GMWatch News Review archive

------------------------------------------------------------
from Andy Rees, the WEEKLY WATCH editor
------------------------------------------------------------
Dear all,

Welcome to WW44, bringing you all the latest news in brief on the GM issue.

And, happily, it's another great week, full of Setbacks to the GM lobby. The FSE results have echoed nicely through the Sunday papers, with some commentators observing that the government cannot afford to risk GM commercialisation before the next election.  Meanwhile, Britain's biggest farmer, the Co-op, has nailed its colours well and truly to the mast, declaring that it is banning GM from its entire business.  We need the other supermarket groups to follow their previous actions to a similar thorough conclusion.

And then there's been more bad news from yet another Government report, this time from English Nature, who deal a massive blow to the case for GM, with news that GM crops will speed up the demise of farmland wildlife, in particular the skylark which is feared might be extinct in Britain in 20 years time.  This gives the lie to the Broom's Barn research, which would have us believe that GM was the skylark's saviour.

Abroad, the tenaciousness of New Zealanders has at least been rewarded by the announcement (on the eve of GM commercialisation) of zero contamination thresholds in GM foods and agriculture.  Let's hope they stick to it.  And in Switzerland, GM opponents have forced a referendum on a five-year ban on GM.

And lastly, news from me.  This will be my last Weekly Watch, sadly.  I am taking more time to complete the book I am currently writing.  The working title is 'The Great Food and Farming Scandal: The Agriculture Crisis in a Nutshell' - a concise, but thorough, overview of the debacle of modern farming, and the much needed solution - organic agriculture as national and international policy.  I am hoping for publication in another 12-18 months. Anyway, thanks to all of you who sent such positive feedback to me.  You will be left in Claire's highly capable hands; she is taking over my post.

Keep up the good work one and all!

Best wishes,
Andy <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
www.ngin.org.uk

------------------------------------------------------------
WEEKLY WATCH number 44 - CONTENTS
------------------------------------------------------------
SETBACKS TO THE GM INDUSTRY
HIGHLIGHTS OF THE WEEK
TOPIC OF THE WEEK - Media comment on the FSE results
ARTICLE OF THE WEEK - Devinder Sharma on Bill Gates' ill-informed donation for biofortification
QUOTES OF THE WEEK
FACTS OF THE WEEK
LIES FROM THE GM LOBBY
HEADLINES OF THE WEEK
CAMPAIGN OF THE WEEK
SUBSCRIPTIONS

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SETBACKS TO THE GM INDUSTRY
------------------------------------------------------------------------
GOVERNMENT'S WILDLIFE EXPERTS WARN AGAINST GM DAMAGE:
Tony Blair's chief wildlife advisers have dealt another massive blow to the case for GM crops, warning that the technology will 'seriously degrade' swaths of countryside.  In a damning report, English Nature also warns that the use of GM oilseed rape and sugar beet would speed up the [already massive] loss of farmland birds.  Replacing conventional oilseed rape with GM varieties would be similarly disastrous, as the crop is Britain's most important for providing feed for birds, producing up to 30 times more sustenance than the average cereal field.   Fears are mounting that species such as the skylark could be extinct in 20 years if GM farming goes ahead. Populations in areas like the east of England, which has a large concentration of oilseed rape [and already much diminished birdlife, as a result of intensive farming], are at particular risk.  The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), with more than a million members, is exploring the prospect of legal action and a massive lobbying campaign, if GM crops are approved.  'This is a big deal for the credibility of the Government's environmental agenda as well as a big deal for farmland birds,' said Dr Mark Avery, the RSPB's director of conservation.  Influential opposition can also be found from Britain's biggest landowner - the National Trust - which is balloting its three million members on whether a temporary ban on GM should be introduced until environmental concerns are investigated further.
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/green/story/0,9061,1066323,00.html

BRITAIN'S BIGGEST FARMER GOES GM-FREE:
The Co-op - which is Britain's biggest farmer and sells £5bn worth of food annually - has announced that it is banning GM food and ingredients throughout its entire business.  The company, which owns farms, supermarkets and a bank, has said it has taken the decision as a result of a survey of its customers.  And it is banning GM from its entire business after four-fifths of Co-op customers surveyed said they would not knowingly buy food containing GM ingredients.   Animals on its 85,000 acres of farms will not be given GM feed.  It will also refuse to grow GM crops even if the government insists it is safe.  The group's move is likely to put pressure on other supermarkets to eliminate GM ingredients from their food. Tesco - the UK's biggest supermarket chain - already says it will no longer sell meat from animals raised on GM feeds. "On the strength of current scientific knowledge and the overwhelming opposition of our members, the Co-op is saying no to commercial growing of GM crops in the UK. And we would urge other consumer-led businesses to follow this precautionary approach.  Too little is still understood about this technology and how it would impact on our environment in future generations," said Martin Beaumont, chief executive of the Co-operative Group.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3209424.stm
SEE CAMPAIGN OF THE WEEK

BRITISH GOVERNMENT LIKELY TO POSTPONE GM COMMERCIALISATION:
Britain is likely to have to wait several years before GM crops are grown commercially, if at all, because of the high political risk, analysts said this week.  Political pollster Peter Kellner told Reuters: "The government will play safe on this until after the next election."  Michael Meacher told Reuters: "Blair has lost public confidence. To go ahead with GMs in the face of all the science would be an absolutely needless own goal.  .It would be explosive if they go ahead with GM crops.  .Blair has already done a huge favour for Bush on Iraq and paid heavily for it. His political instincts will stop him doing Bush another big favour, especially as it is by no means clear that he is guaranteed re-election next year."
http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jhtml?type=scienceNews&storyID=3646507§ion=news

SCIENTISTS QUIT UK AMID PURPORTED GM ATTACKS:
Having failed with the public debate, and been undermined by the findings of the Farm Scale Evaluations, the pro-GM lobby is desperately trying to win support via vague and dubious claims of intimidation for which no actual evidence has been produced.  It is, of course, particularly ironic that it is members of a pro-science (Sense about Science) network which has refused to condemn acts of terrorism (even opposing the peace process in Northern Ireland), and has acted as a public apologist for war crimes and even genocide, who are highlighting the dangers of GM crop protests.
For more about Sense about Science, see:
http://ngin.tripod.com/190303d.htm
This is some of what they have to say: The cost of attacks against GM-crop trials emerged this week as more British plant scientists left the country to pursue their work abroad unmolested. Institutes say attacks damage staff morale. Many researchers feel there is no future for them in the UK. The plant science department at the University of Cambridge is losing three scientists, two of them to Australia. Mark Tester, head of plant science at the university, is moving to the Waite Institute, Adelaide, said: "Industry has left in droves and that reduces the options for researchers and students."  Twenty-eight incidents of vandalism targeted at basic plant research trials were reported between January 1999 and April 2003, according to preliminary findings conducted by the independent trust Sense About Science. These are in addition to 52 incidents reported against the government's field- scale evaluations programme.
http://www.senseaboutscience.org.uk/
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=1646

SWISS TO VOTE ON FIVE YEAR GM BAN:
Swiss opponents of GM foods have forced a referendum, which, if successful, will ban GM products from Switzerland for the next five years.  A coalition of environmentalists and farmers collected more than 120,000 votes to back a referendum to keep Switzerland GM-free.  Under Switzerland's strong tradition of popular votes, a referendum can be called on any issue as long as campaigners manage to collect 100,000 signatures.
http://www.forbes.com/home_europe/newswire/2003/10/21/rtr1116666.html

NZ GOVERNMENT COMMITMENT TO ZERO THRESHOLD FOR GM CONTAMINATION WELCOMED:
The NZ government's commitment to a policy of zero-contamination thresholds for GE in food and agriculture is being welcomed by GE-Free NZ.  The commitment was confirmed on the eve of the lifting of the moratorium on commercial GE release.  "The Minister's statement is welcomed as it is the first clear commitment from the government to protect GM-free production systems," says Jon Carapiet from GE Free NZ in food and environment.

ONTARIO GOVERNMENT INTERVENES IN SCHMEISER CASE:
The Ontario government wants to intervene in the Supreme Court battle between Monsanto and Saskatchewan farmer Percy Schmeiser.  While Schmeiser and his backers are concerned with protecting the rights of farmers, Ontario is worried that gene patents could inflate health costs.
http://www.percyschmeiser.com/Ontario.htm

------------------------------------------------------------
HIGHLIGHTS OF THE WEEK
------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
Up to 600 million GM plants could be grown in Britain every year .
-----------------------------------------------------------
...and more than 6 billion across Europe, European Commission plans to be considered next week, effectively bringing in GM agriculture by the back door, and seriously compromising organic farming across Europe.  And although GM sugar beet and oilseed rape are now likely to be banned in Britain after the FSE trials results, this ban could be negated by the European proposal, which recommends contamination levels of up to 0.3% in rape seed, 0.5% in maize, sugar beet, tomato and potato and 0.7% in soya. These apparently tiny figures would lead to the widespread growing of GM crops, even by organic farmers.  It would mean that 1 in every 200 apparently conventional or organic maize or sugar beet seeds could be GM. Seed packets would not have to mention the contamination unless it had been deliberately introduced.  Michael Meacher said yesterday: "This would introduce GM by the back door and behind the backs of the people of Britain and Europe."
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/environment/story.jsp?story=454870
-----------------------------------------------------------
But the EC commission gives in on GM Seed Directive
-----------------------------------------------------------
However, there is some good news, which is that the EU Commission has changed its legal assessment and now accepts that the proposed Directive on labelling GMOs in seeds can only be adopted by a qualified majority of member states within the Standing Committee responsible for deliberate releases of GMOs into the environment (Directive 2001/18).  Until now, the Commission intended to push through the GM Seeds Directive under a technical procedure in the Standing Committee on Seeds, where it would have been adopted unless a qualified majority of member states voted against it.  The Save our Seeds Initiative today celebrates an important success, but the contamination thresholds proposed by the Commission still remain unchanged.
http://www.zs-l.de/saveourseeds/downloads/zsl_20_10_en.pdf
-----------------------------------------------------------
USDA reports 115 infractions of biotech rules
-----------------------------------------------------------
US biotech companies and research universities have violated strict federal regulations on planting experimental GM crops more than a hundred times in the last decade, the Agriculture Department said.  Environmental groups said they have sought these documents for more than four years through the Freedom of Information Act.  "For an industry that has claimed to the public that ... they follow the law and protect the environment, 115 infractions seem large and is disturbing," said Gregory Jaffe, biotech director for the Center for Science in the Public Interest.  Environmental lobbyists fear many more infringements go unreported.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20031017/sc_nm/food_biotech_dc_1
-----------------------------------------------------------
Who needs GM crops?
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Your usual editorial paean to GM foods (Value in a GM crop -- Oct. 20) as the means to end world hunger fails to consider that we might not need GM foods to do it. Thanks to patient study by UK researchers and intercropping experiments with grasses that ward off pests, Kenyan farmers have almost quintupled their yield of maize for every hectare. The new grasses are favoured by their cows, dramatically increasing milk output.  It's organic. It's being adopted in Tanzania and Uganda. And it's unpatented. Who needs Round-Up ready Monsanto?"  -  Professor Ronald Labonte, Community Health and Epidemiology, University of Saskatchewan (Canada).  The Globe and Mail,
Wednesday, October 22, 2003
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20031022/COLETS22-9/TPComment/Letters
-----------------------------------------------------------
Monsanto pull-out may help anti-GM Indian farmers
-----------------------------------------------------------
Food and environment rights activists believe Monsanto's decision to partially withdraw from Europe will give a boost to an Indian campaign to free a wheat patented by the company.  Groups such as the New Delhi-based Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology (RFSTE) and Greenpeace, state that a Monsanto patent for a strain of wheat it claims to have invented is derived from a traditional Indian variety of the cereal. "We expect Monsanto's withdrawal from Europe to strengthen our case," says RFSTE director Afsar H. Jafri.  RFSTE and Greenpeace are planning to challenge the patent in the European Patent office in Munich before the year-end.
http://southasia.oneworld.net/article/view/71054/1/

------------------------------------------------------------
TOPIC OF THE WEEK 1 - Media comment on the FSE results
------------------------------------------------------------
NO SUPPORT FROM THE [BRITISH] PUBLIC.  NO EVIDENCE.  NO CASE FOR GM:
Does this sound familiar? The Government - led from the front by the Prime Minister - has vigorously pursued a controversial policy, bitterly opposed by most of the British people. The supporting evidence is weak to non-existent, but the policy pleases President Bush and stands to benefit big multinational companies. Tony Blair believes unshakeably in the rightness of his cause, and in the folly of opponents who warn of unforeseen consequences. Then the truth starts seeping out. The facts turn out to be the opposite of the case that has been so eloquently talked up. Public opposition increases. But there is no U-turn, no reverse gear, no admission that Mr Blair might ever have been mistaken. Instead there is an attempt at damage limitation, a concentration on saving face, and a quiet search for a way out.

As with Iraq, so with GM, it seems. A succession of government reports critical of the technology over the last months - culminating in last week's publication of the results of official trials proving that GM oilseed rape and sugar beet damage wildlife - have become the equivalent of the failure to discover Saddam's weapons of mass destruction. But there are also important differences. For, over GM, the truth has begun to stream out before the damage is done - at least as far as Britain is concerned. And the weight of evidence that is now emerging may yet be enough to prevent it occurring altogether.
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/environment/story.jsp?story=454811

GM IS NOT WANTED HERE, AND BLAIR SHOULD ACCEPT IT:
Just what does it take to change Tony Blair's mind? Not long ago, one of his colleagues provided a clue. If you got to the Prime Minister early enough, before he had formed a view - the MP said - he was quite persuadable, but once he had made up his mind, it needed dynamite to shake it. Over Iraq, we know what happened. And over GM, it seems to have been Lord Sainsbury and the biotech companies who got in early.

Article Length: 431 words (approx.)  full article not available online
http://argument.independent.co.uk/leading_articles/story.jsp?story=454749

MICHAEL MEACHER:  SCIENCE BACKS CONSUMERS' REJECTION OF GM FOOD - ARE YOU LISTENING TONY?:
Following the publication of the FSE results last week, Michael Meacher argues that the remit of the FSEs was very narrow. These weedkiller tests are just one limited dimension for assessing the impact of GM crops on the environment. Other dimensions would involve looking at the effects, for example, on soil residues and bacteria, transgene flows and bird populations. Above all, it would be necessary to test what would happen to the environment if farmers were trying to maximise commercial yields and not, as in these trials, to limit adverse effects on wildlife.

But even that is only a small part of the research that is needed. There are at least three other areas of uncertainty. The most important is whether there are any long-term adverse effects of eating GM foods on human health, specifically on the immune or reproductive systems, organ development, metabolism and gut flora. Astonishingly, this has never been systematically investigated, either in North America or in the EU.

Another area where answers are needed is how non-GM crops can be protected from cross-contamination. This issue, known as the problem of co-existence, can be solved only either by substantially extending the very short separation distances between GM and non-GM crops or by setting up GM-free exclusion zones. On a very windy day GM pollen can blow very considerable distances, sometimes miles [26km according to recent UK government research], and bees are also known to transport pollen up to several miles. The EU Commission considered this problem, washed its hands of it as being insoluble, and passed the buck to member states. It would be irresponsible for any member state to allow commercial growing of GM crops before a framework has been spelt out which would guarantee to protect other farmers and provide compensation if their livelihood were damaged or destroyed by GM contamination.

A third area which needs to be resolved is labelling. Even when the new EU rules on labelling are introduced, they will only operate above a 0.9 per cent threshold. Where does this all leave us? Most of the testing needed has never been done, and where some has been - in the case of the environment - that highly restricted element has been wholly negative. So not only does the GM case fail the test of public acceptability, it also fails the scientific test.
http://argument.independent.co.uk/commentators/story.jsp?story=454758

INDIA SHOULD LEARN FROM BRITAIN'S GM CROP TRIALS:
The Financial Express (India), Monday, October 20, 2003,  Ashok B Sharma
http://www.financialexpress.com/fe_full_story.php?content_id=44448

INDEPENDENT SCIENCE PANEL REJECTS CONCLUSIONS OF GM SCIENCE REVIEW:
The UK Government's GM Science Review issued its First Report in July 2003 amid accusations of pro-GM bias. One member of the Panel resigned weeks earlier, and another complained that a senior scientist attempted to undermine his research funding and career.  The Report's conclusions are now firmly rejected by an international group of prominent scientists, the Independent Science Panel (ISP) on GM.  The ISP contests the conclusion that there is "no evidence" GM crops pose a threat to health and the environment, and the recommendation to effectively commercialise GM crops on a "case by case" basis.

The ISP accuses the GM Science Review of sidestepping the major scientific criticisms in its attempt to ultimately mislead and cajole the public into accepting the commercial growing of GM crops.  The "case by case" approach already assumes that GM technology itself is safe. But many within the ISP disagree. Vyvyan Howard, toxico-pathologist from Liverpool University says, "There is precious little science there to be read."
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/ISPRUKG.php

------------------------------------------------------------
ARTICLE OF THE WEEK 1 - Devinder Sharma on Bill Gates
------------------------------------------------------------
Excerpts from the article:
Bill Gates was probably not properly advised, and for obvious reasons. Harvest Plus, a mere CGIAR public relations outfit, is in dire need of financial resources and therefore used the emotional card of hunger and malnutrition to seek funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. A greater humanitarian purpose would have been served if Bill Gates had instead donated grants to institutes and groups that would have helped reach the available food to the poor, to ensure that the hungry are adequately fed. The reality is that the poor and hungry do not have the means to buy the food that is available, much of it rotting in front of their dry eyes.

Bill Gates has to understand that biotechnology, the way it is being promoted by corporate interests, has the potential to further the great divide between haves and have-nots.

CGIAR's blind support of the corporate agenda, therefore, is a pointer to the growing irrelevance of the international agricultural research institutes. Such is the poverty of ideas to meet the growing food needs of the world that the CGIAR has been gradually made to die a premature death, much of it at its own hands. It is high time the CGIAR board, which is firmly in the grip of the World Bank and the Japanese government, follows what is enshrined in its original mandate. The CGIAR should handover the 16 research centres to the respective countries where they are located. This is what the forefathers of the research system had said at the time of creating the CGIAR, and they were so right.

Nothing can revitalise this dying horse. Not even Bill Gates with his millions, unless of course the CGIAR is made to stand up for the cause of the poor and marginalized farming communities.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=1638

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
HEADLINES OF THE WEEK: from the NGIN archive
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
18/10/2003 THE WEEKLY WATCH number 43
19/10/2003 India Should Learn From Britain's GM Crop Trials / Biotech Education For Foreign Visitors
20/10/2003 Independent Science Panel rejects Conclusions of GM Science Review
20/10/2003 Ontario government intervenes in Schmeiser case
21/10/2003 Bill Gates - flogging a dying horse
21/10/2003 Britain's biggest farmer goes GM-free / British government seen postponing GM decision
21/10/2003 Scientists Quit UK Amid GM Attacks - Claims
21/10/2003 Swiss to vote on five-year GM ban / USDA Reports 115 Infractions of Biotech Rules
22/10/2003 Where supermarkets stand on GM food

FOR THE COMPLETE NGIN ARCHIVE: http://www.gmwatch.org/archive.asp

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
CAMPAIGN OF THE WEEK
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
WHERE DO OTHER SUPERMARKETS NOW STAND ON GM FOOD & ANIMAL FEED:
Now that the GM Debate is over, Supermarkets are deciding their policy on products from GM-fed animals. The BBC has done a quick survey of their policies. The responses do not, in most cases, cover the key issue of GM animal feed - especially for dairy products.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3211510.stm  &

The Co-op and Marks & Spencer have given clear promises not to sell produce from GM-fed animals. Sainsbury's and Waitrose may now soon follow them, especially if encouraged. Several other are 'working towards this' but there seems to have been little real movement in some cases. Time to ask them when they're going to catch up with the Co-op and M&S.

Contact details here
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=1648

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUBSCRIPTIONS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe to NGIN's daily list
send an e-mail to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. with the message:
'subscribe NGIN daily'
You'll receive up to 30 mails a week

To subscribe to NGIN's 'WEEKLY WATCH'
send an e-mail to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. with the message:
'subscribe WEEKLY WATCH'
You'll receive 1 mail a week with a news roundup
Those subscribed to the daily list will receive the WEEKLY WATCH
automatically

To subscribe to NGIN's 'GMWATCH'
send an e-mail to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. with the message:
'subscribe GMWATCH'
You'll receive 1 mail a month with a news roundup
Those subscribed to the daily bulletins will receive GMWATCH automatically

To unsubscribe to any of the the NGIN lists:
just mail us saying 'unsubscribe' and specifying which list

archived at:
http://www.gmwatch.org/archive.asp

NGIN website:
http://www.ngin.org.uk