GM Watch
  • Main Menu
    • Home
    • News
      • Newsletter subscription
      • Daily Digest
      • News Reviews
      • News Languages
    • Articles
      • GM Myth Makers
      • GM Reports
      • GM Quotes
      • GM Myths
      • Non-GM successes
      • GM Firms
        • Monsanto: a history
        • Monsanto: resources
        • Bayer: a history
        • Bayer: resources
    • Videos
      • Latest Videos
      • Must see videos
      • Cornell videos
      • Agriculture videos
      • Labeling videos
      • Animals videos
      • Corporations videos
      • Corporate takeover videos
      • Contamination videos
      • Latin America videos
      • India videos
      • Asia videos
      • Food safety videos
      • Songs videos
      • Protests videos
      • Biofuel myths videos
      • Index of GM crops and foods
      • Index of speakers
      • Health Effects
    • Contact
    • About
    • Donations
    • How donations will help us
News and comment on genetically modified foods and their associated pesticides    
  • News
    • Latest News
    • Newsletter subscription
    • News Reviews
    • News Languages
      • Notícias em Português
      • Nieuws in het Nederlands
      • Nachrichten in Deutsch
    • Archive
      • 2021 articles
      • 2020 articles
      • 2019 articles
      • 2018 articles
      • 2017 articles
      • 2016 articles
      • 2015 articles
      • 2014 articles
      • 2013 articles
      • 2012 articles
      • 2011 articles
      • 2010 articles
      • 2009 articles
      • 2008 articles
      • 2007 articles
      • 2006 articles
      • 2005 articles
      • 2004 articles
      • 2003 articles
      • 2002 articles
      • 2001 articles
      • 2000 articles
  • Articles
    • GM Myth Makers
    • GM Reports
    • How donations will help us
    • GM Quotes
    • GM Myths
    • Non-GM successes
    • GM Firms
      • Monsanto: a history
      • Monsanto: resources
      • Bayer: a history
      • Bayer: resources
  • Videos
    • Index of speakers
    • Glyphosate Videos
    • Latest Videos
    • Must see videos
    • Health Effects
    • Cornell videos
    • Agriculture videos
    • Labeling videos
    • Animals videos
    • Corporations videos
    • Corporate takeover videos
    • Contamination videos
    • Latin America videos
    • India videos
    • Asia videos
    • Food safety videos
    • Songs videos
    • Protests videos
    • Biofuel myths videos
    • Index of GM crops and foods
  • Contact
  • About
  • Donations
SUBSCRIBE TO REVIEWS

GMWatch Facebook cornfield banner

SCIENCE SUPPORTS REGULATION OF GENE EDITING

Plant tissue cultures

GENE EDITING: UNEXPECTED OUTCOMES AND RISKS

Damaged DNA on fire

GENE-EDITED CROPS & FOODS

Help stop the new threat

GM Fed pig

News Menu

  • Latest News
  • News Reviews
  • Archive
  • Languages

Please support GMWatch

Donations

You can donate via Paypal or credit/debit card.

Some of you have opted to give a regular donation. This is greatly appreciated as it helps place us on a more stable financial basis. Thank you for your support!

2004 articles

200,000 petition calls for strict labelling of GM foods

  • Print
  • Email
Details
Published: 03 May 2004
Created: 03 May 2004
Last Updated: 22 October 2012
Twitter

1. Save Our Seeds - 200,000 petition
2.Groups slam biotech proposal
3.Save Organic Food Coalition
---

1.Petition calls for strict labelling of genetically modified seeds
[shortened] http://www.eubusiness.com, 03 May 2004

European Union Environment Commissioner Margot Wallstroem was Monday handed a 200,000 signature petition calling for the strictest possible labelling of genetically modified (GM) seeds.

The initiative, by a group calling itself "Save Our Seeds", comes as the commission is preparing to adopt a controversial directive authorising the "accidental or technically inevitable" presence of between 0.3 percent (for oil seed rape and maize) and 0.5 percent (for beetroot, potatoes and cotton) of GM organisms (GMOs) in batches of seed.

The group, composed of 300 farming, ecologist, trade union and cooperative organisations, denounced the plan Monday as "illegal, non-scientific, unjust and completely unnecessary".

"These thresholds of tolerance are going to lead to massive contamination in agriculture and massive problems for farmers," said Greenpeace's European spokesman Eric Gall.

Other critics denounced the project as the end of the European model of farming based on high quality products and accused the commission of being the GMO industry's Trojan horse.

According to Wallstroem's spokeswoman the proposal is not the final version but critics of the scheme said the very principle of thresholds of tolerance should be ruled out and GMOs present in seeds should be labelled once they could reliably be detected at all.

The campaigners also accuse Brussels of wanting to make conventional or organic farmers pay the cost of protecting their crops from what they say will be the inevitable contamination by GMOs from fields of GM crops.

The commission itself has shown signs of internal disagreement, with Wallstroem arguing in January for the thresholds of tolerance to be lowered...

for the rest of the article: http://www.eubusiness.com/afp/040503172436.2i3zlinh
---

2.Green groups slam biotech proposal
http://www.eupolitix.com, 3 May 2004

Proposed new laws on permissible levels of genetically modified organisms in seeds are "illegal, unscientific, and unfair", according to a green coalition.

Speaking in Brussels on Monday, the group of six NGOs hit out at a leaked draft proposal on GM thresholds for seeds, which would allow trace levels of GMOs in food with no labelling.

The proposal sets these levels at 0.3 and 0.5 per cent, depending on the crop, and follows on from laws establishing a 0.9 per cent GM level for food.

Benedikt Haerlin, group co-ordinator, said that allowing any GM contamination of conventional food was "like telling a vegetarian that 0.5 per cent sausage in his food was unfortunately unavoidable".

Haerlin said the proposal broke 2001 EU laws on the 'deliberate release of GMOs'.

Fellow campaigner Eric Gall added that the commission "does not have any reliable scientific basis" for its proposal, as it was using data from 2001 since which time new studies have emerged.

The 2001 scientific committee opinion referred to also presupposed a one per cent level for food, rather than 0.9 per cent.

Environmentalists say this means the tolerable thresholds suggested for seeds would actually have the knock on effect of a higher level than 0.9 per cent GMOs in the end food products.

The European community of consumer cooperatives (Euro Coop) said that the commission proposal would "make it impossible to meet consumer demand for non-GM food".

And the European Environmental Bureau (EEB) upped the stakes still further by saying that allowing biotech contamination would be the "end of the European way of agriculture, which is based on high quality".

He explained that the green groups would like to see a 0.1 per cent threshold - as is currently in practice the case in Europe.

But this will become much harder with the likely approval of new gene altered crops in the future.

The commission proposes 0.3 per cent for rape and maize, and 0.5 per cent for sugar beet, fodder beet, potato and cotton.

It has thus far set no levels for crops such as tomatoes, wheat or soybeans.

But the biotechnology industry said environmentalists were being "anti-technology" and "unrealistic".

for rest of article: http://www.eupolitix.com/EN/News/200405/491225e2-c9ad-41b4-bc1c-e963c6d698f3.htm
---

3.Save Organic Food Coalition Launches Effort to Protect Organic Foods From Biocontamination
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=109&STORY=/www/story/05-03-2004/0002165043&EDATE=

SEATTLE, May 3 /PRNewswire/ -- [shortened] The Save Organic Food coalition and web site (http://www.saveorganicfood.org) are officially being launched this week as The Campaign to Label Genetically Engineered Foods(http://www.thecampaign.org) undertakes a new effort to protect organic food from contamination by genetically engineered crops.

"The American public has really embraced organic food in the past several years. Organic food is one of the fastest growing segments of the U.S. food industry," says The Campaign's Executive Director, Craig Winters. "But at a time when the popularity of organic foods is soaring, organic crops are also at great risk. Across the country, organic farmers are reporting that their crops are being contaminated by genetically engineered crops being grown on neighboring farms."

The Save Organic Food web site  (http://www.saveorganicfood.org) features instant e-mails and form letters that citizens can send to Representatives and Senators urging them to make sure the USDA lives up to its responsibilities to protect organic farmers and the environment from the hazards of genetically engineered foods.

"We're also encouraging folks to join the Save Organic Food coalition," adds Winters. "Membership is free for citizens, organizations, businesses and farmers, and it helps create a powerful voice in the effort to keep organic foods pure."     T he Campaign to Label Genetically Engineered Foods is a 501(c)4 (non-tax deductible) non-profit political advocacy organization. (http://www.thecampaign.org)

Contact: Craig Winters, Executive Director The Campaign to Label Genetically Engineered Foods Phone: 425-771-4040, 425-876-6800 (cell) This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. http://www.thecampaign.org http://www.saveorganicfoods.org

SOURCE The Campaign to Label Genetically Engineered Foods Web Site: http://www.thecampaign.org

  • Prev
  • Next

Menu

Home

News

News Archive

News Reviews

Videos

Articles

GM Myth Makers

GM Reports

GM Myths

GM Quotes

How Donations Will Help Us

Contacts

Contact Us

About

Facebook

Twitter

RSS

Content 1999 - 2021 GMWatch.
Web Development By SCS Web Design