March 2020
Once upon a time (actually 2012), the Westminster Government launched a GM spin offensive on the UK public. The tactic was to make GM a 'hot topic' which kept popping up in the news, despite nothing having actually happened. Part of this strategy seems to have employed the talents of writer and speaker Mark Lynas [1].
Lynas' qualifications are in history and politics, but he writes and speaks about science. He seems to be a man who needs the glamour and theatre of a cause to champion, and in his youth was happy to join anti-GM crop activists in 'decontaminating' GM field trials (or one at least, by his own account). He has even been, in his own words "accused of having been the global founder of the anti-GMO movement".
However, creeping around the countryside dressed in black on a dark night isn't glamorous or theatrical. Nor is unlawful activity lucrative for someone who earns his living from writing. (It's also been suggested Lynas' comrade crop-trashers didn't like him very much.) There's much more mileage for a talented writer in declaiming the excesses of biotech industry PR, and sharing in the bounty of its deep pockets. So, he swapped sides and devoted himself "pretty much full time to the GMO issue".
Showing posts with label industry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label industry. Show all posts
Action on new GMOs
August 2019
Pro-GM lobbyists continue to put
pressure on EU regulators to abandon their precautionary laws
requiring approval, safety checks, traceability and labelling of all
GM crops, foods and livestock.
In particular, the biotech lobby is
striving to evade any regulation of 'new' GMOs produced with 'gene
editing' techniques. With recent EU elections and Brexit, this
is the perfect time for them to push for light-touch,
corporate-friendly GM laws.
Rigging the regulations (and the science)
March 2019
New GMO blockbusters are predicted to include animals, algae and gene drives. These will be controversial, and the biotech industry knows it.
Before these new GM products can be moved forward, the priority is "a pacified regulatory environment" (Latham). And, what better way to achieve this than to take over GM regulation from the inside.
Populating GM assessment bodies with biotech industry employees and close collaborators is successfully hijacking the process from the start.
New GMO blockbusters are predicted to include animals, algae and gene drives. These will be controversial, and the biotech industry knows it.
Before these new GM products can be moved forward, the priority is "a pacified regulatory environment" (Latham). And, what better way to achieve this than to take over GM regulation from the inside.
Populating GM assessment bodies with biotech industry employees and close collaborators is successfully hijacking the process from the start.
Natural excuses to avoid GM safety testing
March 2019
The biotech lobby is coming up with all sorts of fancy arguments to avoid regulation of new DNA-altering techniques which don't involve the insertion of novel genes (protein-coding DNA) into an organism.
Industry-led claims abound that small mutations are naturally present in all organisms, as is the presence of horizontal gene transfer between organisms. The story continues to say that because it is equivalent to 'natural', edited DNA is nothing to worry about. It goes on: organisms arising from intentional DNA-editing are similar to those produced by old, random mutagenesis techniques (such as irradiation). Since the latter have never been regulated, there's no reason to do so with the 'new' version. Moreover, DNA-edited organisms are so 'natural' that their identification is impossible and they are, therefore, untraceable, making regulation impossible to enforce. And, even if the changes are found, no one can tell if the mutation is a result of a natural DNA mutation or a deliberate one. In fact, in our Environment Secretary's view, since Mother Nature is already giving us genetic mutations and horizontal gene transfer, biotech scientists are merely giving Her a helping hand.
All this 'reasoning', however, seems to be more to do with commercial expediency than with science.
The biotech lobby is coming up with all sorts of fancy arguments to avoid regulation of new DNA-altering techniques which don't involve the insertion of novel genes (protein-coding DNA) into an organism.
Industry-led claims abound that small mutations are naturally present in all organisms, as is the presence of horizontal gene transfer between organisms. The story continues to say that because it is equivalent to 'natural', edited DNA is nothing to worry about. It goes on: organisms arising from intentional DNA-editing are similar to those produced by old, random mutagenesis techniques (such as irradiation). Since the latter have never been regulated, there's no reason to do so with the 'new' version. Moreover, DNA-edited organisms are so 'natural' that their identification is impossible and they are, therefore, untraceable, making regulation impossible to enforce. And, even if the changes are found, no one can tell if the mutation is a result of a natural DNA mutation or a deliberate one. In fact, in our Environment Secretary's view, since Mother Nature is already giving us genetic mutations and horizontal gene transfer, biotech scientists are merely giving Her a helping hand.
All this 'reasoning', however, seems to be more to do with commercial expediency than with science.
Cost-cutting in Brazil
November 2018
In 2016,
organic food sales in Brazil were mushrooming by 20 to 30 percent a year. At the same time, some 70 percent of organic
produce was being exported to Europe.
Farmers there recognise that "Growing organics is the future",
and the people are increasingly "wanting healthier food free from
pesticides".
Were it
not for the alliance between the government and Big Agriculture, which is driving
the economy, and the supermarkets, which are controlling the food supply system,
organics would be a key growth industry.
Instead, it remains a tiny fraction of the whole, swamped by Big Ag's
desire for GM crops and their supporting chemicals. Supermarkets, of course, promote cut-throat
competition amongst their suppliers, and the 'winners' are the unrestrained
fraudsters passing off conventional pesticide-laden food as 'organic'.
Faced
with this scenario, the Brazilian government is busy pushing through two
far-reaching pieces of legislation.
Court rules: gene editing is genetic modification
September 2018
Concerns that the European Commission was getting itself in such a twist just trying to define new mutagenesis techniques that it would never get its head round how to regulate them [1] seem to have been straightened out by the European Court of Justice.
Concerns that the European Commission was getting itself in such a twist just trying to define new mutagenesis techniques that it would never get its head round how to regulate them [1] seem to have been straightened out by the European Court of Justice.
70% of world's population fed by peasant farmers
February 2018
Of all our modern 'conveniences', the invention of the Industrial Food Chain must rank as the most unfit-for-purpose.
The Chain has a beginning, a middle and an end:
Of all our modern 'conveniences', the invention of the Industrial Food Chain must rank as the most unfit-for-purpose.
The Chain has a beginning, a middle and an end:
- The beginning is all the resources needed for monoculture of crops: hybrid seed, large tracts of flat land, plentiful water, machines (plus the fossil fuels needed to manufacture and run them), and agrichemicals (plus the fossil fuels needed to manufacture and apply them)
- the middle is transport, storage, processing, packaging and retailing, all of which require an infrastructure of facilities and machines (plus the fossil fuels needed to create and maintain them)
- The end is the food in your kitchen, profit here and there along the way, and wasted stuff.
Corporate Communism?
November 2017
Denying local communities the freedom to choose their own agricultural system, not only what they grow but how they grow it, has suddenly become a priority in the USA.
By August this year, 28 States had passed "seed pre-emption laws" never deemed necessary nor desirable before.
The new laws are primarily designed to block counties and cities from banning GMOs, but the language used in some bills could enable them to extend to such things as manures, fertilisers and irrigation (these could be used to promote, for example, agri-chemical corporate interests, agri-chemical dependent GM crops, and futuristic drought-tolerant GM crops).
Denying local communities the freedom to choose their own agricultural system, not only what they grow but how they grow it, has suddenly become a priority in the USA.
By August this year, 28 States had passed "seed pre-emption laws" never deemed necessary nor desirable before.
The new laws are primarily designed to block counties and cities from banning GMOs, but the language used in some bills could enable them to extend to such things as manures, fertilisers and irrigation (these could be used to promote, for example, agri-chemical corporate interests, agri-chemical dependent GM crops, and futuristic drought-tolerant GM crops).
Organic food is a safe choice
November 2017
In the face of growing concerns that our current chemical-dependent food production systems are neither sustainable nor healthy, the European Parliament has commissioned a review of the scientific evidence of the impact of chemical-free, organic food production (see Note below).
The evidence available for review was sparse, lacking in direct human health or long-term studies, limited by reductionist data, and absent mechanistic explanations for results. In particular, the reviewers led by Swedish University of Agriculture scientists, reported that epidemiological surveys have had a very low impact on regulatory assessments despite involving real-life exposure to multiple chemicals and whole human populations.
One important, but side-lined, US population study linked pesticide levels in the mothers' body (assessed from urine levels) with impaired cognitive development in their children.
In the face of growing concerns that our current chemical-dependent food production systems are neither sustainable nor healthy, the European Parliament has commissioned a review of the scientific evidence of the impact of chemical-free, organic food production (see Note below).
The evidence available for review was sparse, lacking in direct human health or long-term studies, limited by reductionist data, and absent mechanistic explanations for results. In particular, the reviewers led by Swedish University of Agriculture scientists, reported that epidemiological surveys have had a very low impact on regulatory assessments despite involving real-life exposure to multiple chemicals and whole human populations.
One important, but side-lined, US population study linked pesticide levels in the mothers' body (assessed from urine levels) with impaired cognitive development in their children.
Impossible bleeding burgers
September 2017
'Synbio', a.k.a. synthetic biology or synthia, began to look like becoming a reality in our food in 2014. Natural artificial additives such as stevia, vanilla and saffron look-alikes produced in vats of GM yeast were set to hit our plates [1].
The following year, 'Muufri' cowless milk emerged. Muufri has six key natural artificial cow's milk proteins produced in vats of GM yeast [2].
One year on, 'Soylent' meal alternatives became the must-have for the modern man who doesn't have time to shop, cook or sit down to eat. Soylent is "proudly made with GMOs" and doesn't even pretend to have any natural ingredients [3].
The following year, 'Muufri' cowless milk emerged. Muufri has six key natural artificial cow's milk proteins produced in vats of GM yeast [2].
One year on, 'Soylent' meal alternatives became the must-have for the modern man who doesn't have time to shop, cook or sit down to eat. Soylent is "proudly made with GMOs" and doesn't even pretend to have any natural ingredients [3].
Convenient GM 'Arctic' apples
July 2017
Consumers in the US Midwest may now be finding a new
convenience product in their grocery stores: convenient 10oz packs of
conveniently sliced apples which conveniently don't turn brown and are a
convenient snack.
The apples carry an inconvenient label consisting of a
humanly indecipherable barcode which consumers will inconveniently have to scan
with their smartphone to find out what in God's name they're buying.
GM lessons, for free, forever
June 2017
Meet Robert. Robert is an on-off-on-off student at Cornell University, New York State, with a "passion for science".
As a freshman, Robert was "deeply unaware of our current GMO agriculture paradigm" and of his university's connection to it (see below).
During an off-student period, Robert participated in three unique seasons of agroecological crop production, and witnessed its "incredible results". Inevitably, this made him aware of the other end of the agricultural spectrum: GM food ruled by giant corporations. He also recognised that GM commodity monocultures fed to factory-farmed animals are one of the most destructive forces to our environment and health that our planet's ever seen.
With this new perspective on 'conventional' agriculture, Robert eagerly sat in on a Cornell University course entitled "The GMO Debate".
Meet Robert. Robert is an on-off-on-off student at Cornell University, New York State, with a "passion for science".
As a freshman, Robert was "deeply unaware of our current GMO agriculture paradigm" and of his university's connection to it (see below).
During an off-student period, Robert participated in three unique seasons of agroecological crop production, and witnessed its "incredible results". Inevitably, this made him aware of the other end of the agricultural spectrum: GM food ruled by giant corporations. He also recognised that GM commodity monocultures fed to factory-farmed animals are one of the most destructive forces to our environment and health that our planet's ever seen.
With this new perspective on 'conventional' agriculture, Robert eagerly sat in on a Cornell University course entitled "The GMO Debate".
The US GMO non-labelling act
June 2017
For years, the biotech industry has been able to rely on the fact that America remains one of the few industrialised countries whose regulators haven't demanded clear labelling of GM foods.
Big Food has been happy to hide behind this and ignore consumer concerns.
But, as consumer frustration mounts over the denial of their right to know what they're eating, things are starting to change.
For years, the biotech industry has been able to rely on the fact that America remains one of the few industrialised countries whose regulators haven't demanded clear labelling of GM foods.
Big Food has been happy to hide behind this and ignore consumer concerns.
But, as consumer frustration mounts over the denial of their right to know what they're eating, things are starting to change.
Pesticides' catastrophic impacts
May 2017
In March this year, the United Nation (UN) special rapporteurs on the right to food and on toxics presented a scathing report on pesticides.
It pointed to the "catastrophic impacts (of pesticides) on the environment, human health and society as a whole", including an estimated 200,000 deaths a year from acute poisoning alone, plus untold suffering from chronic pesticide exposure now linked to "cancer, Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease, hormone disruption, developmental disorders and sterility".
In March this year, the United Nation (UN) special rapporteurs on the right to food and on toxics presented a scathing report on pesticides.
It pointed to the "catastrophic impacts (of pesticides) on the environment, human health and society as a whole", including an estimated 200,000 deaths a year from acute poisoning alone, plus untold suffering from chronic pesticide exposure now linked to "cancer, Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease, hormone disruption, developmental disorders and sterility".
Science-free wildlife death traps
May 2017
Documents from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in early 2017 show that almost 100% of GM corn is pre-treated with neonicotinoid insecticides. In addition, although the EPA has concluded that neonicotinoid seed treatments have no economic benefit to soya growers, incomplete data indicate that over 50% of soya beans are also coated with the insecticide.
Neonicotinoids, of which there are several brands and classes on the market, are used as seed coatings. They end up throughout the mature plant, its flowers, pollen and nectar, and 95% of the coatings spread through the wider environment including soil water and dust in the air. UK trials have found that at least one neonictinoid accumulates in the soil with increasing toxicity over several years.
Across America, tens of millions of acres of land are planted with corn or soya (often year about), each producing its own fresh wave of neonicotinoids.
Documents from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in early 2017 show that almost 100% of GM corn is pre-treated with neonicotinoid insecticides. In addition, although the EPA has concluded that neonicotinoid seed treatments have no economic benefit to soya growers, incomplete data indicate that over 50% of soya beans are also coated with the insecticide.
Neonicotinoids, of which there are several brands and classes on the market, are used as seed coatings. They end up throughout the mature plant, its flowers, pollen and nectar, and 95% of the coatings spread through the wider environment including soil water and dust in the air. UK trials have found that at least one neonictinoid accumulates in the soil with increasing toxicity over several years.
Across America, tens of millions of acres of land are planted with corn or soya (often year about), each producing its own fresh wave of neonicotinoids.
Noise to drown out the science
March 2017
US law-makers have been urged by one outspoken anti-regulation journal editor to recognise that "a healthy economy with people employed is the cornerstone of a healthy population". That population, however, is "fed by the food industry, which pays no attention to health" (Berry).
What the food industry does pay attention to is its own financial health, and any law-makers who try to make food healthier (so as to maintain that healthy population) are not good for its bottom line.
Science is fundamental to food quality, but industry and its lobbyists have worked out all sorts of creative ways to undermine inconvenient facts emerging from the lab.
Creating noise is the favoured tactic.
What the food industry does pay attention to is its own financial health, and any law-makers who try to make food healthier (so as to maintain that healthy population) are not good for its bottom line.
Science is fundamental to food quality, but industry and its lobbyists have worked out all sorts of creative ways to undermine inconvenient facts emerging from the lab.
Creating noise is the favoured tactic.
Monsanto's expert panels speak
December 2016
The news that glyphosate herbicide, now pretty much ubiquitous in agriculture, public spaces and food, is not 'safe as salt' but a 'probable human carcinogen' was very unwelcome.
Amidst a rash of lawsuits by people claiming glyphosate gave them cancer, Monsanto and its agrichemical brethren face billions of dollars in lost revenue. Besides the collapse of their market for glyphosate-based formulations, such as Roundup, all their glyphosate-tolerant GM crops will go down the drain too.
Since GM crops now encompass maize, soya, cotton, oilseed rape, sugar beet and alfalfa grass, which together amount to most staple US agriculture, this is doubly-bad news for Americans.
For the regulators who allowed the whole situation in the first place, it's a political mess with legal and economic implications requiring urgent action.
Predictably, Monsanto and its friends at CropLife* America have launched a full-scale attack at every level they can think of.
 |
| Photo: Creative Commons |
Amidst a rash of lawsuits by people claiming glyphosate gave them cancer, Monsanto and its agrichemical brethren face billions of dollars in lost revenue. Besides the collapse of their market for glyphosate-based formulations, such as Roundup, all their glyphosate-tolerant GM crops will go down the drain too.
Since GM crops now encompass maize, soya, cotton, oilseed rape, sugar beet and alfalfa grass, which together amount to most staple US agriculture, this is doubly-bad news for Americans.
For the regulators who allowed the whole situation in the first place, it's a political mess with legal and economic implications requiring urgent action.
Predictably, Monsanto and its friends at CropLife* America have launched a full-scale attack at every level they can think of.
Cracks in GMO America
June 2016
After over a decade of GM commodity crop growing, the first
visible cracks began to appear in the carefully crafted American public's
'acceptance' of their novel diet.
 |
| Photo: Creative Commons |
Two years ago, it was clear that a deep scepticism towards
the food industry and its use of technology had taken root.
'Inert' endocrine disruptors
May 2016
Readers of GM-free Scotland will be
familiar with warnings that glyphosate-based herbicides, which are
heavily used on most GM crops, have added ingredients to help
glyphosate penetrate into the plant cells and kill them more
efficiently [1].
Glyphosate dissolves well in water, but
sprayed on a crop without its 'helpers' it would glide off the waxy
outer layer and not much would make it through the fatty membrane
around the cells.
As the weeds around glyphosate-tolerant
GM crops have evolved to become less and less sensitive to the
herbicide, the biotech industry has had to rescue its pet GM
technology by producing more aggressive glyphosate-based
formulations. Most of these added ingredients are detergents
(fat-dissolvers) which disrupt the wax- and fatty- barriers designed
by Nature to protect the plant.
Regulators have allowed added
ingredients in agricultural pesticide sprays to be declared 'inert'
and may be mysterious 'commercially confidential' substances.
The 'needs' of agricultural aid in Africa
May 2016
The Gates Foundation is probably the
biggest philanthropic venture ever, distributing billions of dollars
every year. Its traditional priorities are global health programmes
and educational work in the US.
However, during the last 10 years, the
Foundation has hugely expanded its funding for agriculture,
especially in Africa where 19 out of the 25 most food-insecure
countries in the world are (2014 Global Food Security Index).
In 2006, the
Foundation set up the 'Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa'
(AGRA) as the "face and voice" to fulfil its guiding
principles (see below).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)