A Silent Forest

Monday, 12 April 2010 10:17

The Growing Threat Genetically Engineered Trees. This award winning documentary film explores the growing global threat of genetically engineered trees to our environment and to human health. The film features renowned geneticist and host of PBS' The Nature of Things David Suzuki, who explores the unknown and possibly disastrous consequences of improperly tested GE methods.(Total time 15:46)

Watch video

GM salmon step closer to our dining table

Wednesday, 26 December 2012 22:16

EXTRACTS: Critics say... the FDA has relied on outdated science and substandard methods for assessing the new fish.

"We are deeply concerned that the potential of these fish to cause allergic reactions has not been adequately researched," said Michael Hansen, a scientist at the Consumers Union.

"FDA has allowed this fish to move forward based on tests of allergenicity of only six engineered fish, tests that actually did show an increase in allergy-causing potential."

"Congress can still keep FDA from unleashing this dangerous experiment," said Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch, a consumer advocacy group. "Although this latest FDA decision is a blow to consumer confidence, we encourage everyone to contact their members of Congress and demand this reckless decision be overturned."

"It is extremely disappointing that the Obama Administration continues to push approval of this dangerous and unnecessary product," said Andrew Kimbrell, executive director of the Center for Food Safety. "The GE salmon has no socially redeeming value. It's bad for the consumer, bad for the salmon industry and bad for the environment."
---
---
Super-salmon that are genetically modified to grow twice as fast a step closer to our dining table
Richard Alleyne
The Telegraph, December 24 2012
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9764433/Super-salmon-that-are-genetically-modified-to-grow-twice-as-fast-a-step-closer-to-our-dining-table.html

*A controversial genetically engineered salmon has moved a step closer to the dining table after an American food watchdog said it was unlikely to pose a threat to the environment or humans.

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) said the GM eggs would produce fish with the potential to grow to market size in half the time of conventional salmon.

If it gets a final go-ahead, it would be the first food from a transgenic animal – one whose genome has been altered – to be approved by the FDA, Reuters reports.

The AquAdvantage Atlantic salmon egg was developed by AquaBounty Technology to speed up production to meet global seafood demand.
In a draft environmental assessment, the FDA affirmed earlier findings that the biotech salmon was not likely to be harmful. It said it would take comments from the public on its report for 60 days before making a final decision on approval.

"With respect to food safety, FDA has concluded that food from AquAdvantage salmon is as safe as food from conventional Atlantic salmon, and that there is a reasonable certainty of no harm from consumption," the FDA assessment states.
AquaBounty officials said they were caught by surprise by the news that its product was a step closer to approval as years of controversy had followed the company's application for a go-ahead from the regulator.

They said they did not know the timing or details of the process the FDA will follow following the 60-day comment period.

"We are encouraged that the environmental assessment is being released and hope the government continues the science-based regulatory process," said AquaBounty Chief Executive Ronald Stotish.

Critics say the new salmon is a "dangerous experiment" and have pressured the FDA to reject it.

They say the FDA has relied on outdated science and substandard methods for assessing the new fish.

"We are deeply concerned that the potential of these fish to cause allergic reactions has not been adequately researched," said Michael Hansen, a scientist at the Consumers Union.

"FDA has allowed this fish to move forward based on tests of allergenicity of only six engineered fish, tests that actually did show an increase in allergy-causing potential."

There were also concerns the FDA would not require the genetically modified salmon to be labelled as such, and some critics said they may file a lawsuit to prevent what they fear could be the imminent approval of the engineered fish.

"Congress can still keep FDA from unleashing this dangerous experiment," said Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch, a consumer advocacy group. "Although this latest FDA decision is a blow to consumer confidence, we encourage everyone to contact their members of Congress and demand this reckless decision be overturned."

The Center for Food Safety, another non-profit consumer protection group, was highly critical of the FDA report, and officials said they might sue the regulator over the issue.

"It is extremely disappointing that the Obama Administration continues to push approval of this dangerous and unnecessary product," said Andrew Kimbrell, executive director of the Center for Food Safety. "The GE salmon has no socially redeeming value. It's bad for the consumer, bad for the salmon industry and bad for the environment."

The FDA spokesman Morgan Liscinsky said no final decisions have been made on labelling or on the application for approval.

"The release of these materials is not a decision on whether food from AquAdvantage Salmon requires additional labelling; nor is it a decision on the new animal drug application currently under review. It also does not provide a final food safety determination," Liscinsky said.

The AquAdvantage salmon would be an all-female population with eggs produced in a facility on Prince Edward Island in Canada and shipped to a "grow-out facility" in Panama, where they would be reared to market size and harvested for processing.

Blunt's 'Monsanto Protection Act' undermines legislative process

Wednesday, 10 April 2013 12:19

Read more: Blunt's 'Monsanto Protection Act' undermines legislative process

Bt eggplant field trials unsafe for humans, environment

Thursday, 23 May 2013 11:11

CA: Bt eggplant field trials unsafe for humans, environment
Joel R. San Juan
Business Mirror (Philippines), 22 May 2013
http://www.businessmirror.com.ph/index.php/business/agri-commodities/13830-ca-bt-eggplant-field-trials-unsafe-for-humans-environment

THE Court of Appeals (CA) ruled recently that ongoing field trials for Bacillus thuriengensis (Bt) talong (eggplant) in the country pose risks to human health and the environment, it was learned on Wednesday.

In a 25-page decision penned by CA Associate Justice Isaias Dicdican, the appellate court’s Special 13th Division issued a writ of kalikasan ordering the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) and other concerned government agencies to stop the trials.

CA Associate Justices Myra Garcia-Fernandez and Nina Antonio-Valenzuela agreed with the decision.

According to the court’s ruling, the trials violated the people’s constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology.

“The field trials of Bt talong involve the willful and deliberate alteration of the genetics traits of a living element of the ecosystem and the relationship of living organisms that depend on each other for their survival,” the CA said.

“Consequently, the field trials…could not be declared by this Court as safe [for] human health and our ecology, [since they are] an alteration of an otherwise natural state of affairs in our ecology,” it added.

The government, the tribunal said, has failed to adopt sufficient biosafety protocols in conducting the trials, as well as feasibility studies on genetically modified organisms (GMOs), to protect the environment and people’s health.

The CA noted that, based on case records, the country is yet to have a law governing the study, introduction and use of GMOs. It said what the government has are insufficient regulations issued by the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Science and Technology, and the Philippine Environmental Impact Statement System of the Environmental Management Bureau.

“True, there are biosafety regulations that we follow. However, considering the irreversible effects that the field trials, and eventually the introduction of Bt talong to the market, could possibly bring, we could not take chances,” the court said.

Tests violate Constitution

THE case of the field trials began when environmental group Greenpeace, the Magsasaka at Siyentipiko sa Pagpapaunlad ng Agrikultura (Masipag) and other individuals filed a petition arguing that the tests violated Filipinos’ constitutional right to a balanced and healthy ecology.

They claimed that the trials might contaminate native genetic resources and cause an imbalance in the environment.

But the respondents—the DENR, the Bureau of Plant Industry, the Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority, University of the Philippines (UP) Los Baños Foundation Inc., UP Mindanao Foundation Inc., International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications-Southeast Asia Center—disagreed, insisting that the trials were safe and harmless.

In its ruling, the CA said clear standards governing the study and research of GMOs should be adopted, and also ordered the respondents to rehabilitate the areas affected by the trials.