GM Watch
  • Main Menu
    • Home
    • News
      • Newsletter subscription
      • News Reviews
      • News Languages
        • Notícias em Português
        • Nieuws in het Nederlands
        • Nachrichten in Deutsch
      • Archive
    • Resources
      • GM Myth Makers
      • Gene Editing
      • Non-GM successes
      • GM Quotes
      • GM Myths
      • GM Firms
        • Monsanto: a history
        • Monsanto: resources
        • Bayer: a history
        • Bayer: resources
      • GM Booklet
      • GM Book
    • Contact
    • About
    • Search
    • Donations
News and comment on genetically modified foods and their associated pesticides    
  • News
    • Newsletter subscription
    • News Reviews
    • News Languages
      • Notícias em Português
      • Nieuws in het Nederlands
      • Nachrichten in Deutsch
    • Archive
  • Resources
    • Non-GM Successes
    • GM Myth Makers
    • Gene Editing
    • GM Quotes
    • GM Myths
    • GM Firms
      • Monsanto: a history
      • Monsanto: resources
      • Bayer: a history
      • Bayer: resources
    • GM Booklet
    • GM Book
  • Donations
  • Contact
  • About
  • Search

INTRODUCTION TO GM

GMO Myths and Facts front page.jpg

GENE EDITING MYTHS, RISKS, & RESOURCES

Gene Editing Myths and Reality

Public Left Out of Debate to Introduce Re-Engineered Crop

  • Print
  • Email
Details
Published: 19 July 2005
Twitter

The people ultimately behind this project are the Syngenta Foundation, which is of course entirely a creature of GM giant Syngenta. The reason it's being rushed in is that KARI desperately needs a replacement showcase project for Monsanto/USAID's failed GM sweet potatio project. The new project is just as flawed.
------

Public Left Out of Debate to Introduce Re-Engineered Crop
Gakuu Mathenge
The Nation (Nairobi), July 19, 2005
http://allafrica.com/stories/200507181679.html

The introduction of a genetically maize crop in Kenya is bound to raise complaints from environmentalists.

>Environment lawyer Mr Mark Odhyambo Oloo says researchers have rushed to develop a new maize variety in complete disregard of the law.

"The whole affair has been rush and is dangerous, he said.

"It has not been been subjected to adequate public debate by Kenyans who are expected to be the final consumers of the end product. They (researchers) have also grossly ignored the law by their failure to conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment.

"No one is saying science has no place in improving food production but even science should be guided by the law."

The second schedule of the Environmental Management and Co-ordination Act (EMCA1999) requires that major developments in biotechnology like genetically modified organisms be subjected to EIA's before introduction into the environment.

"The National Environment Authority (NEMA), the official agency charged with the enforcement of EMCA, requires that precautionary measures be taken, especially in new projects about which there is no absolute scientific truth on likely environmental impacts. The GM maize was a perfect case for extreme application of the precautionary principal," Mr Oloo added.

Mr Oloo, who insisted that he was expressing his personal views, said it was unclear as to why Kari and the international agencies were rushing their project while there was a Biotechnology Bill Draft at the Attorney General's Chambers waiting for publication.

The Biotechnology Bill is supposed to spell out the guidelines and conditions under which biotechnological research is conducted in Kenya and under what conditions engineered products can be introduced to the public.

Menu

Home

Subscriptions

News Archive

News Reviews

GM Book

Resources

Non-GM Successes

GM Myth Makers

GM Myths

GM Quotes

GM Booklet

Contacts

Contact Us

About

Facebook

Twitter

Donations

Content 1999 - 2025 GMWatch.
Web Development By SCS Web Design