WEEKLY WATCH number 227
from Claire Robinson, WEEKLY WATCH editor
-----------------------------------------------------------
Dear all:
Don't miss the latest instalment in the ongoing row over GM Watch's challenge to a paper on GM sweet corn that won an award for scientific excellence (WORMY CORN SCANDAL). It's also well worth making a trip to computer scientist Tim Lambert's science blog to see the photographic evidence on who's telling the truth in this story.
http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2007/09/would_you_eat_wormy_sweet_corn.php
We also have two fascinating pieces on subjects that sound desperately boring - Malthusian scarcity and intragenic modification. The latter is a technique that some gene bashers hope will be the publicly acceptable face of GM (MALTHUS, GM AND IM).
And the big news this week is that India's regulators are being charged with contempt of court for their reckless promotion of large scale trials of GM food crops. (ASIA)
Claire This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
www.gmwatch.org / www.lobbywatch.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONTENTS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
WORMY CORN SCANDAL
CORPORATE TAKEOVER OF SCIENCE
AUSTRALASIA
THE AMERICAS
EUROPE
ASIA
UN
PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE OF GM
MALTHUS
GM AND IM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
WORMY CORN SCANDAL
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ WORMY CORN SCIENTISTS' CLAIMS "UNTRUE", EXPERT CONCLUDES
A computer scientist at the University of New South Wales has meticulously analysed pictures that Shane Morris claims prove that the controversial "Would you eat wormy sweet corn?" sign - placed above the bin of non-GM corn during the study he co-authored with Doug Powell and others - was taken down early on in the research. The expert concludes that the pictures show the wormy corn sign was never taken down, ie the exact opposite of what Morris claims. He writes, "I think that science would have been better served if Powell and Morris had acknowledged the flaws in their study rather than making untrue statements about the 'wormy corn' sign being removed."
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8259
http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2007/09/would_you_eat_wormy_sweet_corn.php
+ LOBBYISTS RALLY ROUND WORMY CORN SCIENTIST
An international group of hardline GM promoters have signed an open letter in support of Shane Morris and in condemnation of a letter to the Canadian High Commission that protests his behaviour - see below.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8276
+ SOIL ASSOCIATION CONDEMNS CANADIAN ATTACK ON UK AND IRISH FREE SPEECH
Peter Melchett of the Soil Association has written to the Canadian High Commission to protest the actions of the Canadian Government bureaucrat, Shane Morris, who has been threatening free speech in the UK and Ireland via legal threats against GM Watch and GM-free Ireland. Melchett says Morris has also been trying to undermine Ireland's GM-free policy. See Peter Melchett's letter at
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8256
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORPORATE TAKEOVER OF SCIENCE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ IRINA ERMAKOVA SET UP BY NATURE BIOTECHNOLOGY
The journal Nature Biotechnology appears to have acted as a messenger boy for a bunch of pro-GM lobbyists to do a demolition job on the research of Russian scientist Dr Irina Ermakova. Dr Ermakova made headlines with her research showing ill effects on rats fed GM soy. Clearly, something had to be done.
The journal tells readers it "solicited" the comments from "a group of researchers working in the field."
But this appears to be completely untrue. In a letter from journal editor Andrew Marshall to Dr Ermakova of 25 June we are told: "I am writing to you because the journal has been approached by a group of authors wishing to critique the results of your work that have been discussed in public forums."
Marshall goes on to say, "... the journal would, however, prefer to provide you with an opportunity to present your own findings and conclusions in your own words, rather than a critique from one side."
According to Dr Brian John who has seen the correspondence, Dr Ermakova cooperated, assuming that the editor wished to publish an honest discussion of the scientific issues. She was never shown the "community feedback" to her answers prior to publication of the article, which is an attempt by the GM lobbyists to demolish her study **without giving her a chance to reply to their claims**.
The review authors are all long-familiar hardline GM-promoters - none with any background in toxicology -and they include former Biotech Industry Organisation Vice President, Val Giddings, and the head of a biotech industry funded PR effort, Vivian Moses.
Dr Brian John writes, "...there are some VERY serious questions that now need to be asked about the motives of a man who has seriously abused his privileged position as editor, and about the modus operandi of what used to be a serious scientific publication. What we effectively have is a very brutal and biased (and inaccurate) piece of peer reviewing by a self-selected group of GM proponents, in print and on the record, and published without the vilified scientist being given any opportunity to defend herself."
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8273
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
AUSTRALASIA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ TOP SCIENTIST CAUGHT IN GM MORATORIA CROSSFIRE
A leading Australian scientist has been commissioned by the Western Australia government to conduct a critical animal feeding study that may decide the future of GM crop production in that state. But Dr Judy Carman has come under fire from the pro-GM lobby, which has questioned her involvement in the research.
Comment from Dr Brian John: We shouldn't be surprised by this - the GM industry specializes in the vilification of scientists who discover things or say things that Monsanto et al find uncomfortable. "Shoot the messenger" is a standard technique - expect it to be used more and more as the GM debate hots up in Australia.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8257
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE AMERICAS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ USDA PROPOSES FURTHER DEREGULATION OF GM CROPS
The US Dept of Agriculture (USDA) is considering the adoption of new regulations for GMOs. There are several key provisions under consideration by the agency, including the controversial proposal to allow "low level" contamination of conventional crops by unapproved GM varieties.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8262
ACTION: SEND YOUR COMMENTS TO USDA TODAY!
[via] http://ga3.org/campaign/EIS
+ U.S.: EMAILS DETAIL BIOTECH MEETINGS
Former state economic undersecretary Robert K. Coughlin met with state biotechnology executives to develop lucrative tax breaks for the industry at the same time that he was entering discussions with the biotech trade group to become its next president, newly released e-mails show. Coughlin's actions have led to an Ethics Commission inquiry.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8260
+ U.S: MONSANTO FACES ANTI-TRUST PROBE
Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller is looking into possible anti-trust violation by Monsanto.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8277
+ U.S.: BIOTECH STARTUP CHLOROGEN SHUTS DOWN
Biotech startup Chlorogen Inc. has ceased research operations and is selling off its technology. Chlorogen genetically modified the chloroplasts of tobacco plants to produce proteins that could be made into drugs.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8270
+ U.S.: DELTA KING CLOSES
Delta King Seed Co., the seed dealership that promoted itself as the Soybean of the South, has gone out of business. Delta King owed millions of dollars in technology fees to Monsanto after the company apparently overestimated the amount of seed it could sell and was forced to take a loss.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8270
+ MONSANTO BUYS BRAZILIAN SEED FIRM
Monsanto has paid $100 million to acquire Brazilian corn seed company Agroeste Sementes. The acquisition gives Monsanto control of brands that were planted on approximately 40 percent of Brazil's 30 million corn acres in the 2006-20007 growing season.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8270
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
EUROPE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ FRENCH GOVT PREFERS SECRECY OVER GM PLANTINGS
Since last March, the French government has operated an official public register showing GM plantings. But many GM plantings are NOT being registered and are therefore illegal, says Greenpeace. There have been several actions in France drawing attention to these infractions.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8275
+ UK: LORD SAINSBURY GIVES LABOUR ANOTHER GBP2m
Former science minister Lord Sainsbury has given the Labour Party a donation of GBP2 million. He has now given more than GBP16 million to Labour and has made a GBP2 million loan. Lord Sainsbury has long been the Labour Party's biggest individual donor. A GM enthusiast with biotech business interests, he was also science minister until last year. A member of Labour's National Executive Committee told the BBC, "In any other country I think a government minister donating such vast amounts of money and effectively buying a political party would be seen for what it is, a form of corruption of the political process."
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8261
+ UK: THE DOUBLE STANDARDS AGENCY
Superb comment from Peter Melchett on the pro-GM, anti-organic Food Standards Agency's shameful inaction over toxic food additives (mirroring its inaction over illegal GM rice contaminating UK supplies).
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8265
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASIA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ INDIA'S REGULATORS CHARGED WITH CONTEMPT OF COURT
Aruna Rodrigues and her co-petitioners have filed for contempt of court against three people from India's GM regulator GEAC. The three are charged with allowing trials of GM brinjal (eggplant) and other GM crops to go ahead in spite of the Supreme Court injunction against such trials until biosafety concerns are settled. The other trials that GEAC illegally allowed to go ahead include Bt rice, Bt tomato, Bt okra, more Bt brinjal, and GM groundnuts.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8274
+ GM BATTLE IN THAILAND
The Thai Cabinet last month deferred a decision on whether to permit field testing of GM papaya and tomatoes after facing strong opposition to the releases. An exporter, Soonthorn Sritawee of River Kwai International Food, said some exporters had already suffered due to the GM issue because GM crops are unacceptable in markets that preferred organic products. "We lost the European market for papayas after news that some GM papayas were removed from the Khon Kaen research centre a few years ago," he said. "Importers cancelled orders and never asked for Thai papayas again. We have lost Bt30 million in annual income from that event."
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8266
+ USDA PUSHING GM RICE IN THAILAND
Having lost market share as a result of its GM rice fiasco, the US Department of Agriculture is working hard to get that market share back by encouraging others down the GM route. According to Dr Brian John, "If GM rice can be made acceptable in the countries of the Far East, a few million tonnes of contaminated US rice can easily be shifted on the international market."
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8278
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
UN
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ UN's FOOD AND AG ORG COMES OUT IN FAVOUR OF ORGANICS
The United Nations Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) has come out in favour of organic agriculture. Its report Organic Agriculture and Food Security states that organic agriculture can address local and global food security challenges. Organic farming is no longer to be considered a niche market within developed countries, but a vibrant commercial agricultural system practised in 120 countries. The organic market was worth US$40 billion in 2006, and expected to reach US$70 billion by 2012. FAO official Nadia Scialabba said the strongest benefits of organic agriculture are its reliance on non-fossil fuel, locally available resources that incur minimal ecological stresses and are cost effective.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8268
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE OF GM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ TRANSGENIC PUBLIC RELATIONS: WHY IS IT SO HARD?
A good article for Salon.com challenges the myth put about by pro-GMers that the problem with GM is not the technology, but one of public perception. The myth says that if scientists had better media and communications training, public "mistrust" of GM would melt away.
But the author of the article, Andrew Leonard, points out that the reason the public mistrusts GM is because those promoting it have vested financial interests: "One's starting point is to always be sceptical of assurances coming from anyone who has a financial stake in the proposition at hand. In a world in which the corporate capture of regulatory agencies is routine, top academic scientists enjoy a steady stream of income from corporate entities, and huge multinational corporations require the constant introduction and distribution of new products to generate the profits demanded by their shareholders, you don't have to be a Marxist to be suspicious. You need merely be prudent."
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8267
+ HAVE YOU EATEN YOUR GM FOOD TODAY?
An article for Wired News finds it hard to square people's hatred of GM foods with Monsanto's financial success: "In August 2006, the Center for Food Safety released a factsheet that stated, 'the depth of market rejection of GE foods is arguably unparalleled by any other consumer product.' It's hard to square these statements with Monsanto's $689,000,000 in net income during 2006."
But as Robert Vint points out, the $689,000,000 income for Monsanto comes purely from sales of unlabelled produce - from GM feed (possible only because produce of GM-fed animals is not labelled as such) and from sales of GM food in the USA (where it is not labelled) and biofuel crops (which are not labelled GM and, by their nature, are not a direct health threat to customers). It still seems true that virtually no one knowingly buys and eats GM products - whether they are,for example, in the USA, EU, Japan or Africa.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8271
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
MALTHUS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ SPECTRES OF MALTHUS: SCARCITY, POVERTY, APOCALYPSE
An excellent interview with UC Berkeley historian Iain Boal challenges the assumption of scarcity of resources. The idea that a large population (particularly the poor) constantly threatens to devour scarce resources that will run out in an apocalyptic catastrophe was popularized by Reverend Thomas Malthus. What isn't usually said is that Malthus was the first paid economist, in the service of the East India Company, which monopolized trade with India. The Malthusian notion of scarcity drives the current economic model.
Boal believes that while scarcities do indeed exist, they are generally created by colonial, capitalist exploitation, not by indigenous populations with collective responsibility for their own land. In spite of this, capitalists constantly blame 'commoning' for laying waste to resources, when in reality, the blame lies squarely at the door of unbridled capitalism. Of course, this particular capitalist myth is well used by the likes of Monsanto, as Boal points out, who want us to believe that commons such as food and water will run out unless they are owned and 'looked after' by private interests. Boal has an interesting-sounding book coming up about these topics, called The Long Theft: Episodes in the History of Enclosure.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8269
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
GM AND IM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ IS IM BETTER THAN GM?
Gene bashers are touting intragenic modification (IM) as a new, safer, and more publicly acceptable method of GM that transforms plants with native genetic elements only. But Dr Michael Antoniou, reader in medical and molecular genetics at Kings College, London, says the IM hype is deceptive:
"The point is that 'IM' is very much still a 'GM' process involving the random insertion of a transgene into the plant host DNA. Therefore, IM will be prone to all the highly mutagenic effects of the GM transformation process. The trap the advocates of IM/GM have fallen into is that the main perceived risks arise from the inserted transgene and its product. This is indeed one area of risk but for me (from a molecular genetics standpoint) the PRINCIPAL dangers of GM have always been with the general disruptive effects on host gene function of the GM transformation process, which can not only result in impaired crop performance but also toxic and allergic effects. The terms 'intragene' and IM are technically simply non-scientific but something invented to allay public and other concerns."
GM Watch comment: The paper touting IM is called "Cleaning-up crop genomes through intragenic modification". What an interesting assumption: that natural genomes are dirty and disorderly and need scientists to clean them up!
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8272
For more on this topic
http://www.bioscienceresource.org/commentaries/brc2.php