1.RELIEF AS MONSANTO ABANDONS GM CANOLA IN SOUTH AFRICA
2.GM Sorghum: Africa's Golden Rice
3.Report calls for stricter labelling of food
---
---
1.RELIEF AS MONSANTO ABANDONS GM CANOLA IN SOUTH AFRICA
Biosafety in South Africa - Media Releases
Johannesburg, 11 August 2010
http://www.biosafetyafrica.net/index.html/index.php/20100811326/RELIEF-AS-MONSANTO-ABANDONS-GM-CANOLA-IN-SOUTH-AFRICA/menu-id-100026.html
The African Centre for Biosafety (ACB) is relieved to learn that Monsanto has withdrawn its application to conduct GM canola field trails in South Africa.
GM Canola is predominantly grown in the USA, Canada and Australia. The global market for GM canola, used principally for cooking oils and animal feed, is estimated to be worth $300 million.
The ACB objected to Monsanto's field trial application in September 2009 when the ACB raised serious concerns that the field trials would pose unacceptable environmental risks, including gene flow into wild populations. The South African biosafety authorities were of a similar opinion, and twice requested that Monsanto provide additional biosafety information. Monsanto's decision to withdraw its application clearly indicates it could not provide sufficient safety assurances.
A recent study by the University of Arkansas in the US corroborates these fears. In North Dakota, (a large GM canola growing area), 80% of the wild canola plants studied have developed herbicide resistance by crossing with GM varieties. Studies in both Canada and Japan have come to similar conclusions. Although GM Canola is not grown in Japan, transgenic oil seed rape, a close relative of canola was found in areas adjacent to the ports where it is imported.
"It is with a great deal of relief that South Africa has been spared this great threat to our abundant biodiversity," said Mariam Mayet, Director of the ACB.
ACB's objections can be viewed at www.biosafetyafrica.org.za
---
---
2.GM Sorghum: Africa's Golden Rice
Biosafety in Africa - Briefing Papers
http://www.biosafetyafrica.net/index.html/index.php/20100813327/GM-Sorghum-Africas-Golden-Rice/menu-id-100025.html
In this paper, we critically analyse the African Biofortified Sorghum (ABS) project, a GM 'poster project' in Africa. We dig beneath the veneer of the project being an "African led solution" to poverty and malnutrition on the continent. We also focus attention on the myriad of sorghum research initiatives currently underway in Africa, using both genetic engineering techniques and marker assisted selection (MAS). In this regard, we pay special attention to the USAID funded INTSORMIL programme. We also provide a snapshot of the GM sorghum research being conducted elsewhere in the world.
[pdf] Download 529.27 Kb
http://www.biosafetyafrica.net/index.html/images/stories/dmdocuments/ACB-Sorghum%C2%ADGoldenRice.pdf
---
---
3.Report calls for stricter labelling of food
Karishma Thakurdin
Engineering News, 2 July 2010
http://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/report-calls-for-stricter-labelling-of-food-products-2010-07-02
[see also the video of Mariam Mayet talking about the report, on this page]
Research organisation the African Centre for Biosaftey (ACB) has compiled a report on the significance of mandatory labelling of genetically modified (GM) food products in South Africa.
ACB director Mariam Mayet explains that the report focuses on the traceabi- lity, segregation and other important factors that influence the labelling of GM products.
"The report highlights the objectives of labelling and the integrity of the labelling system, and the types of labelling that could be used. There are three primary purposes for labelling: to verify food safety, to indicate product ingredients in the same way as other additives are indicated and to give consumers a choice about what they are consuming," she says.
Mayet believes that, for labelling to have integrity, consumers must be confident about the accuracy of labels and that there is a readily available way of verifying the information supplied on the labels.
Possible and existing systems for segregating GM and non-GM produce are identified, along with available testing systems to quantify the GM content. The report states that segregation and testing systems underpin the verification process for information provided on labels and can ensure accuracy and verifiability of claims made on labels. Some reference is made to imports, because these will also require labelling if the overall labelling system is to have any integrity and be fair.
Mayet adds that there needs to be accurate documentation throughout the entire process.
The costs of segregation and identity preservation, testing and labelling are considered key parts of the value chain. This includes some reflection on who should bear the costs of mandatory labelling, based on who the beneficiaries are.
"Industry is saying that, if mandatory labelling is implemented, it will increase the cost of food; however, we believe that the people who benefit from the techno- logy should bear the cost as it is totally unacceptable that consumers should pay for the right to know, especially since they were not consulted in the first place as to whether they want GM foods," she explains.
The report also considers the value chains for the three GM crops in South Africa maize, soya, and cotton and determines the driving force in each chain. GM products are currently found throughout the food chain in South Africa. Of the three crops, maize and its by-products are the most widespread in the food chain, since maize is the staple food of the majority of the people in the country. While soya and cotton products are used far less for human consumption, they are found in a range of everyday products, such as oils and food additives.
The report considers demand for non- GM products in South Africa next. This is important because in a market-driven economy, premiums for non-GM products will determine the sustainability of segregation and labelling systems.
She says that the report has been sub- mitted to government and there has been a divided response from government, as some role-players believe that existing voluntary regulations are adequate.
"It provides extensive recommendations and we will lobby strenuously and work with government [to get them implemented],” Mayet says.
She says that the report was also prompted by the implementation of the National Consumer Protection Act, which comes into effect in October.
She adds: "The Act creates an opportunity for the mandatory labelling of certain foods containing GM organisms. It is a far-reaching document that makes a strong case for the protection of a consumer's right to choose, the right to disclosure and information, the right to fair and honest dealing, and the right to fair value, good quality and safety."
The Act has strong teeth and has strict liability provisions that will apply to locally manufactured food, as well as imported products.
Such a report was also necessitated by the fact that it is critical that there is accurate labelling on food products because, when a product is genetically modified, there can be unforeseen, uncertain eventualities, such as people falling sick.
Mayet explains that the labelling of food products falls under the right to disclosure and information, and that labels must be understood with little or no effort by a consumer with average literacy skills and little experience as a consumer of relevant goods or services.
She says that labelling can either be mandatory or voluntary; however, current regulations follow a voluntary labelling regime. She explains that research shows that mandatory labelling is required because there is a clear indication that voluntary labelling is not effective in providing consumers with accurate information about the ingredients in their food.
"Voluntary labelling implies private regulation and, therefore, there are no uniform standards, which can result in the consumer being misled," Mayet says. She adds that unregulated labelling does not provide consumers with the facts needed to make informed choices, and hence, does not provide consumer protection, while mandatory labelling ensures more accuracy and lays the basis for consumers having recourse if claims about content are false.
Edited by: Brindaveni Naidoo