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

Inadequate procedure led to GM crop approvals: European Ombudsman starts investigation

  • Print
  • Email
Details
Published: 26 October 2018
Twitter

EFSA does not have guidance for risk assessment of GM crops with altered nutritional composition

The office of the European Ombudsman has confirmed it will investigate a complaint by GeneWatch UK, supported by Testbiotech, regarding the authorisation for import of three transgenic crops with altered oil content for use as food and feed.

The three transgenic soybeans, produced by Monsanto (Bayer) and Pioneer (DowDuPont/Corteva), were approved for import by the European Commission in 2015. The organisations objected to the authorisations at the time, but the Commission refused to review the substance of their complaint until this year, after losing a legal case brought by Testbiotech. In their complaint to the ombudsman, the organisations state that a letter sent to them by the Commission in July 2018 is still inadequate to address their concerns and to protect the environment and human health.

Issues highlighted in the complaint include:
* Lack of guidance on how to assess the risk of nutritionally-altered GM crops
* Failure to properly assess health risks of altered oil content
* Failure to protect vulnerable groups, including children and people with relevant health conditions

Inadequate labelling

Testbiotech and GeneWatch UK are also preparing a detailed analysis of problems with the risk assessment of nutritionally-altered GM crops as part of the RAGES project (Risk Assessment of Genetically Engineered Organisms in the EU and Switzerland). This outcome will presented in 2019 and will include some broader issues which are not part of the ombudsman complaint, such as the difficulties in assessing risks to the environment of new nutrients in the food chain.

Further information:

The complaint: www.genewatch.org//uploads/f03c6d66a9b354535738483c1c3d49e4/Ombudsman_complaint.pdf

The letter from the EU Commission: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/aarhus/pdf/30_reply.pdf

Decision of the General Court of the European Union: www.testbiotech.org/en/press-release/general-court-european-union-strengthens-precautionary-principle


Source: Testbiotech
https://www.testbiotech.org/en/press-release/inadequate-procedure-led-transgenic-crop-approvals-european-ombudsman-starts

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