ------- + BEWARE NEW BIOTECH EUROVISION The biotech industry is promoting a vision for plant biotechnology through the European Commission, reports an article for ISIS. In a little noticed development in June 2004, the European Commission announced: " Leading representatives from research, the food and biotech industry, the farming community and consumers' organisations presented to European Research Commissioner Philippe Busquin a long-term vision for European plant biotechnology towards 2025. " This initiative represents the latest stage in a process that will culminate in the establishment of a EU biotechnology strategic research agenda by the end of this year, and despite reference to " the farming community and consumers' organisations " , it has been led by the biotech industry. As GM food has already proved to be a failure, not just in Europe, but globally, and with daily reports of the propaganda of GM companies revealed as lies, why is the EU still willing to promote and fund this research? Once again, false claims are made about the need for GM technology to feed people in developing countries where there are already well-proven safe and sustainable alternatives, and for increasing food quality and biodiversity, which GM has singularly failed to deliver. The 21-page " Plants for the future " vision paper was drafted by the 'Genval Group' in cooperation with the European Commission. The Genval Group of twenty-two consists of representatives from companies such as Bayer, Syngenta and Nestle; and the project is supported by an influential " group of personalities " from the biotech industry and academia: the European Research Commissioner himself, Philippe Busquin, Feike Sijbesma, president of EuropaBio (the European Bioindustries Association), and Marc Zabeau, President of the European Plant Science Organisation, EPSO. Busquin says the vision paper is a milestone in setting up a technology platform " comprising an Advisory Council and working groups, open to the stakeholders supporting this vision paper, Member States, and other interested parties and experts " , and due to deliver a strategic research agenda by the end of 2004. Partners to this Advisory Council, funded by the EU, are EuropaBio (which has 35 corporate members operating worldwide, and 25 national biotech associations), and EPSO. The 'vision' document insists, " Europeans owe it to themselves and to future generations to build a scientifically solid and ethically sound foundation for developing this exciting field " ; " Europeans should not lose sight of the enormous social, economic and environmental rewards of this cutting-edge field " ; " Europe cannot afford to miss out on the benefits offered by plant genomics and biotechnololgy " , etc, etc. 'Sustainability' has been co-opted: " There is a limit to how much our planet can take. To guarantee our well-being - and that of future generations - we must make sure that we live in a sustainable manner. This means that sustainability is both a means of ensuring our prosperity and a constant goal to strive for in the future " . .... This new biotech Eurovision is more dangerous than the old. It is dressed up in 'sustainable agriculture' clothing and has the potential to completely undermine it. *Write to the European Commission to firmly reject it now. More at http://www.i-sis.org.uk/BTNBE.php See GM WATCH profile of Mark Cantley, rabidly pro-GM Adviser in theate for Life Sciences (Biotechnology, Agriculture and Food) in the Research Directorate-General of the European Commission: http://www.gmwatch.org/profile1.asp?PrId=28 http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4595 + NESTLE LOSES FOOD FIGHT IN RUSSIA Nestle, the giant food corporation, has lost a legal battle over GM products in Russia. Nestle had filed a lawsuit against the Moscow-based National Association for Genetic Safety for claiming the company's children's food products sold in Russia contained GM ingredients. The association's report claimed a series of Nestle children's food products, as well as those of other international corporations, contained significant amounts of GM soya lecithin. In a statement, Nestle said it would appeal the ruling and denied any of its products contained GM foods. http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4584 ------- CAMPAIGN OF THE WEEK ------- + STOP THE EU BACKING DOWN ON GM UNDER WTO PRESSURE Last year the US, Canada and Argentina filed a complaint at the World Trade Organisation (WTO) over Europe's position on GM foods. Over 100,000 individual submissions have been sent to the WTO so far, demanding that they do not undermine our right to eat GM free food. The WTO has now set up a three-person panel to meet in secret to decide whether to protect the interests of the biotech industry or those of the public and the environment. In August 2004, the panel decided to seek for scientific and technical advice, which will delay the final decision until next year. Acting under the pressure from the WTO, the European Commission is now attempting to overturn bans on GM food and crops that Austria, France, Greece, Germany and Luxembourg put in place to protect its citizens and the environment. On 29 November the Commission will ask all EU member states to vote against these bans. If the European Commission gets its way, these five countries will have to lift their bans and allow more risky GM products into their countries. These national restrictions are the centrepiece of the US-led WTO complaint. A pro-biotech decision would also send a signal worldwide to other countries not to ban GM crops. YOU CAN HELP! Stop the European Commission from forcing risky GM foods onto your plate under WTO pressure. Send a letter, fax or email to your government, demanding that they vote AGAINST the Commission's proposals and ensure that the Commission protects the rights of countries to take a precautionary approach to GM foods and crops. * EMAIL YOUR MINISTER at: http://www.bite-back.org * STOP THE EU FROM BACKING DOWN ON GM FOOD UNDER WTO PRESSURE. Write to your Environment Minister today, demanding them to vote NO! on proposals by the European Commission to end national bans on risky GM food! Email your minister at http://www.bite-back.org BITE BACK: WTO HANDS OFF OUR FOOD! Bush is using the World Trade Organisation to force-feed you genetically modified food! You can help stop them: Bite Back today and sign the Citizen's Objection to the WTO at http://www.bite-back.org From Friends of the Earth Europe - Bite Back campaign ------- FOOD SAFETY ------- + NEW REPORT HIGHLIGHTS HUGE GAPS IN GM CROP SCIENCE A new report on the impact of GM on the genetics of modified crops by an independent group of scientists has highlighted huge gaps in scientific knowledge and the need to greatly improve scientific assessment procedures before GM crops are licensed. The report, by the group EcoNexus, is based on the peer-reviewed scientific literature and USDA documents. It examines the consequences of genetic modification events for the integrity of transgenic plant genomes and suggests that significant genetic damage can arise. The consequences can include: * large scale genetic rearrangements of host DNA at transgene insertion sites * many hundreds to thousands of individual mutations scattered throughout the genome of each new transgenic plant. The authors suggest that these changes are caused through genetic engineering itself, i.e. by transgene insertion and the procedures plant cells are subjected to in order to insert the transgene. Most crop plants are a complex mixture of biologically active chemicals with both positive and negative health effects, they may be bred from inedible ancestors and many have poisonous tissues or organs. Consequently, food safety of edible crops relies crucially on genetic stability and predictability rather than being an inbuilt property of crop plants. Therefore, the discovery of these genetic changes arising from GM, the authors suggest is highly significant and has major implications for the safety of transgenic crops. The report analyses crops that are already on the market around the world based on documents obtained from the USDA. It finds that regulators fail to require adequate analysis of transgene insertion sites and that there is no mechanism to detect random genetic damage induced by transformation. These omissions appear to result from failure to appreciate the magnitude of genetic damage sustained by transgenic plants. They indicate that there are massive gaps in the regulatory systems which are supposed to ensure transgenic crops are safe and that regulators have been guilty of making dubious assumptions about the similarities between transgenic crops and plants developed by traditional plant breeding. The new report, " Genome Scrambling - Myth or Reality? Transformation-induced mutations in transgenic crop plants " is available as a pdf file at www.econexus.info It is written by Dr Allison Wilson, Dr Jonathan Latham and Dr Ricarda Steinbrecher of EcoNexus. http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4581 --------------------------- ASIA --------------------------- + JAPAN: PROTESTS AGAINST GM RICE Japan Offspring Fund (JOF) held a demonstration on Nov 4 in Tokyo together with Nodanro, the National Federation of Agricultural, Forestry and Fishery Cooperatives Workers' Unions. The demonstration took place outside the Akasaka Prince Hotel, where the Japanese Agriculture Ministry and IRRI held a symposium about GM rice. Many Japanese environmental and consumer organizations are actively opposing GM rice research. Nodanro is reportedly reluctant to farm such rice, should it be permitted. Nodanro also expresses strong concern about monopoly problems (such as patenting of GM rice varieties) and threats to biodiversity associated with GM crops. http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4594 + MALAYSIA'S BIOTECH POLICY SHAPED BY US INSTITUTIONS Boeing is funding a study to determine the feasibility of establishing a plant biology research and development centre in Malaysia. Boeing said it had contracted the services of the non-profit Donald Danforth Plant Science Center in St Louis, Missouri, US, to conduct the study. http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4591 The Center was established by Monsanto and academic partners. It was launched with a $70-million pledge from Monsanto, which also donated the Center's 40-acre tract of land, near Monsanto's home town of St. Louis, valued at $11.4 million. Roger Beachy, its founding president, is also Professor in the Dept of Biology at Washington University in St. Louis. It was Beachy's work at Washington University, which, in collaboration with Monsanto, led to the development of the world's first GM food crop, a tomato modified for virus resistance. http://www.gmwatch.org/profile1.asp?PrId=200 Meanwhile, Malaysia's Innovation Ministry has hired the US firm Burrill & Company to conduct a study and analysis for the drafting of a new policy on biotech. Burrill & Company are a life sciences merchant bank focused exclusively on companies involved in areas such as biotechnology, pharmaceuticals, nutraceuticals, agricultural biotechnology, and industrial biotechnology. http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Tuesday/NewsBreak/20041026164541/Article/\ indexb_html + THAI GM CONTAMINATION FALLOUT GIVES DEVELOPING NATIONS FOOD FOR THOUGHT An article in the Wall Street Journal reports that nations of the South are watching developments in Thailand following the GM papaya contamination as they try to decide whether to grow GM crops. Given the fallout from the GM contamination, you might expect that such a decision would be a no-brainer. Germany announced bans on the import of Thai-produced canned fruits that contain papaya and similar threats from the Japanese forced Thai agriculture officials to axe the 1,000 or so papaya trees they had planted as part of an open-field trial. Plus, Thailand earns a premium on its organically grown crops: British supermarket chain Tesco PLC pays extra for its chicken raised without GMO-based feed. However, the article also makes clear the real reason why Thailand and other Southern countries are under such pressure to grow GM crops - because Europe won't: " Genetically modified crops have made little headway on farms in Europe and Japan... Big biotech companies that deal in GMOs are looking for growth opportunities in Asia to compensate for the problems they have encountered in European markets. " (the Thai) government commissioned a team of US biotech experts to tailor a pro-GMO national-policy message that wouldn't alienate Thailand's biggest anti-GMO export markets, according to people involved with the public-relations drive. " Monsanto of St Louis has coached Thai government scientists in the processes used in certain genetic-engineering techniques, particularly for corn. The US government also has provided indirect financial support to Thailand's biotech drive, particularly through aid earmarked to help the government develop the regulatory and legal framework to patent, protect and export genetically modified products. " A posting by an ardent GM supporter on the pro-biotech listserv AgBioView confirms that the only way the biotech industry can survive is to go South: " There are two choices to go: down or down. It is hoped industry quickly takes the choice to go down-market, down south, instead of down and out. " http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4593 + BIOTECH TRAP FOR BANGLADESH An excellent editorial on the negative impact on Bangladesh's agriculture of the decision to go down the GM route is at http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4582 + KEEP AWAY, FARMERS TELL GM PUSHERS A perceptive article contrasts the transgenic research of ICRISAT with the self-sufficiency of women farmers in Andhra Pradesh: http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4583 Excerpt: The International Crop Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) ... is conducting research on transgenic varieties for five crops under its mandate - pigeon pea, chickpea, groundnut, sorghum and pearl millet; these form the staple food for one billion people in the semi-arid tropics (SAT) of Asia and Sub Saharan Africa. ICRISAT is headquartered near Hyderabad and has six regional operations in Africa. ICRISAT's mission statement " Help the poor of the semi-arid tropics " reads almost like rhetoric. It sets out to justify its biotech research efforts quoting Johansen and Nigam who stated " in groundnut, losses (due to drought) estimated to be $520 millions of which $208 millions could be recovered by genetic enhancement " and " estimated losses due to drought are 3.7 million tonnes for chick peas of which 2.1 million tonnes could be recovered by genetic enhancement. " .... So for whom is the GM technology? Is it really for the poor? Are poor farmers from semi-arid tropics really worried about global loss figures like $520 millions of groundnut and 3.7 million tonnes of chickpeas? Ask Anjamma - a dalit, once landless woman from Gangwar from Medak district in Andhra Pradesh whether drought so much bothers her and takes a third of her crop away? She says " rains bring me bounty but even if there is no rain, I do not bother. A little water is enough for sorghum and millet grows on dew, which is enough to feed my family. " For Anjamma and 5000 dalit women like her from 70 villages around Zaheerabad in Medak district, Andhra Pradesh, these are God's grains - crops of truth that have assured them food security even in worst times. Why should she shoulder the responsibility of generating surplus when she does not need to turn to anyone for her needs other than soap, salt and clothes? Sustenance farming is a way of life for these so called 'poor' marginal farmers, which is so diverse from the concept of market oriented agriculture. http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4583 --------------------------- THE AMERICAS --------------------------- + WINNER OF 2004 US ELECTION IS... MONSANTO! Monsanto had bought and owned both the candidates in the US election, says campaigner Robert Cohen. See http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4588 + VERMONT: LABELS WILL BE REQUIRED ON GM SEEDS Companies selling GM seeds in Vermont will have to include a " plain English disclosure " on labels, says Agriculture Secretary Steve Kerr. He says the words, " these seeds have been genetically engineered, " will have to appear on the label. Companies will have to specify what traits have been conferred through biotechnology. The law went into effect in October. Kerr decided on the specific rules after Monsanto Corporation and Dow AgroSciences refused to use the words " genetically engineered " on their seed labels next year. http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4585 + CALIFORNIA: MARIN COUNTY PASSES GM CROP BAN Months after Mendocino County voters passed the nation's first ban on GM crops, voters in Marin County,California, have enacted a similar ban, with 61 percent for and 39 percent against. Marin joins Trinity as well as Mendocino counties in having similar laws banning GMOs. Voters in Humboldt, San Luis Obispo and Butte counties rejected similar ballot measures. The Humboldt County loss was expected because supporters dropped their campaign after complaints that the ballot language contained inaccurate scientific descriptions and also called for the jailing of farmers growing GM crops. http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4588 Butte GM-farm interests raised approximately $190,000 for the Vote No campaign - more than three times the money collected by the ban's supporters. It was one of the most expensive ballot measures in recent county history. The Organic Consumers Association in San Francisco was one of the major financial contributors to the ban campaign in Butte. Spokesman Ryan Zinn said he is laying the groundwork for state legislation that would make GM farmers or companies liable if genes from their crop contaminate organic crops. " County measures still are relevant, but they form part of a bigger strategy statewide in California, " he said. http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4597 Though the Competitive Enterprise Institute's Greg Conko claimed the results " suggest that ag biotechnology is not really threatened in the United States " (http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4597), not everyone's buying the Conko line. An article in the US press headed " GM foods losing their luster " reports that the evidence shows the acceptance of GM food in the US is declining. http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/living/food/10088491.htm + US CITIES GOING GM FREE As well as whole counties, US cities are starting to go GM FREE. The most recent is Arcata which is to move forward with an anti-GMO ordinance banning genetically modified crops in the city, which will be up for final adoption on Nov. 17. Arcata attorney Greg Allen, who requested the city look at such an ordinance, said the adoption of such an ordinance was important not only for Humboldt County, but for the rest of the state. Councilman Dave Meserve said the problem with GMO crops is that " they don't stay put " and can contaminate other crops. He said the heart of Arcata's ordinance is that it considers GMO crops to be a public nuisance. Meserve said the ordinance is not intended to " bash science, " and noted an exception to the ordinance exists for contained laboratories. The ordinance could be used in other cities in the US as a possible blueprint for their own communities. + COLOMBIA: MYSTERY OF 'THE COCA PLANT THAT WOULDN'T DIE' SOLVED! For years, the US has been aerially spraying coca crops in Colombia with Roundup to kill them off, as part of its 'war on drugs'. Predictably, this has led to massive genetic selection for resistance to Roundup and a vigorous supercrop of unkillable coca plants. Speculation abounded as to whether the Roundup resistant supercrop was genetically engineered. However, we at GM WATCH suspected that this plant was too good to be GM. It now appears that we were right. Tests show no evidence of GM and the plant seems to be a testament to the superb adaptability of nature in the face of the US government's chemical warfare programmes. http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4586 + MEXICO: ACTIVISTS TAKE FIRE AT CGIAR Environmentalists and farm activists in Mexico are criticising the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) for distancing itself from small farmers and pandering to transnational biotech corporations that produce transgenic seeds. Protests were held outside the Mexico City hotel October 27-29 where the CGIAR was holding a meeting. According to Silvia Ribeiro, spokeswoman in Latin America for the Canada-based Action Group on Erosion, Technology and Concentration, " The CGIAR is focused on private companies and biotechnology, and there is abundant evidence of that. " In late 2002, the committee of non-governmental organisations that formed part of the CGIAR fell apart when the alliance came under fire from many of its members for forging closer ties with transnational corporations and doing little or nothing in the face of evidence that native varieties of corn were being contaminated by GE corn in Mexico. The industrially-aligned CGIAR has NEVER taken a public position against the contamination of native varieties of corn in Mexico, particularly, as the article notes, in the light of the study produced by the North American Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) which found that GM corn had contaminated local varieties of the crop in Mexico. Unlike the CGIAR, the study recommends that Mexico enforce its moratorium on the planting of GM corn and apply stricter controls against imports of GM products from the United States. It also urges that studies be carried out to assess the impact that illegally planted GM corn has had on native species of plants, and that methods be developed to decontaminate local crops. It also recommends clearly labelling imports of products containing GM crops so consumers know what they are buying. Greenpeace says that the CEC report was completed in June, but the results were not released because they would annoy US biotech corporations. The CGIAR has long been pursuing an identical policy. http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4589 For more on CGIAR: http://www.gmwatch.org/profile1.asp?PrId=295 --------------------------- AUSTRALASIA --------------------------- + TASMANIAN MORATORIUM ON GM CROPS EXTENDED A moratorium on the growing of GM crops in Tasmania has been extended until 2009. The legislation still allows for the growing of non-food GM crops, like poppies, for research under strict controls. http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4592 + SECRET TRIALS RAISE CONTAMINATION FEARS Australian farmer Julie Newman is warning fellow farmers that they could lose markets through contamination from secret government GM canola trials in Victoria. Test protocols demand that bags are placed over GM canola plants to stop them pollinating non-GM crops, but Newmans' investigations shows that this job has not been done properly. Excerpt: Julie's argument is implacable: not only is there no market for GM crops, the slightest contamination with non-GM seeds or pollen, and that's the end of the farmers' export to Europe. " Farmers do not approve of the existing principle of co-existence of GM and non-GM crops; they want principles that will ensure non-GM farmers are not affected, and are protected by legislation and compensated for economic loss " . She says. The situation is exactly the same in Europe. " How many farmers know that the principle of coexistence is that non-GM growers are to avoid GM contamination when it is impossible to do so? How many know that it will be the non- GM growers that will be liable for 'false and misleading advertising' when we cannot deliver the non-GM product we have guaranteed? " Julie asks. And, it could make farmers liable for infringing the patents of companies like Monsanto as well. .... Australia has remained GM-free despite the approval of GM canola by the federal government, because, contrary to the situation in the European Union, it is possible for state governments to establish GM-free zones . So far, all states have either imposed a ban or a moratorium or are considered unsuited for growing GM canola. http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4592 --------------------------- QUOTE OF THE WEEK --------------------------- + SCIENTISTS AFRAID TO SPEAK OUT [New Zealand] Parliament member Sue Kedgley testified [before New Zealand's Royal Commission of Inquiry on Genetic Modification]: " Personally I have been contacted by telephone and email by a number of scientists who have serious concerns about aspects of the research that is taking place and the increasingly close ties that are developing between science and commerce, but who are convinced that if they express these fears publicly, even at such a Commission or even if they asked the awkward and difficult questions, they will be eased out of their institution. " " Are You Critical of Genetically Engineered Foods? Watch Out " , by Jeffrey M. Smith, author of Seeds of Deception http://seedsofdeception.com/newsletter-Nov1_2004.php http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4587 --------------------------- REST OF THE MONTH'S TOP STORIES --------------------------- + GM INCREASING PESTICIDE USE As a former Executive Director of the Board on Agriculture of the US National Academy of Science for seven years, Dr Charles Benbrook represents an authoritative voice on agricultural science. His latest technical report, drawing on 9 years of US Dept of Agriculture data, confirms that the claim of GM proponents that the use of GM crops in the US has led to a major reduction in pesticide use is quite simply a lie. The data shows that overall GM crops have led to an increase in pesticide use amounting to millions of pounds in quantity. Excerpt: GE corn, soybeans and cotton have led to a 122 million pound increase in pesticide use since 1996. While Bt crops have reduced insecticide use by about 15.6 million pounds over this period, HT crops have increased herbicide use 138 million pounds. Bt crops have reduced insecticide use on corn and cotton about 5 percent, while HT technology has increased herbicide use about 5 percent across the three major crops. But since so much more herbicide is used on corn, soybeans, and cotton, compared to the volume of insecticide applied to corn and cotton, overall pesticide use has risen about 4.1 percent on acres planted to GE varieties. The increase in herbicide use on HT crop acres should come as no surprise. Weed scientists have warned for about a decade that heavy reliance on HT crops would trigger changes in weed communities and resistance, in turn forcing farmers to apply additional herbicides and/or increase herbicide rates of application. The ecological adaptations predicated by scientists have been occurring in the case of Roundup Ready crops for three or four years and appear to be accelerating... Reliance on a single herbicide, glyphosate, as the primary method for managing weeds on millions of acres planted to HT varieties remains the primary factor that has led to the need to apply more herbicides per acre to achieve the same level of weed control. http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4572 + NEW REPORT ON GM COTTON IN AFRICA The executive summary of an incisive and readable new report on the introduction of GM cotton into Africa, commissioned by the African Centre for Biosafety, is at http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4571 The report reveals how the first (chemical) Green Revolution produced a wide variety of negative effects on land, the economy and in terms of farmer dependence. It then expertly takes apart many of the arguments advanced by pro-biotech interests to justify pushing GM crops into Africa. + BRAZIL OK'S PLANTING OF GM SOY Brazil's president has broken his promise and approved yet another controversial executive order allowing the planting of GM soybeans. President Luis Inacio Lula da Silva's measure was a victory for cash-strapped Monsanto, which needed the order to collect royalties from those Brazilian farmers who are using smuggled versions of its Roundup Ready seeds. http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4534 http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4533 + BUSH SUPPRESSES GM CROP WARNINGS Monsanto and the US government have been telling the world that GM crops pose no contamination threat to natural indigenous species. But Greenpeace has learned from a leaked report that NAFTA disagrees and is recommending steps to avoid a genetic threat to natural maize in Mexico. Surprise, surprise: the Bush Administration is attempting to suppress the report. The report, written by the Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) of the North American Free Trade Agreement (US, Canada and Mexico) recommends that all GE maize imports be labelled as such and that all US maize entering Mexico should be milled upon entry, to prevent living seeds from being planted. The Bush Administration has intervened several times to delay the publication of the report - completed three months ago - and there is still no official date for its publication. There are at least two reasons why the US might want to delay publication of the report. First, inside sources have alluded to the potential implications of the report on the WTO case being brought by the US and Canada against the European Union. The report will also clearly have an effect on the current US efforts to send GE maize as food aid. A number of African countries have rejected whole US maize as a threat to their environment, and requested only milled maize. The report backs up these demands as it concludes that there is insufficient data on which to conclude safety of transgenic maize for the Mexican environment and recommends milling of maize to reduce these risks. http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4547 + US DECLARES WAR ON IRAQI FARMERS A new report by GRAIN and Focus on the Global South has found that new legislation in Iraq has been carefully put in place by the US that prevents farmers from saving their seeds and effectively hands over the seed market to transnational corporations. Food sovereignty for the Iraqi people has been made near impossible by these new regulations. " The US has been imposing patents on life around the world through trade deals. In this case, they invaded the country first, then imposed their patents. This is both immoral and unacceptable " , said Shalini Bhutani, one of the report's authors. The new law in question heralds the entry into Iraqi law of patents on life forms - this first one affecting plants and seeds. This law fits in neatly into the US vision of Iraqi agriculture in the future - that of an industrial agricultural system dependent on large corporations providing inputs and seeds. In 2002, FAO estimated that 97 percent of Iraqi farmers used saved seed from their own stocks from last year's harvest or purchased from local markets. When the new law - on plant variety protection (PVP) - is put into effect, seed saving will be illegal and the market will only offer proprietary " PVP-protected " planting material " invented " by transnational agribusiness corporations. The new law totally ignores all the contributions Iraqi farmers have made to development of important crops like wheat, barley, date and pulses. Its consequences are the loss of farmers' freedoms and a grave threat to food sovereignty in Iraq. In this way, the US has declared a new war against the Iraqi farmer. http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4538 From the GM WATCH archives: " GM WATCH predicts that very soon, saving and planting our own seeds for food crops will be painted by GM seed companies and their government flunkeys as a subversive act on a par with terrorism. Governments that permit it may be recommended for 'regime change'. You read it here first! " GMWATCH monthly review number 2, 5 October 2002 http://ngin.tripod.com/051002c.htm Note: Iraq is a breadbasket of the Middle East and the genetic origin of wheat. Is the US putting legislation in place in Iraq in preparation for commercialising GM wheat there in order to gain for it a foothold in Asia? Also, if the multinationals contaminate the genetic source of wheat with their patented genes, then they may effectively own the contaminated strains and restrict farmer choice worldwide to GM wheat. In Mexico, with regard to maize, the contamination of native strains - including some supposedly non-GM varieties held in gene banks - is already well under way. http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4560 + WORLD HEALTH ORG URGES FOOD SAFETY RESEARCH Here's as plain an admission as you could get that food safety research on GM food simply has not been done. The World Health Organisation on 12 October suggested Thailand conduct further research on GMOs so that an early action plan can be implemented to cope with possible health risks posed by transgenic food. " At this point, we have no evidence to say that it is dangerous to consume food products that contain GMOs, but at the same time we also don't know its negative side. So, we have to say that we do not know the adverse health effects of GM food, " WHO assistant director-general Kerstin Leitner said. http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4519 + NOBEL PRIZE FOR OPPONENT OF GMOS AND PATENTS ON LIFE This year's Nobel Peace Prize is to be awarded to Wangari Mathai, leader of the Green Belt Movement in Kenya. A biologist by training, Mathai is the first African woman to win the prize. She has won international recognition for her campaign for democracy, human rights and environmental conservation. She has also been among the African scientists who've drawn attention to the dangers of genetic engineering and of patents on life. http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4501 + WAMBUGU APPOINTED TO UN HUNGER TASK FORCE As if in ghastly caricature of Mathai's Nobel prize, news has emerged of the recent appointment of Monsanto-trained Kenyan scientist Dr Florence Wambugu (of failed GM sweet potato fame) to the UN Hunger Task Force. Wambugu is notorious for the lies, hype and misinformation she has used to promote GMOs in Africa and around the world. For more on Wambugu whose " communication programme " is supported by CropLife International, an organisation led by Monsanto, Syngenta, Bayer, Dow and DuPont, see the GM Watch profile: http://www.gmwatch.org/profile1.asp?PrId=131 + BT COTTON FAILS AGAIN In India, Bt cotton has been outperformed by non-GM cotton for 2 years in a row. The third and final year trial for Bt cotton is now underway, according to an article in the Star of Mysore. Facts and figures are at http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4505 + GOLDEN RICE SET TO BE UPMARKET HEALTH FOOD, NOT FOR POOR Syngenta and the Humanitarian Board (set up by Syngenta to negotiate access to Golden Rice for poor countries) have moved to take steps that will give it complete control over Golden Rice, reports Gene Campaign's Suman Sahai. Excerpt: Gone, apparently are the pious intentions of delivering this rice to the world's poor. It looks like there is a high-end nutraceutical in the making, a golden health food for those who can afford these things. ....To lay its claim to Golden Rice, Syngenta has quietly started a process by which it has acquired complete control over the way in which the genetic material of Golden Rice can be used by researchers, ignoring the earlier conditions set up by the Humanitarian Board. ....These new developments are designed to establish Syngenta's absolute ownership of Golden Rice, a step likely to lead to patent claims. http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4470 + BANGLADESH TO GROW GM CROPS Bangladesh is set to grow GM crops. To start with, four types of crops would be developed under the National Agriculture Research System (NARS): rice, potato, eggplant and chickpea. This is happening with the support of the Agricultural Biotechnology Support Project II (ABSPII), which is funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), and managed by Cornell University, USA. ABSP partners have included Asgrow, Monsanto, and Pioneer Hi-Bred. http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4489 + VIOLENT REPRESSION OF ANTI-GM PROTESTS IN FRANCE Peaceful anti-GM demonstrations have been met with violent repression in France. see video http://eric.dif.free.fr and photos of the most recent public protest http://mdh.limoges.free.fr/support/valdiv/index.htm http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4483 + INDUSTRY MOVE IN CANADA THREATENS FARMERS' RIGHTS Canadian farmers' traditional right to save, use, exchange and sell farm-saved seed is being threatened by proposals to collect royalties on virtually all seed. A recent review of Canada's seed production and regulatory system looked at ways to collect royalties on seed the growers save from their own crops, to link crop insurance to the use of purchased certified seed, and to increase intellectual property protection for seed companies. " It's a fundamental shift in agriculture to the privatisation of seeds, " says Terry Pugh, executive secretary of Canada's National Farmers' Union (NFU). " There are no benefits for farmers. " Pugh described the process, known as the Seed Sector Review, as an industry-driven restructuring of Canada's seed production system. Companies such as Monsanto, Syngenta, Bayer and Dupont are pushing for " deregulation " and increased profitability, he said. The aim of the review is to turn growers from producers of seed to consumers of seed. Bill Leask, executive director of the Canadian Seed Trade Association, one of four groups that initiated the Seed Sector Review, believes that in Canada there is no legal right of farmers to save seed. Instead, Leask supports the more restrictive notion of a farmer's privilege - not right - to save seed on their own land. (He claims this, despite Canada's Plant Breeders' Rights Act that clearly allows farmers to save and replant seed from a protected variety, on their own farm). " I don't think farmers ought to have a legal right to save seeds, " he adds. http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4484 http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4502 + ROYAL SOCIETY HOSTS PRO-EUGENICS CONFERENCE A pro-eugenics conference was held on 30 September at the Royal Society in London. People Against Eugenics protested at the conference. Campaigners said the Royal Society should not allow a platform to argue for the elimination of disabled people and for cloning and designer babies. Quotes from some of the speakers: Robert Edwards: " Soon it will be a sin for parents to have a child which carries the heavy burden of genetic disease. We are entering a world where we have to consider the quality of our children. " (Speaking at European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology, reported in Metro, 5 July 1999). John Harris: " Eugenics is the attempt to create fine healthy children and that's everyone's ambition. " Harris told the BBC that couples who choose to have disabled babies are " misguided " . news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3120478.stm John Harris: " I don't think infanticide is always unjustifiable. " Daily Telegraph, Jan 25 2004 http://www.gmwatchorg/archive2.asp?arcid=4465 ------- 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. ------------ 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.