"There is a consensus within the scientific community that genetic modification is a safe method for improving food production." - CS Prakash (item 3)
'A survey measuring attitudes toward biotechnology among Cornell University agricultural and nutrition-science faculty and extension staff (who advise farmers) found that nearly half have reservations about the health, safety, and environmental impacts of genetically engineered food crops and doubt they are the answer to global hunger... Though their numbers were fewer, the biotech promoters said they felt very comfortable publicly voicing their views, while the concerned majority did not express that sentiment.' - SPINNING SCIENCE INTO GOLD http://www.tompaine.com/opinion/2001/08/02/index.html
----
1. GREENPEACE ASKS FRANCE TO BAN ROUNDUP SOYBEANS
2. Philippine House Approves Prison Term for GMO Labeling Violators
3. SCIENCE GROUP PROTESTS SRI LANKAN BIOTECH BAN;
----
1. GREENPEACE ASKS FRANCE TO BAN ROUNDUP SOYBEANS
August 17, 2001
Reuters [via Agnet - shortened]
PARIS - Environmental group Greenpeace was cited as asking France on Friday to ban imports of Monsanto Co's genetically modified Roundup Ready soybeans after scientists discovered unidentified fragments of DNA in the oilseeds.
Greenpeace France was cited as saying in a statement that the scientists' discovery meant that Roundup Ready soybeans had been authorised for human and animal consumption on an "incomplete and false" basis adding that, "We therefore demand the French government to immediately suspend the authorisation of Roundup Ready soybeans on the market, and to ban its import and marketing in France."
A spokesman for the French farm ministry's food agency, the DGAL, declined to comment immediately on Greenpeace's demands.
---
2. Philippine House Approves Prison Term for GMO Labeling Violators
By Michael Bengwayan
http://ens-news.com/ens/aug2001/2001L-08-15-02.html
MANILA, Philippines, August 15, 2001 (ENS) - If you are selling a product that contains genetically modified organisms (GMO) in the Phillippines you may soon have to label it "genetically engineered" or go to prison. Up to 12 years in jail plus a $2,000 fine is the penalty for failing to label that was passed bys the Philippine Congress Tuesday. The bill requires the labeling of GMO derived food and food products.
Under the bill, violators could be imprisoned for not less than six years but not more than 12 years. If the offender is an alien, he or she can be immediately deported without need of any further proceedings.
Congressman Del de Guzman of the city of Marikina introduced the Genetically Engineered Food Right to Know Act, which demands that food and food products containing genetically modified organisms or those produced through genetic engineering technologies be labeled as such.
"It came to my attention that there are many products available in local markets that were sent to Hongkong for laboratory testing have been tested positive for GMO contamination," de Guzman said in a press statement.
[image: Jose de Venecia Jr. is Speaker of the House, the fourth highest official in the Philippine government. ]
Last year, the environmental advocacy group Greenpeace said that 11 popular food products in the country were tested positive for GMO contamination. The latest to be identified GMO positive is Nestle's infant product Cerelac Wheat.
In addition, GMO products like canola oil and potato chips have found their way to the stomach of Philippine consumers.
"The bill will give meaning to the right of our people to know if what they eat have been modified by modern biotechnology," the congressman said. "Consumers have the right to know the contents of the food items they buy and then decide for themselves whether to buy or not, he added.
In the Philippines, most buying consumers have little knowledge of GMO issues, neither pro nor con. The debate regarding the safety of GMOs is on the level of the academe, professionals and some safe food advocates.
Agricultural professor Bony Ligat of the Benguet State University says, "There have been so many discussions regarding GMOs. But these are mostly within the walls of universities and colleges, he says, and not many consumers and farmers are aware of the advantages and disadvantages.
The stand of the Philippine government as well as the Department of Agriculture is pro GMO. Only the non-government organizations have taken the task to bare the loopholes of the current legislation, Ligat said.
Some Benguet farmers, unknowingly, are now planting genetically engineered vegetable crops. The province of Benguet produces almost 70 percent of the vegetables in the Philippines.
De Guzman is doubtful about the safety of GMOs and GMO products. "The safety of GMOs has not been established conclusively. I felt it was necessary to pass a law that will require all products to be appropriately labeled."
Last March, Senator Wigberto Tanada called for the Senate to require the labeling of GMO products especially because many Muslims suspect some of the food commodities they buy are laced with pork ingredients. Muslims, by call of religion, do not eat pork. There are more than six million Muslims in the island nation, among the roughly 80 million Philippinos.
Critics of the labeling bill are mostly food manufacturers and importers. "It will cause a drop in sales, no doubt. When consumers start questioning your products, they hesitate to buy," a top salesman of Purefoods said on condition of anonymity. Purefoods is one of the top five food makers and importers in the country.
"GMO products are being misunderstood. In fact, they ensure food security," he added.
Congressman de Guzman replied, "Global food production is one and a half times more than what is necessary to feed the burgeoning world population. GMO food and food products is not needed, many food experts say."
"Worse, the promise held out by GMOs may turn out to be more harmful to human health than their perceived benefits," the congressman said.
Already, de Guzman's bill has gathered popular support from NGOs advocating for food self-reliance and sustainability. Members of MASIPAG, a nationwide organization of farmers and scientists, and Sibol Agham at Teknolohiya, an NGO providing ecologically safe farming technologies, have rallied in the streets to support the bill.
Many countries like Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, New Zealand, Saudi Arabia, Russia, 15 countries of the European Union, Mexico, Israel, Taiwan, the Czech Republic and Norway have mandatory laws which call for labeling of GMO products.
Global companies are starting to remove genetically engineered ingredients in their foods, particularly in USA, Canada, Japan, Brazil and Europe. Large food supermarkets have cleared their shelves of "genetically-tinkered food items," de Guzman said.
---
3. NB the second contact given below for AgBioWorld - Gregory Conko of the Competitive Enterprise Institute: a right wing free market/pro-globalisation grouping so extreme it seems to favour no regulatory control at all for GMOs!
SCIENCE GROUP PROTESTS SRI LANKAN BIOTECH BAN; AGBIOWORLD FOUNDATION CALLS FOR SUPPORT OF BENEFICIAL TECHNOLOGY
August 17, 2001
press release
TUSKEGEE, Ala -- The AgBioWorld Foundation today called upon the Sri Lankan government to rethink its ban on biotechnology food imports imposed earlier this month. "This was a reckless decision," said C.S. Prakash, professor of plant genetics and president of the AgBioWorld Foundation. "And it will prevent the Sri Lankan people from benefiting from this safe and promising technology."
A recent report published by the United Nations Development Program found that genetically enhanced crop plants can significantly benefit local and regional agriculture in the developing world, the key to addressing both hunger and low income. "Biotechnology offers the only, or the best, tool of choice for marginal ecological zones left behind by the Green Revolution, but home to more than half the world's poorest people," the report found.
It also charged that bans on trade in biotech products based upon dubious concerns about safety could jeopardize the ability of the poorest nations to feed growing populations.
Millions of people go hungry, and hundreds of millions more receive inadequate levels of dietary nutrients. But agricultural researchers around the globe are now using biotechnology to improve many important plant varieties useful in impoverished regions. "The decision by Sri Lanka, or any government, to prevent its citizens from sharing in the benefits of biotechnology is short-sighted and immoral," said Prakash, and he added that "biotechnology provides a valuable tool for developing countries to produce more food locally and in an environmentally sustainable manner."
There is a consensus within the scientific community that genetic modification is a safe method for improving food production. Seven national academies of science and dozens of other scientific bodies have endorsed this approach. And a Declaration of Scientists in Support of Agricultural Biotechnology, endorsed by more than 3,200 scientists, including 16 Nobel Prize winners, states that "biotechnology can address environmental degradation, hunger, and poverty in the developing world by providing improved agricultural productivity and greater nutritional security." The declaration and a list of signatories can be viewed at http://www.agbioworld.org . The AgBioWorld Foundation is a non-profit organization that provides information about developments in plant science, biotechnology, and sustainable agriculture.
For more information, contact C.S. Prakash at 1-334-663-1511 (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.) or Gregory Conko at 1-202-550-2974 (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.).
---
'They get up and talk as if they are neutral. But they almost always have some share in the company or some self-interested gain for their work.'- Phil Bereano, University of Washington
'There is too much hype. Every gene that is discovered will lead to a cure for cancer.' - Maxine Singer, the National Academy of Sciences, quoted in Big Science: Bloated, Whiny and Self-Important, Book Review from Scientific American http://www.sciam.com/2001/0901issue/0901reviews1.html
'When we spliced the profit gene into academic culture, we created a new organism - the recombinant university. ' - Paul Berg, Stanford University
'For any scientist who wants a good job and a nice home with mortgage payments, he's not going to choose the Union of Concerned Scientists." - Hugh Gusterson, MIT, quoted in Science Good, Nature Bad: The Biotech Dogmahttp://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=11105