GM Watch
  • Main Menu
    • Home
    • News
      • Newsletter subscription
      • News Reviews
      • News Languages
        • Notícias em Português
        • Nieuws in het Nederlands
        • Nachrichten in Deutsch
      • Archive
    • Articles
      • GM Myth Makers
      • GM Reports
      • GM Quotes
      • GM Myths
      • Non-GM successes
      • GM Firms
        • Monsanto: a history
        • Monsanto: resources
        • Bayer: a history
        • Bayer: resources
    • Videos
      • Latest Videos
      • Must see videos
      • Agriculture videos
      • Labeling videos
      • Animals videos
      • Corporations videos
      • Corporate takeover videos
      • Contamination videos
      • Latin America videos
      • India videos
      • Asia videos
      • Food safety videos
      • Songs videos
      • Protests videos
      • Biofuel myths videos
      • Index of GM crops and foods
      • Index of speakers
      • Health Effects
    • Contact
    • About
    • 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
  • Articles
    • GM Myth Makers
    • GM Reports
    • GM Quotes
    • GM Myths
    • Non-GM successes
    • GM Firms
      • Monsanto: a history
      • Monsanto: resources
      • Bayer: a history
      • Bayer: resources
  • Donations
  • Videos
    • Index of speakers
    • Glyphosate Videos
    • Latest Videos
    • Must see videos
    • Health Effects
    • Agriculture videos
    • Labeling videos
    • Animals videos
    • Corporations videos
    • Corporate takeover videos
    • Contamination videos
    • Latin America videos
    • India videos
    • Asia videos
    • Food safety videos
    • Songs videos
    • Protests videos
    • Biofuel myths videos
    • Index of GM crops and foods
  • Contact
  • About
SUBSCRIBE TO REVIEWS

GMWatch Facebook cornfield banner

INTRODUCTION TO GM

GMO Myths and Facts front page.jpg

SCIENCE SUPPORTS REGULATION OF GENE EDITING

Plant tissue cultures

GENE EDITING: UNEXPECTED OUTCOMES AND RISKS

Damaged DNA on fire

GENE EDITING MYTHS AND REALITY

A guide through the smokescreen

Gene Editing Myths and Reality

ON-TARGET EFFECTS OF GENE EDITING

Damaged DNA

News Menu

  • Latest News
  • News Reviews
  • Archive
  • Languages

News Archive

  • 2022 articles
  • 2021 articles
  • 2020 articles
  • 2019 articles
  • 2018 articles
  • 2017 articles
  • 2016 articles
  • 2015 articles
  • 2014 articles
  • 2013 articles
  • 2012 articles
  • 2011 articles
  • 2010 articles
  • 2009 articles
  • 2008 articles
  • 2007 articles
  • 2006 articles
  • 2005 articles
  • 2004 articles
  • 2003 articles
  • 2002 articles
  • 2001 articles
  • 2000 articles

Please support GMWatch

Donations

You can donate via Paypal or credit/debit card.

Some of you have opted to give a regular donation. This is greatly appreciated as it helps place us on a more stable financial basis. Thank you for your support!

GM cotton isn't sustainable - reply to Buthelezi et al

  • Print
  • Email
Details
Published: 07 July 2005
Twitter

Recently excerpts from a long-term study on Bt cotton in South Africa were published. They showed:

*Out of 3,000 farmers who originally grew Bt cotton, only 700 continue to do so (an 80% dropout rate). One of the farmers was quoted as saying, 'Four years ago we were told we would make lots of money but we work harder and make nothing.'

*Farmers who grew Bt cotton are now in an average of $1,300 debt as a result.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=5294

The following letter was published in South Africa's Business Report of Sunday, 3 July in response to a letter published the previous Sunday that came from TJ Buthelezi, amongst others. Buthelezi has been flown around the world by Monsanto to promote its Bt cotton. Critics have coined the nickname 'Bt Buthelezi' to illustrate his unconditional support to Bt cotton: during a trip to Monsanto's headquarters in St. Louis, Buthelezi was quoted as saying, I wouldn't care if it were from the devil himself.'
http://www.gmwatch.org/profile1.asp?PrId=184
---

GENETICALLY ENGINEERED COTTON ISN'T SUSTAINABLE

In response to the letter published on 26 June 2005 in Business Report, and an identical letter circulated widely on behalf of the same farmers by Hans Lombard, a public relations consultant to the biotechnology industry, we would like to reiterate the findings of our research that genetically engineered Bt cotton has not created a flourishing cotton farming community in Makhathini as presented to the world, and has not been able to help them overcome the challenges that African cotton farmers face.

The letter refers to a study done by the University of Reading and University of Pretoria which demonstrated the purported benefits of Bt cotton for Makhatini farmers. However, a recent review published by these same authors, in the March 2005 edition of AgBiotechNet, confirms that the situation was not sustainable and acknowledges the problems of drawing conclusions from one season - a point that raises questions about the findings of the original study.

In India, similar trends are emerging; in May 2005, the Indian regulatory authority withheld licenses for the commercial cultivation of three varieties of Bt cotton in Andra Pradesh, following the release of studies showing their dismal performance over the past three years and severe social and economic impacts. In China, zero yield gain has been reported for Bt cotton although pesticides have been reduced, primarily because of an over-use of pesticides by Chinese farmers prior to Bt cotton.

Biowatch research results were presented to Makhatini farmers at a research feedback meeting on 17 September 2004. The farmers that attended this meeting agreed with our research findings. Cleary there are different opinions amongst Makhatini farmers and the situation is more complex than that presented.

It should be noted that Biowatch has not yet published the results of its five-year research project, and that the research referred to by the authors of the letter reflects only extracts of Biowatch's research. Biowatch's final word on the matter will be encapsulated in research that will be published in a peer-reviewed journal later this year.

Leslie Liddell
Director
Biowatch SA

Menu

Home

Subscriptions

News Archive

News Reviews

Videos

Articles

GM Myth Makers

GM Reports

GM Myths

GM Quotes

Non-GM Successes

Contacts

Contact Us

About

Facebook

Twitter

Donations

Content 1999 - 2022 GMWatch.
Web Development By SCS Web Design