EC accused of ongoing conspiracy to suppress research on GM health hazards

[Guest guest]

GMW: EC accused of " ongoing conspiracy " to suppress research

on GM health hazards

" GM WATCH " <info

Sat, 19 Mar 2005 23:13:24 GMT

 

 

 

 

GM WATCH daily

http://www.gmwatch.org

------

 

EC accused of " ongoing conspiracy " to suppress research on GM health

hazards

 

 

EC accused of " ongoing conspiracy " to suppress research on GM health

hazards

Press Notice 20.3.2005

 

The EC has been accused today by community groups across Europe of an

ongoing conspiracy to keep sensitive information on GM safety studies

out of the public domain. It has also been accused of " playing politics

with public health " by turning a blind eye on inconvenient scientific

findings and approving potentially dangerous GM varieties simply to

please the Americans and the WTO.

 

GM Free Cymru, a watchdog group based in West Wales, has been trying

without success to obtain sight of a secret dossier relating to

Monsanto's MON863 maize variety, which is one of a family of GM crops

already

listed for use in Europe. The dossier contains the full application

submitted by Monsanto for EC approval, details of a 90-day rat feeding

study commissioned by the seed owners, a critique of that study

commissioned from Dr Arpad Pusztai by the German Environment Ministry,

and other

material sent to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) by its own

GMO Scientific Panel. None of this material has been released for public

perusal, in spite of many requests from Greenpeace, GeneWatch, GM

Watch, Friends of the Earth and other organizations.

 

According to GM Free Cymru this conspiracy extends back at least five

years. Members claim that he holding of " secret dossiers " acts against

the public interest, and that it is also unlawful. With respect to

MON863, there are now strong indications that the rat feeding study

completed five years ago (and still not peer reviewed or released to the

public) has thrown up physiological changes which show the crop to be

unsuitable for either animal or human consumption (1). Doubts have been

thrown on the integrity of Monsanto's commissioned research results by a

French study published last year (5), by a Belgian review of the

evidence, and finally by the refusal of other EU nations to accept

releases of

MON863 into the food chain. Now it has emerged that Dr Pusztai's

September 2004 review of the rat feeding study was only allowed by

Monsanto

on condition that it would not be published or released to the public.

Furthermore, Dr Pusztai himself was required to sign a " confidentiality

agreement " which means that he can not even talk about the study. The

creation of what is in effect a " secret dossier " by Monsanto and the EC

contravenes EU law (2), and NGOs are furious about the " gagging " of a

respected independent scientist.

 

This is not all. Monsanto is seeking approvals for MON863 in Australia

and New Zealand as well, and although it has signed a declaration to

the effect that it will not withhold any information that might prejudice

its application, it now appears that the company has broken the law and

failed to submit the full report on the study showing abnormalities in

rats fed on MON863 (3). Further, the evidence that it HAS submitted is

highly selective and misleading.

 

" This situation is totally unacceptable, and shows that the whole GM

approvals process is corrupt (8), " said Dr Brian John of GM Free Cymru.

" Critical health and safety information is being kept out of the public

domain simply because Monsanto, a gigantic biotechnology corporation,

insists on its right to " commercial confidentiality. " This is patently

absurd, since only a very small part of its dossier (for example

relating to DNA sequences) is commercially sensitive. Such secrecy

would not

be permitted in the USA (7). We cannot understand why the EC does

business with Monsanto anyway, given its long track record of deception,

bullying and corruption (4). Is the EC in charge of the GM approval

process, or is Monsanto? If the EC does not release the full MON863

dossier into the public domain, and allow Dr Pusztai to speak freely

about

what he has discovered, we believe that Wales -- and every other part of

Europe -- should simply invoke the precautionary principle and ban all

17 of the named GM varieties which are already approved by the EC. We

are convinced that most if not all of those varieties are dangerous

(9).

If nothing else, such a ban would be lawful, and entirely in tune with

the wishes of the general public. "

 

ENDS

 

Contact:

 

Dr Brian John

GM Free Cymru

Tel: 01239-820470

 

NOTES

 

(1) Open letter from Ian Panton of GM Free Cymru to Geoffrey Podger of

EFSA, 14 March 2005.

http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4986

Pusztai " gagged " on GM maize that caused rat abnormalities

 

(2) MONSANTO DEFIES GERMAN GOVERNMENT ON RISK STUDY

Monsanto has refused a request by the German government to hand over a

study showing that rats fed a variety of Monsanto GM maize suffered

serious health abnormalities, Greenpeace revealed. The German

government,

who assessed Monsanto's original application for approval of the MON863

maize, officially asked the company to present the full study to them,

after Le Monde disclosed its details last month. But Monsanto has

refused to hand over the document, claiming it is " confidential business

information " . This contravenes EU law, which stipulates that any

information concerning human health or environmental safety must be

made public.

The study, carried out by Monsanto, found that rats fed with MON863

suffered a number of abnormal effects in the development of blood cells

and vital organs, including the kidneys. Despite being aware of these

results, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) delivered a positive

assessment on the maize on 19 April 2004.

GM Watch Archive: http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=3589

 

(3) http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/PA0409/S00303.htm

 

(4) " Monsanto's World Wide Web of deceit " --

http://www.gmwatch.org/p1temp.asp?pid=25 & page=1

 

(5) In April 2004, Le Monde reported the CGB's view on MON863 and the

existence of the Monsanto rat feeding report. When Greenpeace asked the

German regulatory authority for sight of it, Monsanto refused to

release the government body from the confidentiality agreement it had

signed. While European regulators may have seen the Monsanto study, it

has

never, to our knowledge, been publicly released.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA0409/S00046.htm

See also http://www.crii-gen.org/m_fs_axbis.htm

 

(6) The EC still appears to be obsessed with maintaining its secrecy

on sensitive GM information. In a recent EU Environment Council

discussion, it became clear that the EC wishes to maintain a special

" protected

position " for the GMO approval process. At the meeting it agreed with

the member states that GMOs should be given privileged protection

against public scrutiny. This goes against the wishes of almost all of

the

NGOs dealing with GM issues, and against the spirit of both the Aarhus

Convention and the Cartagena Protocol. GMO, AARHUS AND THE EUROPEAN

UNION (14th March 2005)

 

(7) The " secret dossiers " of GM information would not be permitted in

the United States. " The kinds of studies you discuss would be available

to the public here. MON863 was indeed evaluated by our EPA. In fact

the safety data submitted to the authorities (human health and

environment), are routinely made available to the public, as well as any

comments to the agency on the application. There appears to be no good

reason why your EFSA should not also release ALL of the information on

its

MON863 file. " (Dr Doug Gurian-Sherman, Senior Scientist, Center of Food

Safety, in correspondence with Ian Panton of GM Free Cymru.)

 

(8) There is a long and dishonourable tradition of keeping sensitive

GM information out of the public domain across the EU. For example, in

the UK there was fury when Aventis (now Bayer CropScience) refused to

cooperate in the Chardon LL hearing, and refused to place its own safety

studies on the record. The same company has consistently refused to

release the findings of a cattle feeding study based at Reading

University, using Chardon LL (T25) fodder maize. Monsanto has also

refused to

release the full safety research dossiers relating to other varieties

such as MON810 and associated hybrids.

 

(9) Many of these " listed varieties " are multiple GM hybrids which

combine the traits from several GM lines. Without undertaking any

research on the matter, EFSA has blithely accepted that they are all

safe, in

spite of warnings from independent scientists that they may well be

inherently unstable.

 

 

 

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